Hoping someone could shed some advice for me. I am confident based on the law, this should not have been a ticket for me. I am hoping someone could provide some help gathering information to help build my case as I am bringing this to court.

I was at a stop sign trying to make a left turn onto a 4 lane road from a parking lot. Note, there is a 90 degree bend in the road I am trying to turn onto about 125m to my right, so there is only so much visibility. I look left, and its clear, I look right and it is clear so i look left again and start my turn and am into the first lane of the road. I look back right and there is a car which is flying around the bend and although I might make it, I would have to really give it, so i stop completely in the first lane to let the car pass as I don't want to play chicken. To make matters worse, that car coming around the bend slows down to turn into the same road I am leaving from. There is no middle lane, so they stop in their lane to try and turn, completely blocking me (there is a car behind me now so I can't go anywhere). Now a car in lane 1 gets close and stop so they dont hit me, and to give enough buffer for the car in lane 3 to turn into the parking log. The car starts to make then turn but a car in lane 2 decides he doesn't want to wait, and speeds through lane 2, narrowly missing the turning car but clips the front left front of the bumper of my car.

I was given a ticket for Failure to Yield, 139(1). The cop wouldn't even listen to my story. He spoke with the other party first and basically already had it in my mind it was my fault when he spoke to me. He was actually very rude and in a rush. I wasn't able to tell him the whole store as he kept interrupting me and didn't even let me finish the story how it was clear to proceed when I started, or how I was stopped on the road with another car stopped waiting for me when the car hit me. Based on 139(1):

139. (1) Every driver or street car operator entering a highway from a private road or driveway shall yield the right of way to all traffic approaching on the highway so closely that to enter would constitute an immediate hazard. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 139 (1).

1) Am I correct that this sould not apply as I was not an immediate hazard to anyone, including the person who hit me as the path was clear when i left? I do realize it is my responsibility as a motorist to make sure it is safe to enter a roadway, and I did everything I could to make sure it was clear before proceeding?

2) Should I be worried the police officer did not take my full story? I guess I will have to wait until I can ask for disclosure, but since he didn't listen or record almost any of my story except that I started from the parking lot, will I be able to bring this up in court at my case?

3) Also, I have read alot of posts here and there is frequently talk about "possession of the road". Is this something just talked about, or is this an actual set of rules which denote who has procession of the road. I am curious to know what happens in this case.

4) Insurance obviously wants to pin this on me. I know they use different rules to determine at fault (http://www.ibc.ca/en/car_insurance/docu ... -rules.pdf) but does anyone know if there is anything I can use to help with this? Being completely stationary on the road due to another car with plenty of time for other cars to slow down and stop, I would hope there is something I can appeal to.

Thanks to anyone who can shed some light on any of the above points/questions

1) Arguably you were a hazard though, as you had to stop for someone approaching around a bend.

2) A failure on the officers part to record your statement wont limit your defence. In fact the opposite is true. If you had provided one statement at the scene, then it would be very difficult to say anything different in Court.

3) Ive never heard of any such thing.

4) My guess is no. My experience has always been if its meets the scenario laid out in the fault rules, they stick with that decision.

Stanton wrote:

1) Arguably you were a hazard though, as you had to stop for someone approaching around a bend.

2) A failure on the officers part to record your statement wont limit your defence. In fact the opposite is true. If you had provided one statement at the scene, then it would be very difficult to say anything different in Court.

3) Ive never heard of any such thing.

4) My guess is no. My experience has always been if its meets the scenario laid out in the fault rules, they stick with that decision.

Thanks Stanton for your reply.

1) As for being a hazard, I do understand I was in a compromised position, but I did enter the roadway legally and when it was safe, so it would seem 139(1) does not apply. And the first car to approach me stopped with no problems to wait for me to have a window to pass. The person who hit me had plenty of time to stop, but decided not to wait and try to squeeze through an opening which he couldn't fit.

2) That is what I am scared off. The officer obviously made some notes and must have put something down as notes, but since he did not let me tell the entire situation, I am sure there will be glaring omissions.