So unfortunately I have had a few tickets in the last 5 or 6 years. Thankfully Ticketcombat saved me from one or two. Here is what I don't get though. On your first appearance, the Crown will usually offer most people a deal, ok great. Its usually a reduced fine, and often times a lesser charge with less points, ok great for people that just want an easy out and don't mind the massive insurance hike for 3 years (or if they are lucky, they are allowed 1 ticket). 95% of the people take the deal from my experience, and it saves the courts time and they collect some cash. So a couple of times I offered to pay a ticket with a HIGHER fine, this is more money towards court costs, and whatever else this money goes to, that should be a WIN for the Crown I would have thought. Case and point, speeding ticket with 182 fine, I get offered a 80 dollar fine. I tell him its the same penalty for insurance, and offer to take a red light camera ticket instead which is 300+ dollars. They say no. I shake my head in disbelief and go home and prepare for trial. I have offered to take other things too, parking tickets, really anything that does not have the insurance hike and still has a large fine and they never go for it. What is the deal here, does anyone know? Has anyone had any success making this kind of deal? If so what was the deal? TIA
So unfortunately I have had a few tickets in the last 5 or 6 years. Thankfully Ticketcombat saved me from one or two.
Here is what I don't get though. On your first appearance, the Crown will usually offer most people a deal, ok great. Its usually a reduced fine, and often times a lesser charge with less points, ok great for people that just want an easy out and don't mind the massive insurance hike for 3 years (or if they are lucky, they are allowed 1 ticket). 95% of the people take the deal from my experience, and it saves the courts time and they collect some cash.
So a couple of times I offered to pay a ticket with a HIGHER fine, this is more money towards court costs, and whatever else this money goes to, that should be a WIN for the Crown I would have thought. Case and point, speeding ticket with 182 fine, I get offered a 80 dollar fine. I tell him its the same penalty for insurance, and offer to take a red light camera ticket instead which is 300+ dollars. They say no. I shake my head in disbelief and go home and prepare for trial. I have offered to take other things too, parking tickets, really anything that does not have the insurance hike and still has a large fine and they never go for it.
What is the deal here, does anyone know? Has anyone had any success making this kind of deal? If so what was the deal?
It isn't ethical to allow someone to plead guilty to something you know they didn't do. A lesser charge is based on the same series of events. For example fail to stop goes down to improper stop.
It isn't ethical to allow someone to plead guilty to something you know they didn't do. A lesser charge is based on the same series of events. For example fail to stop goes down to improper stop.
Well I don't think that is "it", in the last courthouse I was in I sat near the front on purpose to see what was being offered, and it did not matter what the person did, they were ALL being offered "Disobey Sign", and the people had a wide variety of charges where some were not related or did not fit the mold as you put it, running a red light would be just as suitable in other words or even more suitable.
Well I don't think that is "it", in the last courthouse I was in I sat near the front on purpose to see what was being offered, and it did not matter what the person did, they were ALL being offered "Disobey Sign", and the people had a wide variety of charges where some were not related or did not fit the mold as you put it, running a red light would be just as suitable in other words or even more suitable.
Ynotp is correct. I cant speak to your personal observations, but the plea deal should somehow relate to the actual offence. Keep in mind that the Justice of the Peace could ask for a synopsis of what happened leading up to the charge, so if the offence doesnt fit what happened, a conviction cant be registered. In your case I dont know what offences the Crown was pleading down to "disobey sign", but it is a pretty big catch all for pleas.
Ynotp is correct. I cant speak to your personal observations, but the plea deal should somehow relate to the actual offence. Keep in mind that the Justice of the Peace could ask for a synopsis of what happened leading up to the charge, so if the offence doesnt fit what happened, a conviction cant be registered. In your case I dont know what offences the Crown was pleading down to "disobey sign", but it is a pretty big catch all for pleas.
In my own experience, I was charged with careless for being hit from behind into the car in front of me. Prosecutor offered failure to turn left to avoid collision. Fine. I accepted it. When brought in front of JP, he asked for clarification of events from prosecutor. he then questioned them on how I could have turned left from a stopped position. Charge thrown out.
