Ontariohighwaytrafficact.com

Hey, i recently got a ticket for failing to stop a red light (Section 114(18)).

I was travelling south, the cop was travelling north. He was on the other side of the intersection then me, my light turned yellow and i tried running it but it turned red before i could cross the line. I was going too fast to be able to stomp the break so i had to run it through.

The cop made a u-turn, pulled me over and gave me this ticket. I checked for fatal errors but unfortunately couldn't find any, the fine and everything on the ticket was correct.

I tried telling him it was yellow but he said "nope it was a solid red". This ticket is really going to hurt my insurance, since I am a young driver.

This is technically my first ticket because my last ticket didn't get issued. This one 100% got issued because its electronically printed and not hand-written like the other one i had.

Anyways, how should i go about this to get this ticket dropped. What are that it will get dropped?

Extra Information: This happened in Scarborough.

EDIT: I mean to also say, what are the chances i will get this ticket dropped?

There's no secret to making tickets just disappear.

There's two points in your post that get confusing. You say the light turned red before you crossed the line but yet you argue with the officer the light was yellow? I'm not sure I follow the reasoning there.

Amber doesn't mean "speed up and beat the light". Even had managed to race and beat the red light, you can still be ticketed for disobeying an amber. You're not exactly accomplishing much when the argument is "I almost beat it".

If you're going down the path of "I tried to beat the red light but I ran through it in the interest of safety to avoid stopping in the intersection", don't even bother. It's a contradictory defense. Someone who is interested in making the safest maneuver isn't trying to beat amber lights.

Either way it's an absolute liability charge. Either you went through the red or you didn't. That's all they care about at the end of the day.

You can request disclosure and go from there. That's the best advice you're going to get at this stage.

bend wrote:

There's no secret to making tickets just disappear.

There's two points in your post that get confusing. You say the light turned red before you crossed the line but yet you argue with the officer the light was yellow? I'm not sure I follow the reasoning there.

Amber doesn't mean "speed up and beat the light". Even had managed to race and beat the red light, you can still be ticketed for disobeying an amber. You're not exactly accomplishing much when the argument is "I almost beat it".

If you're going down the path of "I tried to beat the red light but I ran through it in the interest of safety to avoid stopping in the intersection", don't even bother. It's a contradictory defense. Someone who is interested in making the safest maneuver isn't trying to beat amber lights.

Either way it's an absolute liability charge. Either you went through the red or you didn't. That's all they care about at the end of the day.

You can request disclosure and go from there. That's the best advice you're going to get at this stage.

Oh sorry shoulda been more specific.

Anyways, incase he doesn't have proper evidence, i said "It was yellow" because i didn't want to give him a confession that it was red. Also I was hoping he would think i actually ran a yellow and not give me a ticket.

It didn't work out and i still got a ticket so now I have to deal with it.

But, yeah I'd like all the possible options that I could do to possibly get this ticket removed because I'm really worried about my insurance now. I'm a young driver and insurance will rape me.

But yes, i do believe the light i ran was red.

I was thinking about getting a lawyer but I don't know whose good when it comes to tickets like this.

There's no point going to trial because the officer will testify you went through on red (or else he wouldn't have issued the ticket and you can't testify or else you have to say the same thing or purjure yourself.

argyll wrote:

There's no point going to trial because the officer will testify you went through on red (or else he wouldn't have issued the ticket and you can't testify or else you have to say the same thing or purjure yourself.

Yes but what about the possibility he doesn't show up to court?

Also even if he does show up to court, can't I adjourn it to another court date and try my luck again?

Also lets say he does show up to court and i do end up getting convicted of the ticket, is there anything i can do to avoid this making my insurance spike up.

Since a ticket last's on your record for 3-years, I was thinking about cancelling the insurance policy for 3 years, until the ticket no longer exists and then getting insurance back after. This will keep my insurance clean, won't it?

I'm not an expert, but this is what i would do.

On the day of court, you usually get an opportunity to speak with the prosecutor before session starts, so make sure you arrive early.

Speak, to the prosecutor and plead your case. eg) first timer, concerned about insurance, young driver, etc ....

You will get a sense from the prosecutor what their stance is. And if he/she has mercy on you, they may reduce the charge down to a zero demerit offence.

Which "should" not impact your insurance.

If they play hard ball, then you can adjourn it to give you an opportunity to get legal representation.

FastNAwesome wrote:

I'm not an expert, but this is what i would do.

On the day of court, you usually get an opportunity to speak with the prosecutor before session starts, so make sure you arrive early.

Speak, to the prosecutor and plead your case. eg) first timer, concerned about insurance, young driver, etc ....

You will get a sense from the prosecutor what their stance is. And if he/she has mercy on you, they may reduce the charge down to a zero demerit offence.

Which "should" not impact your insurance.

If they play hard ball, then you can adjourn it to give you an opportunity to get legal representation.

Oh okay! Thanks for your input! Appreciate it a lot.

