Hello,

I was approaching an intersection with my motorcycle, riding with the plastic face shield opened when something (i think a bug) hit me in a eye. After a few seconds of disorientation, I reopened my eyes and I was on the intersection facing a red light. My instinct suggested me to keep going instead of breaking hard (and most likely fall down). I mean, in that moment I decided to do what my instinct told me it was the safest thing to do.

When the policeman stopped me, I was still confused and I didn't explain my reasons. I did after he gave my ticket ($325), and he said me to just put 'not guilty' on the back and send it, and that he didn't have intention to fight against me for this ticket

I'm pretty new in Canada.. what do you think he meant?

Which of the two option of option 3 (trial) should I choose?

Would the 'emergency situation' i was involved in be a good defence in court?

Thanks everyone for your help!!

good way to lose an eye....lucky it was not a larger bug or rock

a full emergency brake on an MC will not cause it to go down. For your safety, go practice emergency braking in an empty parking lot, not at a time of need.

Ok, I'll follow your suggestion, but I'll have to bring with me a friend with a sling to shot a stone in my face while I'm riding, to get a full training for the specific situation.

latollo wrote:

I did after he gave my ticket ($325), and he said me to just put 'not guilty' on the back and send it, and that he didn't have intention to fight against me for this ticket

It's not really up to the officer to decide not to show up in court to give his evidence. That is part of a police officer's job and unless there are some extenuating circumstances, he should show up. Where I worked we would get a nasty memo from the prosecutor, sent to our boss, if we didn't show up.

latollo wrote:

Which of the two option of option 3 (trial) should I choose?

Would the 'emergency situation' i was involved in be a good defence in court?

Thanks everyone for your help!!

Check out the articles at www.ontarioticket.com. Then ask questions here if you still have any.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but if you have been charged with 144 (18), I'm under the understanding that it is a $250 charge with a $50 victims surcharge (Whatever that is, ... a crock).

If I am correct this would be a fatal flaw. What you would have to do is choose to fight it, then NOT show up for trial in hopes the the JP sees that it is the wrong fine, and it gets quashed. If they don't notice and it goes through, you should appeal it, as it is the wrong fine.

Mind you I'm not 100% so I hope someone corrects or confirms this.

Best of luck.

RYOUNVS wrote:

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but if you have been charged with 144 (18), I'm under the understanding that it is a $250 charge with a $50 victims surcharge (Whatever that is, ... a crock).

If I am correct this would be a fatal flaw. What you would have to do is choose to fight it, then NOT show up for trial in hopes the the JP sees that it is the wrong fine, and it gets quashed. If they don't notice and it goes through, you should appeal it, as it is the wrong fine.

Mind you I'm not 100% so I hope someone corrects or confirms this.

Best of luck.

All tickets come with a victims surchage.

You probably would not want to try that strategy...

The JP might not see thats true, and you can be convicted if you don't challenge it or show up.

The correct fines for 144 (18 ) Red Light - Fail to Stop are:

Set fine $260 + Victim surcharge ($60) + Court costs ($5)

$325 Total Payable.

Really?! I have in front of my my ticket and it says Set fine $250, Total Payable $300. Then beside that it says, Total payable includes set fine, applicable victim fine surcharge and costs.

Is it possible that there are different Total Payables for each city or is there a flaw that I didn't know of on my ticket? Maybe I should ask that elsewhere, but if you don't mind answering I'd appreciate it.

RYOUNVS wrote:

Really?! I have in front of my my ticket and it says Set fine $250, Total Payable $300. Then beside that it says, Total payable includes set fine, applicable victim fine surcharge and costs.

Is it possible that there are different Total Payables for each city or is there a flaw that I didn't know of on my ticket?

Fine is the same everywhere in Ontario. It is $260 totalling $325.

Ontario Court of Justice - set fines 1 - HTA you can find it

http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/ocj/en/s ... /index.htm

In Oshawa I recived a redlight charge of $150 - payab le $180

Different than $325 mentioned

I received a ticket for redlight charge under section 144 (18) cost is $150

payable is $180. but should be $260. Section 144 (15) is Amber charge for cost $150.00 - can this ticket be revoked due to wrong cost shown for section 144(18) - Officer used right offence but wrong cost - any comments

Thanks

I received a ticket for redlight charge under section 144 (18) cost is $150

payable is $180. but should be $260. Section 144 (15) is Amber charge for cost $150.00 - can this ticket be revoked due to wrong cost shown for section 144(18) - Officer used right offence but wrong cost - any comments

Thanks

That would make the ticket irregular on its face and it could be quashed. You could speak to the prosecutor about it and if they are reasonable they will probably withdraw it, rather than making you go before a JP to argue that it should be quashed.

Today I received a ticket for running a red on my bicycle. Elsewhere I read that the officer has to put the make and model on the ticket or it is a "fatal error." Anybody know if there is truth to this? The cop just drew a line through this section and wrote, "B." Bikes have a make and model.

I have already asked for my day in court - it doesn't make sense to me that I would lose demerit points from my driver's licence for riding a vehicle that doesn't require a driver's licence. (I should have shown him my heath card - silly me!) I'm a very cautious car driver with a spotless record.

There is no problem with writing something like that to indicate that it is a bicycle.

You will still receive demerit points because a bicycle is a vehicle under the HTA and red light applies to vehicles, not just motor vehicles.

DJ Jazzy wrote:

it doesn't make sense to me that I would lose demerit points from my driver's licence for riding a vehicle that doesn't require a driver's licence.

It doesn't make sence to me that you expect other road users to share the road with you and then you go squeese past several cars and run the red light just to have the cars pass you again.