149 km/h on the 401

RdioJJ
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

149 km/h on the 401

Unread post by RdioJJ on

Hey all,

I was recently busted doing 151 km/h on the 401 (officer bumped it to 149 to avoid impounding the rental). I realize I screwed up pretty hard, but I can't afford the insurance hike; so I really want to avoid this. I've been doing some research and found that she improperly calculated my set fine.

The OHTA states that:

Penalty
(14) Every person who contravenes this section or any by-law or regulation made under this section is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable, where the rate of speed at which the motor vehicle was driven,

(a) is less than 20 kilometres per hour over the speed limit, to a fine of $3 for each kilometre per hour that the motor vehicle was driven over the speed limit;

(b) is 20 kilometres per hour or more but less than 30 kilometres per hour over the speed limit, to a fine of $4.50 for each kilometre per hour that the motor vehicle was driven over the speed limit;

(c) is 30 kilometres per hour or more but less than 50 kilometres per hour over the speed limit, to a fine of $7 for each kilometre per hour that the motor vehicle was driven over the speed limit; and

(d) is 50 kilometres per hour or more over the speed limit, to a fine of $9.75 for each kilometre per hour that the motor vehicle was driven over the speed limit. 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 17 (7).



She has written that I acted Contrary to: Highway Traffic Act Section. 128

When I run the numbers 49*$7 = $343

But written on my ticket the Set Fine is $294.

Am I able to use the default method to have the Justice of Peace quash this?


Sonic
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 46
Joined:

Unread post by Sonic on

In this particular incident, I will refrain from making any claims. Your set fine appears to be incorrect, and I am aware that people have appealed successfully and had the ticket quashed in their respective situations, however - in reading London v. Young, what stands out to me is:

London (City) v. Young, 2008 ONCA 429
http://canlii.ca/t/1x2n3
[82] I acknowledge that there can be cases where a mistake in the "set fine" amount found on the offence notice (the defendant does not see the certificate of offence) could prejudice a defendant. For example, a person may chose not to defend a charge thinking the fine is $100, when in fact it is $400. Differences between the amount shown on the offence notice and the actual "set fine" amount may be significant enough to cause defendants to choose options they would not otherwise choose. This potential prejudice can be addressed without the need to quash all charges where there is any error in the "set fine" amount, even an error that could not possibly have prejudiced the defendant.

[83] A defendant who is convicted under s. 9 will receive a notice of the fine imposed by the justice: s. 66(5). If the amount of the fine is higher than the amount noted on the offence notice, the defendant is entitled to appeal the conviction and sentence to the Ontario Court of Justice: s. 135(1). Presumably, if the defendant can convince the appeal court that he or she was materially misled by the error as to the amount of the "set fine" made in the notice of offence, the defendant will be successful on the appeal.

[84] The right of appeal to the Ontario Court of Justice provides a straightforward inexpensive means of protecting those who may suffer any potential injustice caused by a mistake on the offence notice as to the amount of the "set fine". As well, it does so in a way that preserves the convictions of those for whom the error was of no possible consequence.

[85] In my view, interpreting the Act in a manner that allows for convictions where the error is inconsequential and permits successful appeals in those circumstances where the error is of some consequence promotes the due administration of justice by producing results that have more to do with the merits of the allegation and the fairness of the process, and less to do with the provincial offences officer's ability to correctly fill in boxes on a form.

[86] I would allow the appeal, make an order in the nature of mandamus directing a justice of the peace of the Ontario Court of Justice to examine the relevant certificates of offences under s. 9 of the Act in accordance with these reasons.

Appeal dismissed.
The case gives courts the authority to reinforce the conviction if there was no potential prejudices that may have occured, specifically - where the set fine is less than the actual amount you have to pay. Once again, don't take this as a matter of fact, because I'll admit I haven't diligently looked into the matter, nor have I read the entire case law thoroughly - but I would like to raise the issue just so someone that is more familiar with the matter can assist you, and address these concerns. I wouldn't want you to not attend trial with the belief that the conviction be quashed, only to have it registered and reaffirmed by the appeals court by interpretation of the passage quoted above.


Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined:
Location: Ontario

Unread post by Stanton on

Your fine is actually correct. The fine on speeding tickets is calculated using the Ontario Court of Justice's set fines table, which can be found here: http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/how-do- ... hedule-43/

For whatever reason the fines are slightly lower then what's listed in the HTA, but both are acceptable. The set fine for 30-49 kilometres per hour over is $6.00 per kilometre, so your set fine should be $294 with a total payable of $359.