How will i be able to adjourn though if i speak with the prosecutor early, won't they know I'm at court and i was able to attend then. Usually they don't let you adjourn for no reason?

I'm really paranoid, i have an exam tomorrow too but can't even study now because of this

After you speak with the prosecutor, don't leave.

Enter court with everyone else.

When they call your name, you go up and you will deal with whatever transpired with the prosecutor.

If you end up adjourning it, the judge will ask you why and you just say you need some time to get legal representation.

If this is your first court date, they will not deny the adjournment. And a date will be chosen while you are standing there.

FastNAwesome wrote:

After you speak with the prosecutor, don't leave.

Enter court with everyone else.

When they call your name, you go up and you will deal with whatever transpired with the prosecutor.

If you end up adjourning it, the judge will ask you why and you just say you need some time to get legal representation.

If this is your first court date, they will not deny the adjournment. And a date will be chosen while you are standing there.

Oh okay, i heard even when tickets are 0 demerit points it still effects insurance the same. I heard insurance companies don't look at demerit points, they look at the offence.

Also is there a possibility in getting community service or anything to get the ticket removed?

Insurance companies don't care about demerit points. A ticket is a ticket (unless it is a very serious one in which case they treat it worse).

Yes you could simply not have insurance (and not drive !) until the ticket drops off but you're also losing your no claims discount.

The chances of the officer not turning up are very slim these days. You can try it but it is very unlikely.

If this is your first ticket then the insurance hit shouldn't be too extreme. Another one would be significant however.

argyll wrote:

If this is your first ticket then the insurance hit shouldn't be too extreme. Another one would be significant however.

Yes but the thing is I don't even drive much.

I'm 21 years old currently, turning 22 this year.

The whole reason my dad is paying for my insurance is because he wants it so by the time i turn 25, i get a cheap insurance. This isn't going to happen now if this ticket stays on my record because I won't have 5 years of clean driving history. That's why I'm kind of nervous.

Also what paralegals do you guys recommend.

I heard wewinitoritsfree.com are good? Do you guys know anything about them?

So far the options I have are, Wewinitoritsfree.com, OTTLegal, Redline?

Any suggestions?

Also i have another question, how does a ticket's effect on insurance rates work. I'll use this example someone used to explain to me to ask the question.

So someone on this forum previously explained to me that:

Let's say you get a 10% discount when you turn 25 and let's assume your insurance currently costs : $2000.

At 25, you would get the 10% discount (which equals $200 off) and would end up paying $1,800 (i.e. $2000-$200)

However, if you had claims or convictions within the last 5 years, your insurer might say your base premium is now $2500.

At 25, you might still qualify for the 10% discount (which equals $250 (i.e. 10% of $2500)), so now you would end up paying $2,250 (that is, $2500-$250).

So, while you WOULD have paid $1,800 if you had a clean record, you end up paying $2,250 because your base premium was higher.

So i was wondering, let's say I do get convicted of this offence and my base premium goes up to $2500. Then by the time i turn 25, the ticket is off my record. Would I still get the original discounted rate of $1,800/year even though I did get a ticket.

It doesn't work like that.

You aren't "keeping a clean record" by cancelling your insurance for a couple years. All you're doing is avoiding any surcharge they charge you for the next little while.

Also, you can't do insurance math to predict the future. Is your insurance provider planning on keeping the same rates years from now? You plan on driving the same car? You plan on living in the same place? You plan on piggybacking off your dads policy several years from now? Are all the drivers on your policy going to remain there? Are they going to keep a clean record? Half the factors are out of your hands.

bend wrote:

It doesn't work like that.

You aren't "keeping a clean record" by cancelling your insurance for a couple years. All you're doing is avoiding any surcharge they charge you for the next little while.

Also, you can't do insurance math to predict the future. Is your insurance provider planning on keeping the same rates years from now? You plan on driving the same car? You plan on living in the same place? You plan on piggybacking off your dads policy several years from now? Are all the drivers on your policy going to remain there? Are they going to keep a clean record? Half the factors are out of your hands.

But, won't my insurance record stay clean to come. How will they find out about my offence if they never see the ticket. After 3-years it will be removed from my record?

Also i called OTT Legal and they told me that there is a 60% chance that they can get it dismissed and 40% chance they can get it reduced. Those numbers sound pretty good but kinda hard to believe?

Please keep topics to one thread.

As for the OTT chances, they have a database on which officer shows up to court or not. My guess is they have 10 cases with that officer, he missed court 6 times, and showed up 4 times, or something along those lines. They actually won't go for a full trial (not to my knowledge) because they get paid no matter what.

As for your insurance issue, remember insurance company's pay for driver abstract checks, so they are random. I've paid for a copy of my abstract and when the guy and Service Ontario printed it, it was 6 8.5x11 pages long. He asked me how do I still have a license and laughed. Anyways, back to my point. My insurance company had not done a check on me yet *knocks wood* and they still have me as a conviction less, suspension less driver. So you may get lucky and not get checked for those 3 years, and your premium will not go up.

