90 in 70 zone reduced to 80-fight or not

I just got ticket for speeding 90kmh in 70 zone.I didn't see the police car on the road and the officer didn't give me his exact location.It was only one officer. also when i asked to see the device he showed to me only the screen and when i wanted to see the model he said he not supposed to give it to me and put it away.He said i will see all the details in his notes as evidence.

I asked question about the device and he said it takes too long and i am blocking the traffic so i have to go.From the stop to the issuing the ticket was less than 5 min. No time for questions.Do i have any chance fighting the ticket?

Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

There's always a chance to fight a ticket, but it's impossible to know what those chances are without further information.

You're best bet is to request disclosure and see what the officer's evidence is, and see if there are any weak points on which you could try and fight the charge.

Be aware however that if you do go to trial, the ticket will likely be raised to the full amount, so a $95 fine and 3 points if convicted.

Because the officer was not willing to play 20 Questions roadside does not constitute grounds for ticket dismissal, if that's your question.

Thanks guys! My point is the officer was trying to cover something.He stooped me took my documents, print the ticket and gave it to me in just 3 min.No driving record check no explanation . I am sure he wasn't beside the road i was driving.We didn't see police car anywhere near by in a clear day light.

Anyway i will try my chances. The ticket will be in my record anyway.

Well, the police usually hide when doing radar, they wouldn't catch many people of they sat in plain sight..... and consider your self lucky, I never heard of anyone getting dealt with that quickly. Like the others said, request all the info you want when you ask for disclosure. I don't see how he was trying to cover anything up. Was probably nearing the end of his shift, or he got another call and was in a hurry to get going.

manwithaplan wrote:

Well, the police usually hide when doing radar, they wouldn't catch many people of they sat in plain sight.

funny you say that...I sit on the hwy plain view on a straight area, nothing around, and still drivers don't look more than 100m up the road to see the cruiser, plenty of people just want my attention I guess Sometimes I even try to help by making the car look bigger and park it x-ways, that doesnt seem to work either

I don't doubt it, lol. You could probably sit there with your lights flashing and still catch people. Hell, when I first got my license at 17 I ran a red light down the street from a police station with a cruiser right behind me (D'oh!). I started paying more attention after that.

In most cases I see personally (in Toronto) they're usually hiding behind trees/poles with the cruiser(s) parked out of site. And on the 407 you guys like to hide behind the overpasses, so we can't see you until it's too late

manwithaplan wrote:

And on the 407 you guys like to hide behind the overpasses, so we can't see you until it's too late

ahh..see there is the difference, sitting behind overpasses provides us protection/barrier from vehicles just randomly leave their lane in an uncontrolled path for an undetermined location

i agree we don't pay attention too much ahead but when you are passing by a police car i don't think you will miss it.That is my point here.There was nowhere to hide and it is not a bicycle to hide it.Or i am totally blind and my friend sitting on the passenger seat also.And probably he was on his way home-4:30 pm just about time .Anyway -i had a bad luck.

I just had the trial. I did submit evidence(photos) there is no sign Speed limit posted after the intersection.

The Justice accepted the evidence and said yes but long before the intersection there is sign so i was convicted.

Clearly this court is a joke .They do not respect the traffic regulations or they have no idea what that is.

At least i made them to work hard for the $90 fine.

I would recommend everyone to fight any ticket they get.

I had a trial and convicted for driving 90km/h in 70 zone. I was clocked after a major intersection and after the intersection there is no speed limit sign posted. The reason i was convicted was there is speed limit sign long before the intersection . The speed limit signs have to be posted after every major intersection according to the regulations-not accepted by the court. Also submitted the city road map report with the roads categories and speed limits and it was totally ignored by the Justice(what a joke). The road was listed as category B and speed limit 80 outside urban area-the Justice accepted the prosecutions statement that in the city speed limit is 50km/h just by saying so.

I did submit all documents from the City and photos proving all i say -but i guess the Justice doesn't believe his eyes.

What a disappointment-The traffic court is so corrupted!!!

gramada2 wrote:

The speed limit signs have to be posted after every major intersection according to the regulations-not accepted by the court. !

for all of us, what regulation is this? and what section? thanx

Here guys

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/e ... _e.htm#BK0

3. (1) The commencement of the part of a highway for which a maximum rate of speed is prescribed shall be indicated by a speed limit sign accompanied immediately below by a sign bearing the markings and having the dimensions as illustrated in the following Figure:

When you are entering the Highway from a side road you are driving left or right on the intersection to enter the highway.

For you this is the beginning of the Highway. How you would know what is the speed limit or if it is different than the appropriate speed limit for that category road?

