cruzmisl wrote:

I can't think of any reason why it would be illegal. If the limit is 50 then its 50 regardless of being near the 401 or other circumstances. Your chances of getting it dismissed is slim to none IMHO. Looking at googlemaps though it looks like the 92/60 is the same street (different name) but further north. Not that it matters in this case but just sayin'

92/60 has nothing to do with this or google maps, just lettin' you know. when an officer pulls you over for 72 in a 50km/h literally 200 metres in from of an 80km/h sign and your actual stop is literally 10 ft. from an 80km/h sign , and on his notes write the weather was clear, sunny, dry, its obvious they are trying to rape people of there money its not about public safety.

if the last speed limit sign before the spot an officer pulled you over did not meet OHTA specifications.

found here:

http://www.search.e-laws.gov.on.ca/en/i ... text=#hit1

(i'm going to go measure things up tomorrow. like if the bottom of the sign is 1.5 - 2.5 metres from the road and the distance away from the road it is.)

could this be a reason to dismiss your ticket?

I'll play devils advocate. By your rationale if the road is empty and the weather is good you can go faster than the posted speed limit? Looking at googlemaps there are some houses on the west side of the street. Maybe the home owners don't want people going 80km/h past their house while their kids play in the driveway. Further north there are a lot of businesses then homes on both sides of the street which is likely why its 50km/h. Speed limits start at the sign not before. Not my rules just the way it is.

I think the 401 and 407 speed limits are too low too. They are flat,wide, in good repair and typically have great visibility. I could easily travel those roads at 140km/h and feel perfectly safe. Sadly the government disagrees so I have to do 100.

Anyway, I think you need to re evaluate your defence.

if it is a 50 or 80 zone you would be really SOL...those zones dont even need to be posted, but rather a courtesy the signs are there

The short answer is possibly. It would depend on the location, limit and sign placement. As HwyBear said, the HTA lists "default" speed limits of 50 km/h in town and 80 km/h on highways. If the posted limit was the same as these, I don't think you'd have an argument. If the limit was something different, you may have an argument. Keep in mind, the signs regulation does provide an exemption for placement if the design of the road makes it impracticable to correctly place the sign.

Might help if you could provide the actual location, especially if it's on street view.

If you were driving at the "default speed limit" then yes you could use this as a defence, as Stanton and hwybear said.

For example... if you were doing 50 in a 30 zone in a built-up area, and the sign did not meet O.Reg specifications, then the "default" limit of 50 takes over and you'd probably be found not guilty...

Sad that you are out there with a measuring tape to ensure the sign isn't an inch to small, when you coulda been paying attention to your speed with a similar degree of precision.

Whether or not you succeed and I find it unlikely based on my 20+ years on the pen side of these affairs, the bottom line is it's not a classy defence.

Perhaps got to court, accept that you were speeding and ask nicely for a reduction. The crowns are for more amenable to this than the sign was 2% to small etc.

It's either a valid defence, or it's not. "Classy" has nothing to do with it, especially since this is an absolute liability offence.

the reason i ask this is because, I got a ticket for doing 72km/h in a 50km/h zone. on the officers notes he states it was a properly post 50km/h zone. well the same street on the opposite side from the direction I was traveling is a posted 60km/h zone.

http://www.google.com/maps/myplaces?vps ... dgD&num=10

i've created a map on google with the location of the street signs. as you see on the map the markers without the dot in them are the speed limit signs for the southbound lanes and the markers with the dot in them are the speed limit signs for the northbound lanes.

I was traveling southbound on dougall ave. towards dougall pkwy. the officer on the ticket wrote he clocked me at 72km/h at dougall ave. & darcy st.

the northbound lanes at dougall ave. & darcy st. is a 60km/h zone.

basically my current defense is that i literally travel the road in both directions daily and since i know the northbound lane in this section of the road is a 60km/h zone i thought i was in a 60km/h zone.

the last 50km/h speed limit sign for southbound traffic is 60 metres before the 50km/h speed limit sign for northbound traffic. If this defense is not good enough i wanted to know if the last 50km/h sign does not meet HTA regulations could that section of dougall ave. technically be an improperly posted 60km/h zone??

if this is true this ticket should be thrown out...i think anyways lol. Anyone with better knowledge than me, i'd love to hear from you

gabe wrote:

tthe last 50km/h speed limit sign for southbound traffic is 60 metres before the 50km/h speed limit sign for northbound traffic. If this defense is not good enough i wanted to know if the last 50km/h sign does not meet HTA regulations could that section of dougall ave. technically be an improperly posted 60km/h zone??

your posts have been merged together, stay on one thread

Think we already covered it above, that a speed limit WITHOUT posted signs is 50km/hr in built up area (which in the google map shows houses on one side of road). The posting of a 50km sign is therefore a reminder/courtesy to all drivers, not mandatory.

Likely just used dougall and Darcey as a reference. It doesn't mean that's specifically where the offence took place.

hwybear wrote:

gabe wrote:

tthe last 50km/h speed limit sign for southbound traffic is 60 metres before the 50km/h speed limit sign for northbound traffic. If this defense is not good enough i wanted to know if the last 50km/h sign does not meet HTA regulations could that section of dougall ave. technically be an improperly posted 60km/h zone??

your posts have been merged together, stay on one thread

Think we already covered it above, that a speed limit WITHOUT posted signs is 50km/hr in built up area (which in the google map shows houses on one side of road). The posting of a 50km sign is therefore a reminder/courtesy to all drivers, not mandatory.

so are you saying its possible for one direction of a road can be considered a built up area and the other direction a posted 60km/h zone?

gabe wrote:

so are you saying its possible for one direction of a road can be considered a built up area and the other direction a posted 60km/h zone?

I lean to "no". a road is a road and visibility is usually equal no matter which direction you are going. the built up area covers both directions..... take pictures and prove to the crown that the signage in the area is not clear and create confusion.

Reflections wrote:

gabe wrote:

so are you saying its possible for one direction of a road can be considered a built up area and the other direction a posted 60km/h zone?

I lean to "no". a road is a road and visibility is usually equal no matter which direction you are going. the built up area covers both directions..... take pictures and prove to the crown that the signage in the area is not clear and create confusion.

Should I go out and take pictures myself, or could I just print off pictures from Google's Street View? Would it make a difference in court?

gabe wrote:

Reflections wrote:

gabe wrote:

so are you saying its possible for one direction of a road can be considered a built up area and the other direction a posted 60km/h zone?

I lean to "no". a road is a road and visibility is usually equal no matter which direction you are going. the built up area covers both directions..... take pictures and prove to the crown that the signage in the area is not clear and create confusion.

Should I go out and take pictures myself, or could I just print off pictures from Google's Street View? Would it make a difference in court?

You will have to take your own pictures for them to be admissable in court