In my own experience, I was charged with careless for being hit from behind into the car in front of me. Prosecutor offered failure to turn left to avoid collision. Fine. I accepted it. When brought in front of JP, he asked for clarification of events from prosecutor. he then questioned them on how I could have turned left from a stopped position. Charge thrown out.
I was in court last year to dispute a illegal right turn ticket. I was very surprised and lucky to have the fine reduced and plead guilty to " Interfering traffic", which I learned was actually not a HTA offense. Explained to me as a glorified parking ticket.
ynotp wrote:
It isn't ethical to allow someone to plead guilty to something you know they didn't do. A lesser charge is based on the same series of events. For example fail to stop goes down to improper stop.
I was in court last year to dispute a illegal right turn ticket. I was very surprised and lucky to have the fine reduced and plead guilty to " Interfering traffic", which I learned was actually not a HTA offense. Explained to me as a glorified parking ticket.
My mistake,? could it be obstructing traffic, sorry it was last year, cant recall exact wording. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK248 http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/how-do- ... hedule-43/ S.170 (12) - Interfere with traffic - Total Payable: $65
hawaii wrote:
hwybear wrote:
Interfering with traffic is an HTA offence....section 170
My mistake,? could it be obstructing traffic, sorry it was last year, cant recall exact wording.
My mistake,? could it be obstructing traffic, sorry it was last year, cant recall exact wording. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK248 http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/how-do- ... hedule-43/ S.170 (12) - Interfere with traffic - Total Payable: $65 I guess two versions of that charge?
iFly55 wrote:
hawaii wrote:
hwybear wrote:
Interfering with traffic is an HTA offence....section 170
My mistake,? could it be obstructing traffic, sorry it was last year, cant recall exact wording.
I have a lot of issues with the idea that speed measuring devices like radar and lidar guns are using computer generated simulations to test themselves that they are working properly. The manufacturer is making a claim that a device can test itself. Where's the proof that it works?
I was pulled over a couple days ago going down a steep incline on my way to Cobourg. In order to get up a hill in my vehicle, I have to go at least 90 or it gets stuck between gears and then when I was going down the hill I wasn't riding my brake or touching the gas, it just gained speed. When I…
Question, mrsbobajob, a while ago, went to a sleep went to a sleep clinics, due to snoring, not sure if sleep apnea. Now someone told her that if she does have SA, her insurance needs to know and it will go on her license. So she didnt go to pick up her report.
I hope I can paint the picture with the accuracy that the truth deserves. I have no intention of just beating a ticket.. but more like beating a really unfair ticket. You decide!
I had entered Canada after a short trip downsouth through Detroit on my way to Toronto. Not being equipped with a GPS…
alright well last night (march 19th) at 12:55 am i had recieved 2 tickets the first was failing to stop at a stop sign (i did a rolling stop) and it was dated the 19th the second ticket that i got at the exact same time was dated the 18th. The second one was because i had a blood alcohol level of…
I received a speeding ticket for 15 over in York Region. The officer issued me a ticket for someone else[wrong DL info on ticket] but for correct charge and amount. The ticket was not hand written but computer generated. I am concerned how to proceed with this as well as if the officer issued my…
i was in a road traffic accident on friday. a guy pulled out of a side road onto a main highway in front of me. i hit him in the middle of the road but was swerving left to hit him on the front and not cause a major accident. i was charged with failing to drive in a marked lane and he was charged…
i have a g2 license which was suspended for driving without a g1 driver for 30 days and my insurance cancel me . after i receive my letter to remove suspend, i got in an accident and now receive a notice to go to the police station
I was issued a Summons to Defendant, Section 7.1.b, and now I got to appear in court. Where could I find information on set fine amounts or the maximum punishment? Is it normal to be dragged to court for plate not properly displayed? After all, it is not a moving violation, and I wasnt endangering…