Or with other words shortly after every intersection speed limit sign is posted so the new traffic entering that road is informed for the speed limit change.

and little bit more

when charged with speeding the prosecution has to provide certified copy of the By Law stating there is a new speed limit in force for that section of the road and is different than the appropriate speed for the road.

I don't think they ever do that. The officer says there is sign posted but if the sign is posted who knows?

In my case there is no sign posted and i showed photos.

I think you misunderstood the section you've quoted. It's referring to the fact that when there is a change in the speed limit (i.e. a 80 drops down to a 50 zone), the speed limit sign should have the word "BEGINS" affixed below it. The requirement for where and how often speed limit signs need to be posted is directly above that section (600 or 900 meters apart depending on the speed limit).

Right or wrong, there is no legal requirement for the limit to be posted at every intersection.

In regards to your second part about bylaws, I believe for Court purposed the presence of a speed limit sign on the roadway (even though there wasn't one at the intersection) is considered prima facie evidence of the bylaw.

You seem quite knowledgeable and i would ask you a question if you don't mind.

Let see the scenario here.

The highway goes east/west. There is a road crossing the highway in north/south direction.

I am coming from north and turning right on the highway. There is no speed limit sign posted.

What will be the speed limit for me?

Thanks for the fast responses!

I know what you're saying, but the limit would be whatever is posted on the highway, even if there is no sign present where you turned on. I can think of a few highways near where I live which have limits lower then 80, yet the speed isn't posted at the intersections where motorists enter the highway.

i am sure there is a lot of places like that but we have to observe where is the next speed limit sign-should be no more than 900m after the previous.

In my location there is no next sign after 900m. The next sign is way further when you enter the town. It is pure abuse of power unfortunately i have no time fighting that.

In BC is clearly stated

"confirmatory sign after each intersection"

so no misunderstandings -no confusions-no discussions

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications/en ... oST_PM.pdf

Stanton wrote:

I know what you're saying, but the limit would be whatever is posted on the highway, even if there is no sign present where you turned on. I can think of a few highways near where I live which have limits lower then 80, yet the speed isn't posted at the intersections where motorists enter the highway.

OK here is the Ontario Traffic Manual .

http://www.library.mto.gov.on.ca/webopa ... rch&hide=1

go to page 40-41

sign Rb-1 (basic speed limit sign) is placed right after each intersection downstream the traffic

No sign- the speed limit is the default speed limit for the road.

gramada2 wrote:

Here guys

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/e ... _e.htm#BK0

3. (1) The commencement of the part of a highway for which a maximum rate of speed is prescribed shall be indicated by a speed limit sign accompanied immediately below by a sign bearing the markings and having the dimensions as illustrated in the following Figure:

When you are entering the Highway from a side road you are driving left or right on the intersection to enter the highway.

For you this is the beginning of the Highway. How you would know what is the speed limit or if it is different than the appropriate speed limit for that category road?

Or with other words shortly after every intersection speed limit sign is posted so the new traffic entering that road is informed for the speed limit change.

and here http://www.library.mto.gov.on.ca/webopa ... rch&hide=1

Ontario Traffic Manual- page 40

Stanton wrote:

I think you misunderstood the section you've quoted. It's referring to the fact that when there is a change in the speed limit (i.e. a 80 drops down to a 50 zone), the speed limit sign should have the word "BEGINS" affixed below it. The requirement for where and how often speed limit signs need to be posted is directly above that section (600 or 900 meters apart depending on the speed limit).

Right or wrong, there is no legal requirement for the limit to be posted at every intersection.

In regards to your second part about bylaws, I believe for Court purposed the presence of a speed limit sign on the roadway (even though there wasn't one at the intersection) is considered prima facie evidence of the bylaw.

The Ontario Traffic manual explains and shows clearly on Page 40-41 Sign Rb-1 posted after every intersection .

The missing sign might be a traffic engineers mistake but doesn't justify the ignorance in the court.

Lesson 1: The only chance to win is the officer no show or Motion for 11b if you have to wait more than a year for the trial( i did won one and was easy-may be i was lucky)

Lesson 2: The Provincial offenses court is not a court where you can get Justice.They will get you convicted no matter

Lesson 3: The Justice of Piece is actually acting as a second prosecutor

I had almost 2 hours trial and trust me i was well prepared and had good evidence. I proved the officer was wrong and the judge had to defend him during the cross examination . As you can expect i was convicted but i don't regret it. It was a good experience and i learned a lot. If you have ticket fight it , no mater what .

Good luck everyone!

You weren't charged against the "Ontario Traffic Manual". The Ontario Traffic Manual Books and/or the Official Government Driving Handbook are simply guides. OTM for traffic practitioners and the Handbook for new drivers. They are not a defense to Highway Traffic Act violations. If you have an issue with the information provided in these guides, consult the many names listed in its credits and maybe they'll consider an addendum in your honor.