RdioJJ
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by RdioJJ on

Stanton wrote:Your fine is actually correct. The fine on speeding tickets is calculated using the Ontario Court of Justice's set fines table, which can be found here: http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/how-do- ... hedule-43/

For whatever reason the fines are slightly lower then what's listed in the HTA, but both are acceptable. The set fine for 30-49 kilometres per hour over is $6.00 per kilometre, so your set fine should be $294 with a total payable of $359.

I looked into that, my ticket says I'm being charged under HTA Section. 128 though. How can I be getting charged under the Ontario Court of Justice table when it clearly says Highway Traffic Act?

Reference: http://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90h08


RdioJJ
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by RdioJJ on



User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Moderator

Unread post by Radar Identified on

Stanton is correct; because the Ontario Chief Justice has the authority to impose a different (lesser) fine if you pay a ticket out-of-court, that's why your set fine is lower. It is perfectly legit.

If you go to trial, they can revert to the standard fine as per the HTA.
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca


RdioJJ
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by RdioJJ on

So if I pay the ticket out of court, it'll be lower than normal?


Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined:
Location: Ontario

Unread post by Stanton on

RdioJJ wrote:So if I pay the ticket out of court, it'll be lower than normal?
If you go to trial and are found guilty, the Crown could request that the Justice of the Peace impose the higher fine value from the HTA, but it doesn't always happen. Regardless, you'll still be facing a higher fine at trial because they'll amend the speeding ticket back up to the original amount of 51 over. It varies somewhat from one insurance provider to the next, but 51 over is also likely to have a much more serious impact on your insurance rates.


bend
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1155
Joined:

Posting Awards

Moderator

Unread post by bend on

RdioJJ wrote:I was recently busted doing 151 km/h on the 401 (officer bumped it to 149 to avoid impounding the rental). I realize I screwed up pretty hard, but I can't afford the insurance hike; so I really want to avoid this.
As just previously pointed out, your charge will be amended to 51 should a trial take place. Keep that in mind before you go all out with this.


iFly55
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 561
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by iFly55 on



RdioJJ
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by RdioJJ on

Thanks for all the valuable info guys! Should I just pay the ticket and handle the insurance hike?


ynotp
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 548
Joined:
Location: Ontario

Posting Awards

Unread post by ynotp on

RdioJJ wrote:Thanks for all the valuable info guys! Should I just pay the ticket and handle the insurance hike?
It is probably what will end up happening, but you should request a trial. Preparing for a trial you may get the charges stayed/withdrawn if: it takes too long, if there is no disclosure, if the officer is a no show. There is also a slim possibility that the charge will be further reduced. You have right up until the trial starts to enter a guilty plea, effectively neutering the prosecutor's ability to request the reinstatement of the original speed charge. If the disclosure against you indicates incomplete note taking by the officer then you can head to trial, but you should only head to trial if you have a slam dunk case.
Last edited by ynotp on Wed Jun 17, 2015 8:14 am, edited 1 time in total.


RdioJJ
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined:

Unread post by RdioJJ on

Seems like I have a lot to consider. Again, thanks for all the helpful tips folks! This site rocks, and I'm learning a ton of stuff.


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

I suggest you always choose NOT GUILTY and request a trial with the Officer present.

Once you get a Notice of Trial in the mail, request Disclosure (which will be officers notes) and a copy of the radar/lidar manual.

Then once you review the disclosure, then you can decide if you should proceed to trial or just pay the existing ticket as it is. You may want to hire lawyer/paralegal at this point to review it with you.

51 over is defintely more serious than 49 over BUT 49 over is still pretty significant.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


bend
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1155
Joined:

Posting Awards

Moderator

Unread post by bend on

jsherk wrote:Once you get a Notice of Trial in the mail, request Disclosure (which will be officers notes) and a copy of the radar/lidar manual.
You're not going to get a copy of the manual. You'll get the 1 or 2 pages regarding testing at most. There's also the possibility that there was no device used since there's not enough detail in the post to know. In that case, you wouldn't get anything involving a manual.
jsherk wrote:51 over is defintely more serious than 49 over BUT 49 over is still pretty significant.
The difference between 51 and 49 is ridiculously huge. Insurance companies don't calculate your rates by the kilometre. 51 puts you in an entirely different bracket. It's considered a serious offense and will land you a 100% rate increase no matter how clean your driving record is. You also run the risk of being booted by your insurance provider completely.

In most cases, speeding 1-49km will be treated the same by your provider (minor bracket). It would be completely reckless and bonkers to risk a 51km over conviction for a 49.






Post Reply

Return to “Exceeding the speed limit by 30 to 49 km/h”