Just discovered this site last week, very informative,

Got caught speeding last March, 22 km /hr over posted 50 km, my very first in 17 years of driving. I didn't think I was going that fast, also thought the speed limit was 60, the officer corrected me right there.

At the time, I also had vision impairment, but did not know I had cataract on both eyes which were surgically removed 3 months later.

My court date was this morning, I requested for an adjournment as I did not know about disclosure until last week.

My ticket shows I am M, but correctly, I am a female. The police officer also cited HTA s. 128 but Penalty 14 (b) does not match his calculated set fine and total payable in the ticket. He used the OCJ table for this. Was he correct? None of this was brought up this morning. I did make the request for disclosure before I left the court house.

My next court date is in June, this year. What are my chances? I turned down the judge's offer of lesser charge with guilty plea. Silly, huh. I hope to keep a clean record.

Thanks in advance for any help sent my way.

Romes wrote:What are my chances?

Chances of what? An acquittal? You haven't provided any info to judge that on.

Also, what was the fine you got for 22 over?

Set fine $82.50 / Total Payable $107.50. This is different from HTA guidelines / table.

BTW, I will be picking up my requested disclosure documents next week. I was told it was the only way I can have them.

Thanks for your feedback.

That's the correct set fine for 22 over on a ticket (out of court settlement). The other table is what the fine would be if assessed by a JP on a finding of guilty in court.

I suppose it will be guilty as charged with demerits on my next court date, Or is there a chance for another deal before the trial? The JP said 'no deal' after he granted my request for adjournment on account of the request for disclosure which the prosecutor refused to provide me a copy of before the court proceedings started. I also found out today that the disclosure was provided shortly after I handed in my request, at which point I had already left the courthouse. I may sound paranoid but I feel like this was done purposely. So, the M instead of the F does not have any impact at all either, just have not seen this raised in any of the postings I viewed. Thanks again.

It's not the JP's decision whether or not there will be a deal. That is between you and the prosecutor. You can schedule a resolution meeting with them before the next set date (if there's time) or meet with them the morning of to discuss a plea, if that's what you'd like to do.

The prosecutor was a mean one. She told the JP at least twice that the delay was mine. My next set date starts at 9 a.m., will it be proper to contact the prosecutor before the set date, potentially for a deal?

Also, before the speeding ticket, I did not know what Option 3 meant. When I told the officer it was my first speeding ticket he said, 'I know, just choose option 3 and you'll be fine (reinforced by a hand gesture which typically meant and I read as "Oh, don't worry"). Was he correct in leading me to choose this option although he did not explain the options within Option 3, which I found out later on.

If I sound desperate, I am, to keep my record clean. Thank you.

Romes wrote: The JP said 'no deal' after he granted my request for adjournment on

Which means that your matter has been completed for today and even if you make a deal sometime later during the day with prosecutor, it can not be brought before the court on this same day

Romes wrote:Also, before the speeding ticket, I did not know what Option 3 meant. When I told the officer it was my first speeding ticket he said, 'I know, just choose option 3 and you'll be fine (reinforced by a hand gesture which typically meant and I read as "Oh, don't worry"). Was he correct in leading me to choose this option although he did not explain the options within Option 3, which I found out later on..

and do tell what this gesture is....I have no clue what a "dont worry" gesture is

think the officer told you more than most would say anyway.

Most is are likely to say something like:

- there are 3 options on the back of the offence notice, read them carefully and respond within 15 days

- there are 3 options on the back of the offence notice, plead guilty, plead guilty with explaination or ask for a trial, read them carefully and respond within 15 days

I think that you should be able to plead this down to 15 km/h over. You could try calling their office to see if they want to resolve it in advance.

This still means I plead guilty which will go on my clean record, does it not? Will this give me demerit points too if I did?

And then there's my insurance which is up for renewal next month.

Thank you for all the feedback. Regardless of the outcome of my case, you guys have all been great in your advice and comments.

Yes, insurance companies typically look at all convictions, regardless of demerit points. That being said, a speeding conviction of 22 over would likely be considered a minor conviction. Most providers overlook your first minor conviction. If you get two or three minor convictions, then you could be looking at a rate hike of 5-10%. Major convictions (careless, fail to remain) are when your insurance rates go through the roof. Check with your provider to be sure.

Edit: And to answer your question, 15 over (or less) does not carry any demerit points.