I have an unusual situation. I was traveling down the 401, noticed a speed trap, and started flashing my lights -- in order to warn oncoming drivers. Within a 30 seconds, a car slowed, crossed the grass, and approached me from behind. Lights appeared, and I then realised that this was an officer in an undercover car. The officer pulled me over, and while he was polite, clearly his motivation was to 'get that guy' that was warning oncoming traffic of speeders. We discussed things for a while, with me making it clear that I find the inane speeding laws to be beyond reproach. All in all, it was a polite conversation. After the conversation was over, the officer decided to run my license. Unbeknownst to me, I had a suspended license. Here is where it gets interesting. I have a Quebec driver's license, and my "Ontario Driver's license" was suspend *while I had my Quebec driver's license*. I say "Ontario driver's license", because.. after this incident I approached the MTO, and was told I still had an active driver's license in Ontario. When I notified them (three separate people, in three separate calls) that I have a Quebec driver's license, and have had one for years -- they said there was 'no way to cancel my Ontario license'. No, I'm not joking. Three separate people in the MTO said they don't know how to cancel my Ontario license. The prosecutor in this case, during disclosure (initial summons), has told me that I am "responsible to notify the MTO when I move". When I did move to Quebec, I had to hand in my Ontario license, and Quebec told me that they would "send it back to Ontario". I am not entirely sure what I could have done to prevent this scenario, as I had no idea I was suspended, didn't even realise I had unpaid fines (apparently the tickets go back *years*), and wasn't even a licensed Ontario driver when the suspension occurred! In truth, I don't see how my Ontario license could have even still be valid .. that is, outside of the move to Quebec, it should have expired due to lack of payment by now! So, how is a driver with a license in another province, supposed to know about a suspension? Someone with a license in another province, for *years* prior to the suspension?? I'm not sure why this is even moving forward to court?
I have an unusual situation.
I was traveling down the 401, noticed a speed trap, and started flashing my lights -- in order to warn oncoming drivers.
Within a 30 seconds, a car slowed, crossed the grass, and approached me from behind. Lights appeared, and I then realised that this was an officer in an undercover car.
The officer pulled me over, and while he was polite, clearly his motivation was to 'get that guy' that was warning oncoming traffic of speeders. We discussed things for a while, with me making it clear that I find the inane speeding laws to be beyond reproach. All in all, it was a polite conversation.
After the conversation was over, the officer decided to run my license. Unbeknownst to me, I had a suspended license. Here is where it gets interesting.
I have a Quebec driver's license, and my "Ontario Driver's license" was suspend *while I had my Quebec driver's license*.
I say "Ontario driver's license", because.. after this incident I approached the MTO, and was told I still had an active driver's license in Ontario. When I notified them (three separate people, in three separate calls) that I have a Quebec driver's license, and have had one for years -- they said there was 'no way to cancel my Ontario license'.
No, I'm not joking. Three separate people in the MTO said they don't know how to cancel my Ontario license.
The prosecutor in this case, during disclosure (initial summons), has told me that I am "responsible to notify the MTO when I move". When I did move to Quebec, I had to hand in my Ontario license, and Quebec told me that they would "send it back to Ontario". I am not entirely sure what I could have done to prevent this scenario, as I had no idea I was suspended, didn't even realise I had unpaid fines (apparently the tickets go back *years*), and wasn't even a licensed Ontario driver when the suspension occurred!
In truth, I don't see how my Ontario license could have even still be valid .. that is, outside of the move to Quebec, it should have expired due to lack of payment by now!
So, how is a driver with a license in another province, supposed to know about a suspension? Someone with a license in another province, for *years* prior to the suspension?? I'm not sure why this is even moving forward to court?
Once you have a licence in Ontario in remains for life. You can turn the licence in, but all details on MTO remain intact. Unpaid fines still remain against the Ontario licence until paid. So your licence would have said 2 things on it when the officer checked: expired licence and suspended. A driver has 6 days to notify the MTO of a change of address. If a person say from Alberta (with Alberta DL) gets stopped and charged, then convicted, an Ontario Drivers Licence is generated to keep track of the outstanding fines and convictions. If not paid the licence status for the generated Ontario licence is then changed to "suspended". So if this person from Alberta gets stopped 10yrs later , he/she is still suspended in Ontario.
Once you have a licence in Ontario in remains for life. You can turn the licence in, but all details on MTO remain intact. Unpaid fines still remain against the Ontario licence until paid. So your licence would have said 2 things on it when the officer checked: expired licence and suspended. A driver has 6 days to notify the MTO of a change of address.