Unlucky duck. You have to reveal tickets, suspensions to your insurance company. If not they can refuse to pay.

UnluckyDuck wrote:

Please keep topics to one thread.

As for the OTT chances, they have a database on which officer shows up to court or not. My guess is they have 10 cases with that officer, he missed court 6 times, and showed up 4 times, or something along those lines. They actually won't go for a full trial (not to my knowledge) because they get paid no matter what.

As for your insurance issue, remember insurance company's pay for driver abstract checks, so they are random. I've paid for a copy of my abstract and when the guy and Service Ontario printed it, it was 6 8.5x11 pages long. He asked me how do I still have a license and laughed. Anyways, back to my point. My insurance company had not done a check on me yet *knocks wood* and they still have me as a conviction less, suspension less driver. So you may get lucky and not get checked for those 3 years, and your premium will not go up.

I made different threads because the topic is different. One is asking for a good paralegal that people recommend. The other is advice on the ticket.

argyll wrote:

Unlucky duck. You have to reveal tickets, suspensions to your insurance company. If not they can refuse to pay.

Agreed. It's in every insurance policy. You have to reveal any changes.

No one does it, but they could very well deny you coverage when you need it the most. When they deny you coverage, your only option is to take them to court. I don't know how successful you'll be. Knowingly concealing tickets while paying reduced rates would be an uphill battle. That's something you don't want while the other driver is suing you over an accident.

I was under the assumption as if they don't ask, I don't reveal. I'm not lying to them, just not telling them about it. If they ask, I'll be truthful. I've been on the same policy with the same provider for 7 years and not once have they asked me about tickets.

Your assumption will not act as a defence in a civil suit

UnluckyDuck wrote:

I was under the assumption as if they don't ask, I don't reveal. I'm not lying to them, just not telling them about it. If they ask, I'll be truthful. I've been on the same policy with the same provider for 7 years and not once have they asked me about tickets.

They won't ask you, the fact that you have a policy with them they are able to check your driver's transcript with MTO without your knowledge or consent, the consent was given once you signed up with them.

They generally check your record when your policy is up for renewal.

Observer135 wrote:

UnluckyDuck wrote:

I was under the assumption as if they don't ask, I don't reveal. I'm not lying to them, just not telling them about it. If they ask, I'll be truthful. I've been on the same policy with the same provider for 7 years and not once have they asked me about tickets.

They won't ask you, the fact that you have a policy with them they are able to check your driver's transcript with MTO without your knowledge or consent, the consent was given once you signed up with them.

They generally check your record when your policy is up for renewal.

Yes, but I'm trying to say after 3-years it will be off my record. Even if they check with the MTO it's not going to show up.

t3ch9 wrote:

Yes, but I'm trying to say after 3-years it will be off my record. Even if they check with the MTO it's not going to show up.

The ticket is on your driver record for life. There are different types of record requests you can make through ServiceOntario. Insurance provider will use a 3 year record, but they may ask you personally (verbally) for a 6 year history or anything past 3 years when you start.

oh oops, i was supposed to post this on this thread, not my other one but...

One defense a paralegal told me about was...

The cop was not looking at the same light as me, he was in front of me on the opposite side so therefore he wasn't looking at the same light as me, therefore my light could've been yellow and his could've been red.

Unless he tested the lights (which I'm sure he didn't)?

What do you guys think about this? Should i go with this guy? He was from Mavericks legal service.

No one here knows anything about your case other than the story you've provided.

Do you have any notes or anything from your disclosure request?

t3ch9 wrote:

oh oops, i was supposed to post this on this thread, not my other one but...

One defense a paralegal told me about was...

The cop was not looking at the same light as me, he was in front of me on the opposite side so therefore he wasn't looking at the same light as me, therefore my light could've been yellow and his could've been red.

Unless he tested the lights (which I'm sure he didn't)?

What do you guys think about this? Should i go with this guy? He was from Mavericks legal service.

To be acquitted you need to create reasonable doubt, not just doubt. Traffic lights are well designed to all operate on a matched cycle.

bend wrote:

No one here knows anything about your case other than the story you've provided.

Do you have any notes or anything from your disclosure request?

No, I don't. I got the ticket less than a week ago, still gotta file it.

I will post the notes here once I get disclosure.

I'm pretty sure he also has a dash cam video also.

argyll wrote:

t3ch9 wrote:

oh oops, i was supposed to post this on this thread, not my other one but...

One defense a paralegal told me about was...

The cop was not looking at the same light as me, he was in front of me on the opposite side so therefore he wasn't looking at the same light as me, therefore my light could've been yellow and his could've been red.

Unless he tested the lights (which I'm sure he didn't)?

What do you guys think about this? Should i go with this guy? He was from Mavericks legal service.

To be acquitted you need to create reasonable doubt, not just doubt. Traffic lights are well designed to all operate on a matched cycle.

Yes but traffic lights are technology and can have malfunctions. Which is what I think the paralegal was trying to tell me he wanted to argue.