G2 Driver - 100 in 60, reduced to 80 in 60

Hi. My son was driving and went to pass a vehicle who continued to speed up, and he ended up being clocked at 100 over in a 60. It was no excuse I told him. If driver is going to be an @ss, just back off and go in behind. Other driver got stopped as well, and cop even said he saw him trying to pass.

So, here's the dilemma. Right now I think it is 3 demerits for my son based on the 80 in 60 for $95. Cop marked 100 at top of ticket and told him that if he contests, there is a chance he may get 4 demerits and pay full $295. My concern is not cost...he's going to pay regardless. However, my concern is impact on insurance, and I have confirmed it will impact.

So, the question is, do I fight and potentially risk going to 4 demerits, and having a conviction anyway? Ultimately, the way I understand it, for this NOT to impact my insurance, the entire thing would have to get thrown out, and I suspect the chances of that are quite slim. So is it even worth it given the fact the cop wrote 100 at the top of the ticket, or are we just delaying the inevitable?

Any advice, thoughts?

Read this thread: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7678.html

Then post any questions you have back in this one.

Anything 1km-49km is going to impact your insurance the exact same way. Insurance doesn't calculate on a per km basis. It's all falls under the minor bracket. What that means is anything that falls under the minor bracket is issued the same surcharge. Example, they may decide that your son is hit with a 5% surcharge for a first offense that falls in the minor bracket. That means if he's convicted of speeding 40km, 20km, or 5km over the surcharge doesn't change. It would still be 5%. Under normal circumstances, you'd have nothing to lose by fighting this ticket other than the slight decrease in the initial fine seeing how insurance is still going to charge you the same way.

HOWEVER, these are not normal circumstances. Your son is a G2 driver, which means he is a novice driver subject to Novice Driver Escalating Sanctions. Your son is still on driving probation, so to speak. His ticket can and will be amended to 40km over should this go to trial. Any conviction of a 4 or more demerit point offense would see his license suspended for 30 days on a first offense.

jsherk wrote:

Read this thread: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic7678.html

Then post any questions you have back in this one.

Either give the original poster your time by posting a response specific to their situation or don't post at all. We're not going to do this thing where you link back to your threads every time someone asks a question. Your generic thread failed to warn the poster of a potential suspension.

bend wrote:

Either give the original poster your time by posting a response specific to their situation or don't post at all. We're not going to do this thing where you link back to your threads every time someone asks a question. Your generic thread failed to warn the poster of a potential suspension.

If there was more to add than my generic response, then I would have added it. My generic response is exactly what I would have said, which is why I linked to it. If I was aware of the potential suspension, then I would have added more to my response, but was not aware of it so did not mention anything about it.

bend wrote:

Anything 1km-49km is going to impact your insurance the exact same way. Insurance doesn't calculate on a per km basis. It's all falls under the minor bracket. What that means is anything that falls under the minor bracket is issued the same surcharge. Example, they may decide that your son is hit with a 5% surcharge for a first offense that falls in the minor bracket. That means if he's convicted of speeding 40km, 20km, or 5km over the surcharge doesn't change. It would still be 5%. Under normal circumstances, you'd have nothing to lose by fighting this ticket other than the slight decrease in the initial fine seeing how insurance is still going to charge you the same way.

Not Necessarily true. My insurance deems 1-29 over as a minor offense, and 30-49 over as a major offense. The difference is a minor offense will yield a 5% increase where a major offense will increase your rates by 100% or even more. It's best to figure out if your insurance company deems a 40 over as major or minor.

Also, keep in mind, the points stay on record for 2 years from the OFFENSE DATE therefore, if racking up points is an issue, they go faster then they accumulate (usually).

One last thing to add, the 30 day administrative suspension (if convicted of 40 over) DOES NOT affect insurance, so if you do go to trial and lose, it shouldn't affect your rate, but the charge (whether major or minor) will.

UnluckyDuck wrote:

Not Necessarily true. My insurance deems 1-29 over as a minor offense, and 30-49 over as a major offense. The difference is a minor offense will yield a 5% increase where a major offense will increase your rates by 100% or even more. It's best to figure out if your insurance company deems a 40 over as major or minor.

I HIGHLY doubt someone at your insurance provider told you that a major offense would result in a 100%+ surcharge. What are they charging for a serious offense? 1000%? Insurance companies have a surcharge cap. They only charge you so much a percentage before it hits a ceiling, which is why they will boot you from regular insurance because there's no money to be made considering the liability.

The major bracket consists largely of regular offenses committed around children, schools, or are novice driving related. Improper Passing (School Bus), Improper Passing (Zones), Speeding 1-49 (Zones), Practically any novice condition that doesn't involve the drivers consumption of alcohol. These are the type of offenses that would yield a 15% surcharge for a first offense and something like a 25% for a second for your everyday graduated license holder 25 years and up.

Serious offenses is where you get into a 100% territory.

From what I know, insurance providers will dedicate speeding related offenses in dedicated zones for major convictions. There's a stigma while speeding in these zones and they are treated more seriously, which is why the ministry doubles the fines. If your provider is considering 30-49 a major offense, then they'd have to treat it no different depending on the zone because they certainly aren't bumping it up to a serious offense. Which is why 1-49 is largely considered the same by most.

Or the original poster can just contact their provider and ask.

Really appreciate all the comments.

At this point, I don't think I want to go to trial because chances are, it is a lost cause. If anything, we'll end up losing more by having to pay an extra $200 and my son losing his licence (not that he doesn't deserve some punishment, but that's a separate topic).

What I may do is ask for a trial, and like suggested, may seek disclosure of notes in case there is a goof significant enough to have this thrown out. Otherwise, not worth the effort. Trying to get a deal with prosecutor is likely also a lost cause because like we all know, as soon as you plead guilty to anything, its an offence, and as a result, insurance spike.

And good suggestion about asking the provider (Chieftain). I have sent an email to my broker asking the hypothetical question about what they consider minor offense for speeding, and how much of a surcharge there would be if either me or my son had an offense.

Cheers.

UnluckyDuck wrote:

One last thing to add, the 30 day administrative suspension (if convicted of 40 over) DOES NOT affect insurance, so if you do go to trial and lose, it shouldn't affect your rate, but the charge (whether major or minor) will.

What makes this an ADLS suspension? The sanction suspension is based upon conviction. ADLS suspensions are not. They are handed out for immediate roadside suspensions, medical reasons, support payment issues, etc. There is no conviction associated with any of these, hence why they shouldn't be used against you for the purpose of determining rates.

I don't see why any insurance provider couldn't use the suspension against you. I could be wrong, however.