If a person say from Alberta (with Alberta DL) gets stopped and charged, then convicted, an Ontario Drivers Licence is generated to keep track of the outstanding fines and convictions. If not paid the licence status for the generated Ontario licence is then changed to "suspended". So if this person from Alberta gets stopped 10yrs later , he/she is still suspended in Ontario.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Interesting. Thanks for that info. The three separate people at the MTO I called, could have perhaps explained that to me. That being said, I still do not see how I failed to do whatever due diligence a citizen would normally take. First, who the heck calls all the agencies of the province they used to live in, and informs them that they've moved? At best, you inform the new province, and they inform the old. Even Quebec's health agency takes your Ontario health card, and does the same! In this case, I was even told by Quebec that they would send my old license "back to Ontario", with notification that I now had a Quebec license, address, etc. I don't believe it is reasonable for me to distrust Quebec, my new province in this task. When I'm told that there are treaties between the provinces, by provincial agents in my province of residence.. it should be reasonable to believe them. Somewhere, Ontario did not properly update my new address, when they received my old license from Quebec. I believe, again, that this is not my fault. Does my reasoning sound ... reasonable?
hwybear wrote:
Once you have a licence in Ontario in remains for life. You can turn the licence in, but all details on MTO remain intact. Unpaid fines still remain against the Ontario licence until paid. So your licence would have said 2 things on it when the officer checked: expired licence and suspended. A driver has 6 days to notify the MTO of a change of address.
If a person say from Alberta (with Alberta DL) gets stopped and charged, then convicted, an Ontario Drivers Licence is generated to keep track of the outstanding fines and convictions. If not paid the licence status for the generated Ontario licence is then changed to "suspended". So if this person from Alberta gets stopped 10yrs later , he/she is still suspended in Ontario.
Interesting. Thanks for that info. The three separate people at the MTO I called, could have perhaps explained that to me.
That being said, I still do not see how I failed to do whatever due diligence a citizen would normally take.
First, who the heck calls all the agencies of the province they used to live in, and informs them that they've moved? At best, you inform the new province, and they inform the old. Even Quebec's health agency takes your Ontario health card, and does the same!
In this case, I was even told by Quebec that they would send my old license "back to Ontario", with notification that I now had a Quebec license, address, etc. I don't believe it is reasonable for me to distrust Quebec, my new province in this task. When I'm told that there are treaties between the provinces, by provincial agents in my province of residence.. it should be reasonable to believe them.
Somewhere, Ontario did not properly update my new address, when they received my old license from Quebec. I believe, again, that this is not my fault.
Actually, your reasoning is not sound. It is quite customary for the crown to ask for a certified copy of the suspension letter, and they are doing so in my case. If they are asking for a certified copy of that letter, then clearly that letter being sent is of some importance. What is important here, is whether or not it was reasonable for me to be unaware of THE SUSPENSION. I am not in court for failing to pay fines. I am in court for driving with a suspension. Living in Quebec for YEARS before the suspension ever took place, makes it quite reasonable that I was unaware of the suspension. One can banter all they like about whether or not I had unpaid tickets. That's not the issue -- at all. (One can get all huffy and puffy and talk about how I missed paying something -- missing a payment on something isn't illegal in this country.. that's because most SANE and REASONABLE people know that sometimes people have busy lives, and may overlook things.)
cruzmisl wrote:
No it doesn't. You should have just paid your fines. You know you got the tickets and you know you didn't pay them so its no one else's fault.
Actually, your reasoning is not sound. It is quite customary for the crown to ask for a certified copy of the suspension letter, and they are doing so in my case.
If they are asking for a certified copy of that letter, then clearly that letter being sent is of some importance. What is important here, is whether or not it was reasonable for me to be unaware of THE SUSPENSION.
I am not in court for failing to pay fines. I am in court for driving with a suspension.
Living in Quebec for YEARS before the suspension ever took place, makes it quite reasonable that I was unaware of the suspension.
One can banter all they like about whether or not I had unpaid tickets. That's not the issue -- at all.
(One can get all huffy and puffy and talk about how I missed paying something -- missing a payment on something isn't illegal in this country.. that's because most SANE and REASONABLE people know that sometimes people have busy lives, and may overlook things.)
