Hi, My husband was involved in an accident on the weekend. He was pulling out of a plaza driveway. There was no stop sign there as far as he can remember. There was a fair amount of traffic on the street he was pulling onto. He saw a space to pull out which he felt was a safe amount of space. As he was turning onto the road he noticed that the oncoming car was driving faster than he expected and not slowing down at all. He sped up to avoid the collision but the other car still hit the rear of his vehicle really hard and spun it around. The police officer said that, since it could not be determined how fast the other car was going (the driver said she was going 50kph), that my husband was at-fault for entering the highway at an unsafe time and he got a ticket for failing to yield to traffic on a through highway contrary to HTA 136(1)(b). There wasn't much damage to the other car comparatively. Our car is looking like a possible write-off at this point. We are feeling unsure if we should challenge this ticket at all. There were a lot of people around but no one acting as a "witness". Thanks.
Hi,
My husband was involved in an accident on the weekend. He was pulling out of a plaza driveway. There was no stop sign there as far as he can remember. There was a fair amount of traffic on the street he was pulling onto.
He saw a space to pull out which he felt was a safe amount of space. As he was turning onto the road he noticed that the oncoming car was driving faster than he expected and not slowing down at all. He sped up to avoid the collision but the other car still hit the rear of his vehicle really hard and spun it around.
The police officer said that, since it could not be determined how fast the other car was going (the driver said she was going 50kph), that my husband was at-fault for entering the highway at an unsafe time and he got a ticket for failing to yield to traffic on a through highway contrary to HTA 136(1)(b).
There wasn't much damage to the other car comparatively. Our car is looking like a possible write-off at this point.
We are feeling unsure if we should challenge this ticket at all. There were a lot of people around but no one acting as a "witness".
The charge sounds right for what happened IF it's true. You should be more concerned with the insurance increase. A couple of points (OK several): 1. Was there a stop sign? Go back and check. If there wasn't, then the charge is wrong. 2. If there was a stop sign, is it a real stop sign, created by municipal by-law or is it one of the small private property stop signs that are not legal? 3. Was the police officer an accident reconstruction expert? When did the car behind start to brake? Were there skid marks? What speed was your husband traveling upon impact? Does the damage indicate a high rate of speed? Now ask yourself whether you want to get into all of this to prepare for trial? On the other hand, you might get lucky, the woman who hit your car may not show up (therefore no witness), case dismissed. Or you and the Crown could negotiate a lower charge. You've got options, you need to consider them.
The charge sounds right for what happened IF it's true. You should be more concerned with the insurance increase.
A couple of points (OK several):
1. Was there a stop sign? Go back and check. If there wasn't, then the charge is wrong.
2. If there was a stop sign, is it a real stop sign, created by municipal by-law or is it one of the small private property stop signs that are not legal?
3. Was the police officer an accident reconstruction expert? When did the car behind start to brake? Were there skid marks? What speed was your husband traveling upon impact? Does the damage indicate a high rate of speed?
Now ask yourself whether you want to get into all of this to prepare for trial? On the other hand, you might get lucky, the woman who hit your car may not show up (therefore no witness), case dismissed. Or you and the Crown could negotiate a lower charge.
Hi, I wanted to say thanks for the reply. This is a fabulous forum. It is so great to have a sounding board to check things out before committing to paying a ticket or fighting it. We decided not to fight it because really saving $110 or part of $110 was not worth the trouble at all, buying a new car and the insurance was certainly the main $$ issue. Really the whole thing mainly felt really unjust. I can't say whether the officer was an accident reconstruction expert or not (not sure how to tell). There was no stop sign but really it doesn't matter much to us whether we are charged with 136(1)(b) or 139(1), and whether or not we could save $110. It's mainly us having to pay so much (insurance and buying a new car) for another driver being at least as reckless as my husband that just won't sit right with us. It seemed, in our opinion, that the other driver didn't brake at all and was likely speeding, just considering how fast she was approaching, how hard she hit the car, how quickly cars are able to completely stop when they are going 50 and that my husband had time to realize there was a danger and had time to speed up to try and avoid it - and he did avoid most of it, the other driver only hit the rear bumper/taillight really hard instead of the doors. It just sucks that it's considered completely the fault of my husband, who pulled out of the driveway, simply because there is no solid evidence and because he could always have waited for an even larger space - even though the other driver could have been speeding and completely oblivious to the traffic around. There is just no way to prove things for certain. Anyway, thanks so much for your insights.
