Ontariohighwaytrafficact.com

One of my law teachers told us one of the "fatal flaws" is the fine amount. If it is not the same as perscribed in the law, the ticket will not stand. He mentioned it kind of in passing as most of the class was not into hearing the long winded reasoning. Maybe, a poor choice of wording on my part.

I beat a ticket due to this.

I think I'll try to be clearer in the future.

Ontario HTA 128 sub 14 b ) between 20km and 35 km the set fine is 4.50 per km, I was doing 21km over my set fine should be $94.5 but on the ticket shows set fine of 78.75, is this grounds to nullify the ticket??

klayymann wrote:

Ontario HTA 128 sub 14 b ) between 20km and 35 km the set fine is 4.50 per km, I was doing 21km over my set fine should be $94.5 but on the ticket shows set fine of 78.75, is this grounds to nullify the ticket??

I'm not 100% on a low amount being fatal, but a high amount definetly is. Try challenging the the ticket and see what happens. Are you planning on a challenge anyway??

There are set fines put out by the government and they are actually a little lower than typed in the HTA. I don't know the reasons, but the lower fines are accepted Province wide and the one listed in the HTA are not.

hwybear wrote:

There are set fines put out by the government and they are actually a little lower than typed in the HTA. I don't know the reasons, but the lower fines are accepted Province wide and the one listed in the HTA are not.

And you wonder why these forums exist .

Reflections wrote:

hwybear wrote:

There are set fines put out by the government and they are actually a little lower than typed in the HTA. I don't know the reasons, but the lower fines are accepted Province wide and the one listed in the HTA are not.

And you wonder why these forums exist .

Yes Dammit....I want to pay a higher fine I deserve it

Yes , i am definately fighting this and have pleaded not guilty, i have six months till a trial is set. if my ticket is issued contrary to HTA 128 then the set fine according to the HTA subsection 14 should apply. this may be my only defence beside questioning the cop about his use of the laser radar.

klayymann wrote:

laser radar.

There is no such thing!

Sorry Bear, i meant LIDAR, I think,

In this case the speed trap was hidden and the "wonderful" officer was behind a speed detector on a tripod.

i will do some research in order to come up with questions for the officer.

this roadway was 4 lanes deep going down a steep hill and i was just changing into the fourth lane when he pointed to me and stopped the rest of the cars so i could make it to the curb, i am doubtful it could have been me, but i was following traffic, i would want to know the size of the beam from his position. i did ask him where he "caught" me and he said at the bottom of the hill.

ok, more research.

i get hit doing 81 in a 60 zone.

21 over

anywhere between 16-25 3 demerits

so why does the cop charge me no questions asked at 21, i take the hit anyway with demerits at 16, so why not just charge me at 16, i know according to the HTA the set fine per km is different, but it doesnt matter anyway because the fine i actually get doesnt reflect the penelty under the HTA.

hmmmm, glad i plead not guilty!!

hopefully by trial i will have found info pertaining to this difference in set fine and have a case, wether high or lower it does not corrospond to the setfine as per 128 HTA.

klayymann wrote:

Sorry Bear, i meant LIDAR, I think,

No problem.....we actually have several members who don't use the equipment on a regular basis saying things like that.....it is either one OR the other (radar or laser) (laser is also called LIDAR) and those are actually acronyms anyway!

hwybear wrote:

klayymann wrote:

laser radar.

There is no such thing!

Stop being SASSY, Bear

Reflections wrote:

hwybear wrote:

klayymann wrote:

laser radar.

There is no such thing!

Stop being SASSY, Bear

Sorry, I'll go back to the honey jar and get some sweetness! That is actually very mild as compared to how I talk to co-workers when they say that.

I would hope your co-workers know the difference.

Just got a ticket - 120km in a 90 km -- that one KM extra doubles my fine and give an extra point.

This was a speed trap - going from 100 down to 90 - with one officer on the bridge and several cruisers waiting to pull people over. I'm not sure if they were using radar or laser as the officer came to my passanger side to avoid traffic and I could barely hear anything she was saying.

The officer said that it was against her policy to reduce roadside but I could got to court and the judge would!?!?!?

This was a little frustrating but okay. My question is:

1) If I fight the ticket and lose, do I get charged court costs or anything additional?

2) On the ticket there is only one officer's name at the top (I'm assumeing last name) Do both officers names need to be on the ticket? and will both officers need to come to court?