It is not just your case, the certified copy of MTO documents is used for everyone, whether it be unpaid fines/demerit points/child support/unlicenced, expired plates, use plates not authorized etc ....so nothing special...nothing new, same old routine for police/crown/courts.
btwilliger wrote:
. It is quite customary for the crown to ask for a certified copy of the suspension letter, and they are doing so in my case.
It is not just your case, the certified copy of MTO documents is used for everyone, whether it be unpaid fines/demerit points/child support/unlicenced, expired plates, use plates not authorized etc ....so nothing special...nothing new, same old routine for police/crown/courts.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Actually, your reasoning is not sound. It is quite customary for the crown to ask for a certified copy of the suspension letter, and they are doing so in my case. If they are asking for a certified copy of that letter, then clearly that letter being sent is of some importance. What is important here, is whether or not it was reasonable for me to be unaware of THE SUSPENSION. I am not in court for failing to pay fines. I am in court for driving with a suspension. Living in Quebec for YEARS before the suspension ever took place, makes it quite reasonable that I was unaware of the suspension. One can banter all they like about whether or not I had unpaid tickets. That's not the issue -- at all. (One can get all huffy and puffy and talk about how I missed paying something -- missing a payment on something isn't illegal in this country.. that's because most SANE and REASONABLE people know that sometimes people have busy lives, and may overlook things.) You are in court for failing to pay fines and as a result your licence was suspended. Had you paid the fine you wouldn't have been suspended. The suspension just didn't just recently happen. You just recently got caught. No one is huffy and puffy and you're correct not paying isn't illegal. The subsequent suspension is though. Regardless of where you live, 7 days after the suspension takes effect it is considered served and is valid.
btwilliger wrote:
cruzmisl wrote:
No it doesn't. You should have just paid your fines. You know you got the tickets and you know you didn't pay them so its no one else's fault.
Actually, your reasoning is not sound. It is quite customary for the crown to ask for a certified copy of the suspension letter, and they are doing so in my case.
If they are asking for a certified copy of that letter, then clearly that letter being sent is of some importance. What is important here, is whether or not it was reasonable for me to be unaware of THE SUSPENSION.
I am not in court for failing to pay fines. I am in court for driving with a suspension.
Living in Quebec for YEARS before the suspension ever took place, makes it quite reasonable that I was unaware of the suspension.
One can banter all they like about whether or not I had unpaid tickets. That's not the issue -- at all.
(One can get all huffy and puffy and talk about how I missed paying something -- missing a payment on something isn't illegal in this country.. that's because most SANE and REASONABLE people know that sometimes people have busy lives, and may overlook things.)
You are in court for failing to pay fines and as a result your licence was suspended. Had you paid the fine you wouldn't have been suspended.
The suspension just didn't just recently happen. You just recently got caught.
No one is huffy and puffy and you're correct not paying isn't illegal. The subsequent suspension is though.
Regardless of where you live, 7 days after the suspension takes effect it is considered served and is valid.
It is not just your case, the certified copy of MTO documents is used for everyone, whether it be unpaid fines/demerit points/child support/unlicenced, expired plates, use plates not authorized etc ....so nothing special...nothing new, same old routine for police/crown/courts. ? Yes, I realise it is 'nothing special', that's why I said it is 'customary'. However, those documents are key to the crown's case, and also key to my defense.
hwybear wrote:
btwilliger wrote:
. It is quite customary for the crown to ask for a certified copy of the suspension letter, and they are doing so in my case.
It is not just your case, the certified copy of MTO documents is used for everyone, whether it be unpaid fines/demerit points/child support/unlicenced, expired plates, use plates not authorized etc ....so nothing special...nothing new, same old routine for police/crown/courts.
?
Yes, I realise it is 'nothing special', that's why I said it is 'customary'.
However, those documents are key to the crown's case, and also key to my defense.
No, not at all. I am not in court for failing to pay fines and having my license suspended. At all. Period. Quite true. However, I am not in court for failing to pay fines. I am in court for driving while suspended. There are dozens of ways to end up with a suspended license... and that is all I am in court for. At no point in time did I said it just happened. No, having a suspended license is quite legal. You're not making sense. Not true. You really should stop trying to provide advice, unless you are well versed in the law. Take this for example: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#s52s1 Sub-section 2: Yes, "unless the person to whom the notice is sent establishes that he or she did not, acting in good faith, through absence, accident, illness or other cause beyond his or her control, receive the notice.". I am able to establish that, as I was living in another province for over a year prior to the suspension notice being mailed, and I had also reason to believe that Ontario knew where I lived -- as my new Province told me they would inform Ontario. That is quite certainly "acting in good faith" and "cause beyond my control".... I do not control Ontario's inability to process information from Quebec. Please, take more care in the statements you make here. People's lives can be severely affected by what you say!
cruzmisl wrote:
You are in court for failing to pay fines and as a result your licence was suspended.