Open up a Government Drivers handbook and it will tell you "As you read, remember that this handbook is only a guide... For official descriptions of the laws, look in the

Highway Traffic Act of Ontario and its Regulations..."

You were charged under the Highway Traffic Act and it tells you everything you need to know about sign placement. The Highway Traffic Act states:

2. (1) Subject to section 4, where a maximum rate of speed other than that prescribed by subsection 128 (1) of the Act is prescribed for a highway in a local municipality or built-up area, speed limit signs shall be erected on the highway, in each direction of travel,

(a) not more than 600 metres apart where the speed limit prescribed is 60 kilometres per hour or less; and

(b) not more than 900 metres apart where the speed limit prescribed is greater than 60 kilometres per hour and not more than 70 kilometres per hour. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 615, s. 2 (1); O. Reg. 175/08, s. 1.

(2) Where the maximum rate of speed for a highway in a built-up area more than 1,500 metres in length is that prescribed by subsection 128 (1) of the Act, speed limit signs shall be erected on the highway not more than 900 metres apart. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 615, s. 2 (2).

(3) Where the maximum rate of speed for a highway in a built-up area 1,500 metres or less in length is that prescribed by subsection 128 (1) of the Act, speed limit signs shall be erected on the highway not more than 300 metres apart. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 615, s. 2 (3).

There is no requirement listed in The Highway Traffic Act that states a sign must be placed at every intersection.

R.R.O. 1990, REGULATION 615

"(6) A speed limit sign as prescribed in section 1 shall be erected at the termination of the designated portion of the highway, except that the maximum speed shown thereon shall be the appropriate speed limit for the adjoining portion of the highway. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 615, s. 5 (6)."

Termination of the highway is every major intersection controled by traffic lights -no side roads or property acces roads as someone sugested earlier.

here is the section 1 at the begining

"1. A speed limit sign,

(a) shall be not less than 60 centimetres in width and 75 centimetres in height; ........"

Whether the sign must be there or not is not an issue now. The issue in the trial was that the only supportive evidence from the officer for my conviction was the 70 speed limit sign.The officer testifies there is a speed limit sign posted. I did prove there is no sign posted and never been posted before . The senior traffic engineers can proove that with a record showing the sign was never installed. I did prove it with photos that there is no sign. The officer was lying under oath and that was OK with the Judge.

gramada2 wrote:

R.R.O. 1990, REGULATION 615

"(6) A speed limit sign as prescribed in section 1 shall be erected at the termination of the designated portion of the highway, except that the maximum speed shown thereon shall be the appropriate speed limit for the adjoining portion of the highway. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 615, s. 5 (6)."

Termination of the highway is every major intersection controled by traffic lights -no side roads or property acces roads as someone sugested earlier.

here is the section 1 at the begining

"1. A speed limit sign,

(a) shall be not less than 60 centimetres in width and 75 centimetres in height; ........"

An intersection is not a termination of a highway.

The quoted section would actually be referring to the termination of a school safety zone, not the actual highway itself. Its basically saying when the school safety zone ends, you need to post a new sign with the (presumably) higher limit.

Stanton wrote:

The quoted section would actually be referring to the termination of a school safety zone, not the actual highway itself. Its basically saying when the school safety zone ends, you need to post a new sign with the (presumably) higher limit.

You are wrong here. When the school zone or community safety zone continues after the next intersection (which is considered termination!) the 40 speed limit sign shall be posted after the intersection. If the school zone ends at the intersection speed limit sign is not required after the intersection and the speed limit goes to the default speed limit-50km/h in the city. Speed limit sign is required after each intersection if the speed limit is different than the default speed limit. That is why we don't see 50km/h signs after each intersection in the city-the 50km/h is valid for the whole city and that is a way to reduce the signs pollution.

The paragraph you are showing with the 600m ,900m and so on is for uninterrupted road. Every intersection where is required a full stop in every direction of travel is considered termination and also a point of acceleration . Anyway we can talk a lot here. Actually in the Traffic manual which is used by the Traffic engineers to determine the sign locations you can see few road diagrams with signs required and the locations. You can see on the uninterrupted side of the road is valid the rule 600m and so on , but on the interrupted side of the road signs are posted after each termination or intersection.

Thanks for taking time to discuss this mater!

Are you basing that on the Ontario Traffic Manual? Remember, the OTM is the suggested best practice but not a legal requirement under the HTA. While I dont disagree that signage should comply to the standards set by the Province, for Court purposes typically only the HTA requirements need to be met.