Any help would be appreciated.

momoney wrote:

I could got to court and the judge would!?!?!?

Judge is actually a JP (Justice of the Peace) who can not lower the ticket or demerit points. Having said that, you could always speak with the Prosecutor and see if you can have it reduced. If the prosecutor and you agree on a resolution, that will be brought before the JP. Just remember points are issued by MTO, nothing to do with courts.

momoney wrote:

1) If I fight the ticket and lose, do I get charged court costs or anything additional?

Yes, court charges are added onto the fine. Inquire with the court involved to see how much the court costs are.

momoney wrote:

2) On the ticket there is only one officer's name at the top (I'm assumeing last name) Do both officers names need to be on the ticket? and will both officers need to come to court?

Only the issuing officer's name would be on the offence notice. If in fact it was an "intercept program" both officers will be required for court. Sometimes the witness box (used for civilian witnesses) will be checked off in this scenario with the 2nd officers badge # , but this is not mandatory to do.

I had the understanding that the court fees are added to the ticket whether you fight it or not, no??

Bookm wrote:

I had the understanding that the court fees are added to the ticket whether you fight it or not, no??

The ticket already includes the set fine, victim surcharge and court costs. Going to court doesn't cost any more (except your time).

momoney wrote:

Just got a ticket - 120km in a 90 km -- that one KM extra doubles my fine and give an extra point.

This was a speed trap - going from 100 down to 90 - with one officer on the bridge and several cruisers waiting to pull people over. I'm not sure if they were using radar or laser as the officer came to my passanger side to avoid traffic and I could barely hear anything she was saying.

The officer said that it was against her policy to reduce roadside but I could got to court and the judge would!?!?!?

Agianst her policy? Its against the law. Period.

If they reduce the speed how can you be convicted?

You cannot be convicted for something you didnt do.

If they enter false evidence in court saying you were only doing 90 when you were doing 120 they are committing a criminal offence.

Fabricating evidence

137. Every one who, with intent to mislead, fabricates anything with intent that it shall be used as evidence in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed, by any means other than perjury or incitement to perjury is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

MISLEADING JUSTICE

Perjury

131. (1) Subject to subsection (3), every one commits perjury who, with intent to mislead, makes before a person who is authorized by law to permit it to be made before him a false statement under oath or solemn affirmation, by affidavit, solemn declaration or deposition or orally, knowing that the statement is false.

…

Application

(3) Subsections (1) and (1.1) do not apply to a statement referred to in either of those subsections that is made by a person who is not specially permitted, authorized or required by law to make that statement.

Wouldn't this mean that both parties of plea deal should be found guilty of an indictable offence?

No.

A plead deal prior to trial prevents the evidence from be heard by a Justice in a judicial proceeding.

Evidence that is used in a proceeding must be real evidence, not fabricated.

If the Crown were to even orally misreprent to justice in a proceeding that the driver was doing 90 when he or she knew they were doing 120 the Crown can be charged with perjury.

Perjury does not only occur under oath or in court proceedings, either.

If you lie to a cop during his or her investigation, you can be charged with perjury, as a cop is a person who is authorized by law to permit the statement to be made to him or her in the execution of their duties.

ticketcombat wrote:

Bookm wrote:

I had the understanding that the court fees are added to the ticket whether you fight it or not, no??

The ticket already includes the set fine, victim surcharge and court costs. Going to court doesn't cost any more (except your time).

My fine went up when I lost. Two sets of fines....

PART V of POA

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Interpretation

76 (3) In this section,

"document" includes a certificate of offence, certificate of parking infraction, a certificate requesting a conviction, an offence notice and a parking infraction notice.

Penalty for false statements

86. Every person who makes an assertion of fact in a statement or entry in a document or form for use under this Act knowing that the assertion is false is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $2,000.

Reflections wrote:

ticketcombat wrote:

Bookm wrote:

I had the understanding that the court fees are added to the ticket whether you fight it or not, no??

The ticket already includes the set fine, victim surcharge and court costs. Going to court doesn't cost any more (except your time).

My fine went up when I lost. Two sets of fines....

I updated my site several times this week as I became aware of more information (Thanks lawmen for R. v. O'Neill, 2008). Set fines apply for out of court settlements. That's pretty clear. What isn't clear is whether the they can apply after the trial. R. v. O'Neill says Yes on the discretion of the justice. On my site (Step 5-->Sentencing) I list some of the points a defendant should cover to reduce the statutory fine and get the set fine or less!