No, not at all. I am not in court for failing to pay fines and having my license suspended. At all. Period.
cruzmisl wrote:
Had you paid the fine you wouldn't have been suspended.
Quite true. However, I am not in court for failing to pay fines. I am in court for driving while suspended. There are dozens of ways to end up with a suspended license... and that is all I am in court for.
cruzmisl wrote:
The suspension just didn't just recently happen. You just recently got caught.
At no point in time did I said it just happened.
cruzmisl wrote:
No one is huffy and puffy and you're correct not paying isn't illegal. The subsequent suspension is though.
No, having a suspended license is quite legal. You're not making sense.
cruzmisl wrote:
Regardless of where you live, 7 days after the suspension takes effect it is considered served and is valid.
Not true. You really should stop trying to provide advice, unless you are well versed in the law. Take this for example:
(2) Notice sent by registered mail under clause (1) (a) or by mail under clause (1) (b) shall be deemed to have been given on the seventh day after the mailing unless the person to whom the notice is sent establishes that he or she did not, acting in good faith, through absence, accident, illness or other cause beyond his or her control, receive the notice. 2000, c. 26, Sched. O, s. 4.
Yes, "unless the person to whom the notice is sent establishes that he or she did not, acting in good faith, through absence, accident, illness or other cause beyond his or her control, receive the notice.".
I am able to establish that, as I was living in another province for over a year prior to the suspension notice being mailed, and I had also reason to believe that Ontario knew where I lived -- as my new Province told me they would inform Ontario.
That is quite certainly "acting in good faith" and "cause beyond my control".... I do not control Ontario's inability to process information from Quebec.
Please, take more care in the statements you make here. People's lives can be severely affected by what you say!
sorry bt...had only seen being "used in my case" :oops: No worries, I see you help with a lot of info on here, including quite a bit of help you provided earlier to me. Thanks for that. Misreads will happen.
hwybear wrote:
btwilliger wrote:
?
Yes, I realise it is 'nothing special', that's why I said it is 'customary'..
sorry bt...had only seen being "used in my case"
No worries, I see you help with a lot of info on here, including quite a bit of help you provided earlier to me.
Correct. You are in court for driving while your licence is suspended Because it's illegal to drive with a suspended licence despite your reasoning. The information I gave is correct. 7 days the suspension is considered served but even that isn't true. Its actually 8 days because you don't count the mailing day. You meet the criteria either way. Do you control your ability to pay your fines? I'm just telling you how it is. Go to court, present your defence to the JP and see what happens. No one said you were guilty. Maybe you'll get a sympathetic JP.
No, not at all. I am not in court for failing to pay fines and having my license suspended. At all. Period.
Correct. You are in court for driving while your licence is suspended
I'm not sure why this is even moving forward to court?
Because it's illegal to drive with a suspended licence despite your reasoning.
Not true. You really should stop trying to provide advice
The information I gave is correct. 7 days the suspension is considered served but even that isn't true. Its actually 8 days because you don't count the mailing day. You meet the criteria either way.
I do not control Ontario's inability to process information
Do you control your ability to pay your fines?
I'm just telling you how it is. Go to court, present your defence to the JP and see what happens. No one said you were guilty. Maybe you'll get a sympathetic JP.
The information I gave is correct. 7 days the suspension is considered served but even that isn't true. Its actually 8 days because you don't count the mailing day. You meet the criteria either way. No, the information you provided is absolutely not correct. You can not take one little piece of legislation, and just ignore parts that say 'unless'. Exclusions are there for a reason, and that reason is to protect the innocent. I do not meet the criteria, because, as I mentioned before: Do you control your ability to pay your fines? I'm just telling you how it is. Go to court, present your defence to the JP and see what happens. No one said you were guilty. Maybe you'll get a sympathetic JP. I don't need sympathy, just a JP that follows the legislation.
cruzmisl wrote:
Not true. You really should stop trying to provide advice
The information I gave is correct. 7 days the suspension is considered served but even that isn't true. Its actually 8 days because you don't count the mailing day. You meet the criteria either way.