Hi,
I wanted to say thanks for the reply. This is a fabulous forum. It is so great to have a sounding board to check things out before committing to paying a ticket or fighting it.
We decided not to fight it because really saving $110 or part of $110 was not worth the trouble at all, buying a new car and the insurance was certainly the main $$ issue.
Really the whole thing mainly felt really unjust. I can't say whether the officer was an accident reconstruction expert or not (not sure how to tell). There was no stop sign but really it doesn't matter much to us whether we are charged with 136(1)(b) or 139(1), and whether or not we could save $110.
It's mainly us having to pay so much (insurance and buying a new car) for another driver being at least as reckless as my husband that just won't sit right with us.
It seemed, in our opinion, that the other driver didn't brake at all and was likely speeding, just considering how fast she was approaching, how hard she hit the car, how quickly cars are able to completely stop when they are going 50 and that my husband had time to realize there was a danger and had time to speed up to try and avoid it - and he did avoid most of it, the other driver only hit the rear bumper/taillight really hard instead of the doors.
It just sucks that it's considered completely the fault of my husband, who pulled out of the driveway, simply because there is no solid evidence and because he could always have waited for an even larger space - even though the other driver could have been speeding and completely oblivious to the traffic around. There is just no way to prove things for certain.
I got a speeding ticket on the 401 by Cornwall. The officer said I was going 140 initially then dropped it to 130 (for the record I don't believe for a second I was going 140, that's way faster than I would ever intentionally drive). I filled out the info on the back of the notice to request a…
I was recently charged with stunt driving on a 60kmh road. When I was pulled over, the officer told me I was going almost 100kmh (still 40kmh above the limit) but was charging me for stunt driving because I accelerated quickly from an intersection on an empty road (in a straight line). I know…
what to do about a an illegal right turn onto steeles from staines rd
got the ticket around october of last year
put it to trial
so there is a big mess of cars at this intersection and I see a cop outside standing directing traffic with a huge row of cars pulled over to the side, through…
Are any non-domestic vehicles "pursuit-rated" in North America? Also have the Michigan State Police (this is relevant because apparently they have the most accepted selection/testing process) tested any of them to see if they meet their criteria? Just curious...
Ottawa, Canada (AHN) - Beginning Tuesday, or April Fool's Day 2008, fines on Quebec drivers caught overspeeding will be doubled. It is not only the money penalty that will go up, but also demerit points.
The new law, Bill 42, is similar to Ontario's street racing rule. It stipulates fines for…
A friend got a ticket Jan. 9th of this year for doing 110 kph in a 90 kph zone, so 20 over.
What should the set fine and total payable read?
It's confusing to me, as the prescribed fine under HTA s.128 is different than the set fine enumerated by the Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice.
An OPP officer ticketed me claiming I was going 40km/h over the limit (140km/km) on my way home with a few friends on the 401. This is my first ever speeding offense. Although I am sure I was over the limit, I am almost certain that I was not going 40 over, more realistically closer to 30 over. The…
Yesterday night I was charged for stunt driving (excess over 50km/h) and I have a few inquiries. I'm sure you've all heard the same story, but the unmarked cop in an SUV was tailing me for a good 2-3 minutes as I was travelling 120~135 km/h. Then as he came close I decided to boot it up…
I had a speeding ticket in May 2013 which brought me to 9 demerit points out of 15. I received a letter and had to attend an interview. Due to a history of speeding tickets and a previous interview a few years prior, the interviewer decided to put me on zero tolerance for a year. Meaning if I…