No, the information you provided is absolutely not correct. You can not take one little piece of legislation, and just ignore parts that say 'unless'. Exclusions are there for a reason, and that reason is to protect the innocent.
I do not meet the criteria, because, as I mentioned before:
Deemed date of service
(2) Notice sent by registered mail under clause (1) (a) or by mail under clause (1) (b) shall be deemed to have been given on the seventh day after the mailing unless the person to whom the notice is sent establishes that he or she did not, acting in good faith, through absence, accident, illness or other cause beyond his or her control, receive the notice. 2000, c. 26, Sched. O, s. 4.
cruzmisl wrote:
I do not control Ontario's inability to process information
Do you control your ability to pay your fines?
I'm just telling you how it is. Go to court, present your defence to the JP and see what happens. No one said you were guilty. Maybe you'll get a sympathetic JP.
I don't need sympathy, just a JP that follows the legislation.
Interesting read. I think that the defendant has a good case on this one. As long as he can prove on balance of probabilities that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that his address was changed (i.e Quebec advised as such) and actually surrendered his Ontario driving license (in Quebec) at the time of obtaining a Quebec one. Im my opinion any reasonable person would be entitled to believe that, for all effective purposes, his address has been changed and any subsequent suspension in Ontario would be sent to his new address in Quebec. A defence of officialy induced error (as long as there is prove of all of the above).
Interesting read. I think that the defendant has a good case on this one. As long as he can prove on balance of probabilities that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that his address was changed (i.e Quebec advised as such) and actually surrendered his Ontario driving license (in Quebec) at the time of obtaining a Quebec one. Im my opinion any reasonable person would be entitled to believe that, for all effective purposes, his address has been changed and any subsequent suspension in Ontario would be sent to his new address in Quebec. A defence of officialy induced error (as long as there is prove of all of the above).
If the ON DL (Driver's Licence) is expired or not renewed, a valid QC DL will suffice. In this instance the QC DL is valid, but the previous ON DL was suspended, which then The ON DL takes precedence over the QC DL.
Reflections wrote:
why was your Ontario licence suspended?
Or just not renewed?
If the ON DL (Driver's Licence) is expired or not renewed, a valid QC DL will suffice. In this instance the QC DL is valid, but the previous ON DL was suspended, which then The ON DL takes precedence over the QC DL.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I will be going to trial for my red light camera offence.
I'll be arguing two issues, centered on the fact that there are two essential elements of 144(18) - a) a vehicle approaching the intersection shall stop; and b) the vehicle shall not proceed until green. Both essential elements must be contravened beyond a reasonable doubt to be an offence.
1) My ticket says I (being the owner) am "charged…
I know that the RIDE program has been covered extensively in these great forums, but I have a question about the stop itself:
I recently was stopped for a RIDE Program and the officer asked me to roll the window down all of the way (I had it at half and could easily communicate with them). I told them that I could hear them just fine and they insisted I roll it down all of the way. Again I told…
Not sure the right place for this so if it needs to be moved please do so.
I was stopped today for 15 over the speed limit, I gave all the documents to the officer and he said he could not accept a photocopy of my ownership only the original I had a photo copy front and back and I had my plate sticker number with it.
he gave me a ticket for HWY ACT Section 7(5)(a) he said only the original would…
Hey! I'm from Sudbury Ontario. Hope that general talk is fine for this subject
I am very serious about looking for exact ruling about underfacing lighting
Section 14 clearly states:
Red and blue lights to the front restricted
(14.1) In addition to the lighting requirements in this Part, a police department vehicle may carry lamps that cast red and blue lights, but no other motor vehicle shall carry…
i was driving my dad's car when i was caught by the red light camera in Brampton. My dad would've to take time off work to go ask for a trial and then go to one.
Can i represent him? if yes, what do i need to do?
I was pulled over and told I went through a red light during a right turn. I learned through a friend who is a police constable that the one who pulled me over is new to the job (under a year, and possibly even the first month or two of real duty).
I was given a ticket for $180. I have some questions:
(1) Is this offense automatically associated with 3 demerit points? I see no mention of them on…
I got a ticket for 'Disobey Stop Sign' in November of 2013 (in York Region), requested disclosure and went to court in August of 2014. At my first appearance, I did not plea but requested an ajournment to to consult legal advice. The JOP set the next appearance in September.
I contacted a paralegal about my options. He told me that on my next appearance, if the police officer did not show, the…
I had a trial and found guilty, but the trial seemed to go wrong since the beginning.
The JP asked me if i am intending to take the stand- I said NO.
I asked how to submit my evidence-documents and photos.
JP said-i have to take the stand if i want to submit evidence.(Now i am finding this is wrong-i could introduce my evidence during cross examination and my defense would be much stronger)
Ottawa, Canada (AHN) - Beginning Tuesday, or April Fool's Day 2008, fines on Quebec drivers caught overspeeding will be doubled. It is not only the money penalty that will go up, but also demerit points.
The new law, Bill 42, is similar to Ontario's street racing rule. It stipulates fines for motorists who drive at over 40 km/h at under 60 km/h zones, speed at 50 km/h at 60 to 90 km/h areas and…
Make big trucks go slower and the roads will become safer.
Obvious, isn't it? It's also obvious when you look out the window that the world is flat.
Last Monday, truckers in Ontario tried to mount a convoy to Queen's Park to show their opposition to electronic speed limiters. These devices, electronic chips in trucks' engine management systems, restrict speeds…
I was out on a four lane highway around Orangeville Ontario and I noticed a school bus coming south (I was going north). I kept my eyes on the bus in case it was going to stop. As I approached it, it was slowing down a little, but no lights, and especially no arm with the STOP sign. As I was just about to pass the bus, I still did not see the lights, nor did I see the STOP sign.
Hey everyone first off I'd like to say great website, I have been reading and it is very useful
I'm posting today as I'd like to get some feedback on my situation and have a couple of questions. Please excuse the vagueness in some areas - I don't want my case to be identifiable given the small town.
So I was driving up north and was pulled over by an OPP SUV for doing 31 over. Cop drove past me,…
Driving on a 80km/hr highway the car ahead hits the brakes and slows to 55, l slow down right behind him no reason to slow down traffic was moving between 80 and 90. I notice the driver is on the phone and looking through papers on the passenger seat. He begins to start to go a opp officer drives by doing 80 plus in oncoming lane turns around and says l was following to close. Told him what was…
My son was making a right turn at the intersection he had a green so slowed down looked and proceeded into the turn. It was pouring rain and the was a big pool of water as he got arround the curb. He tried to keep the car going sharp right however it slid into the car making a left turn. the lane he was turning into is very narrow and at a very busy corner. He paniced and left the scene only…
I had an collision the other day. I was turing left and ran into a car going straight in the opposite direction. The insurance company has already determined that I'm at fault, since I made the left turn. But I'm wondering whether I should go on trail and at least I might get rid of the ticket. The ticket was under 142(1)
I was told that if I go on court, both the guy I hit and the officer who…
question for a friend of mine.....says she got a 3 day suspension for giving a A on a roadside. Thing is she wasnt driving. She is a g2 driver and the car was parked in a parking lot, she just ran out to get something and turned the car on. Can a 3 day be issued if you arent driving on a highway - (I've read for impaired it doesnt matter, but 3 day isnt criminal)? And is there any way to…
I can't find the category for this post so I'm posting it here.
Two questions...
1. Are golf carts considered a 'vehicle' under the Highway traffic act? I know carts can't drive across roads or on roads but if you try to bring one from the USA into Canada they are considered a 'vehicle'.
2. If you are on private property are you allowed to carry 'opened' alcohol in your golf cart? I know golf…
I got pulled over (along with about 10 other cars) for going through a road closed sign. I had just pulled out of a parking lot pretty much right beside the road closed sign, and with about 4 cars behind me there wasn't much I could do but go through, so I think I have a good chance of fighting it. However, on my ticket under the Signature of issuing Provincial Offences Officer, it's left…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural area and I sometimes see vehicles doing mail delivery. The vehicle then started accelerating and…
I was pulled over yesterday in a community safety zone and told I was doing 84 in a 50. When i passed the officer I looked at my odometer and I was only doing 64. I was given a summons on the spot to appear in court at the end of June. Do I have any chance in this if it comes down to his word over mine. I was in the car alone but have travelled these same roads every day, twice a day for 6 years…
who is at fault when :a) a passenger opens door and jumps out of vehicle onto the road with traffic. b) he gets hit by a car travelling in the adjoining lane. c) traffic lights were green. d) pedestrian crossing was further up and indicated "no crossing" light e) the vehicle that he exited from leaves the scene as soon as accident occurred. f) no charges have been laid after police filed report…
