I got a ticket the other day for following too close and have scheduled a meeting with the prosecutor and am wondering if there is a possibility of a lighter charge that they could knock it down to because I really don't feel this is worth 4 demerit points. Here's the situation: It was in a known speed trap area in town and I had actually consciously thought that the police might be out at this time. But, the driver in from of me was traveling 40km/h (the posted speed limit) so I figured I had nothing to worry about. Wrong. It's an interesting road and there is a general consensus that the speed limit is far too low (probably why they're able to catch so many speeders). It's a 40 road with lanes wide enough to fit a car and a half that only has the backs of houses facing the road. Down the road from where I got pulled over there is a high school and an elementary school. The speed limit in front of the high school is 40 and in front of the elementary school is 50 (that makes sense in somebody's mind I guess). Anyways, it was around lunch time and a bus was going in the opposite direction and the car in front of me and myself were going down the hill. Once the bus had passed the guy in front of me got spooked and put on his brakes (the natural reaction to cops even if you're going the limit). No collision occurred but I was a bit closer than I usually would have been since he had just braked rather suddenly. At this point the officer working the radar gun motioned to me and told me to pull over and issued a ticket for following to closely. In my mind I had left ample room to brake in time to avoid a collision (shown by the obvious evidence that my car doesn't have a nice dent on the front bumper now). It was a 40km/h road so the speeds obviously weren't as dangerous as on a faster road. But, nonetheless there are still 4 demerit points attached to this ticket. Essentially had I been going 89km/h on the road and been ticketed for the my fine would have been bigger but I would have only got 4 demerits. I'm wondering though what the prosecutor can really offer with my situation. From a quick look I can't really see another similar offense that it could be knocked down to so is there anyway that they can issue the fine ($110 isn't a huge hit to me) and just scrap the points involved? Or is the prosecutor able to change it to an unrelated offense of similar fine value (I'm guessing this is probably a big no no)? Thanks for the help and I appreciate any comments.
I got a ticket the other day for following too close and have scheduled a meeting with the prosecutor and am wondering if there is a possibility of a lighter charge that they could knock it down to because I really don't feel this is worth 4 demerit points.
Here's the situation:
It was in a known speed trap area in town and I had actually consciously thought that the police might be out at this time. But, the driver in from of me was traveling 40km/h (the posted speed limit) so I figured I had nothing to worry about. Wrong.
It's an interesting road and there is a general consensus that the speed limit is far too low (probably why they're able to catch so many speeders). It's a 40 road with lanes wide enough to fit a car and a half that only has the backs of houses facing the road. Down the road from where I got pulled over there is a high school and an elementary school. The speed limit in front of the high school is 40 and in front of the elementary school is 50 (that makes sense in somebody's mind I guess). Anyways, it was around lunch time and a bus was going in the opposite direction and the car in front of me and myself were going down the hill. Once the bus had passed the guy in front of me got spooked and put on his brakes (the natural reaction to cops even if you're going the limit). No collision occurred but I was a bit closer than I usually would have been since he had just braked rather suddenly. At this point the officer working the radar gun motioned to me and told me to pull over and issued a ticket for following to closely.
In my mind I had left ample room to brake in time to avoid a collision (shown by the obvious evidence that my car doesn't have a nice dent on the front bumper now). It was a 40km/h road so the speeds obviously weren't as dangerous as on a faster road. But, nonetheless there are still 4 demerit points attached to this ticket. Essentially had I been going 89km/h on the road and been ticketed for the my fine would have been bigger but I would have only got 4 demerits. I'm wondering though what the prosecutor can really offer with my situation. From a quick look I can't really see another similar offense that it could be knocked down to so is there anyway that they can issue the fine ($110 isn't a huge hit to me) and just scrap the points involved? Or is the prosecutor able to change it to an unrelated offense of similar fine value (I'm guessing this is probably a big no no)?
Thanks for the help and I appreciate any comments.
One of the good things about the OHTA is that the prosecutor can charge you with an unrelated offence upon plea bargain. You might get charged with a by-law infraction instead upon plea, which would have no demerit points associated with it. However, request disclosure if you haven't done so already, see what they have. Do not admit being too close. Say that you were doing 40 in a 40, and the guy in front braked suddenly. This way it appeared that you were following too close because it took you a split second to react to the fact that the driver in front slowed down without good reason (that reason being a cop). Also, do bring up the point that you did not rear-end into the guy in front. The guidelines suggests 2 seconds between cars, maintain that you followed that. You might even have a good chance to win this in court.
One of the good things about the OHTA is that the prosecutor can charge you with an unrelated offence upon plea bargain. You might get charged with a by-law infraction instead upon plea, which would have no demerit points associated with it. However, request disclosure if you haven't done so already, see what they have.
Do not admit being too close. Say that you were doing 40 in a 40, and the guy in front braked suddenly. This way it appeared that you were following too close because it took you a split second to react to the fact that the driver in front slowed down without good reason (that reason being a cop). Also, do bring up the point that you did not rear-end into the guy in front. The guidelines suggests 2 seconds between cars, maintain that you followed that. You might even have a good chance to win this in court.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
One of the good things about the OHTA is that the prosecutor can charge you with an unrelated offence upon plea bargain. You might get charged with a by-law infraction instead upon plea, which would have no demerit points associated with it. However, request disclosure if you haven't done so already, see what they have.
Do not admit being too close. Say that you were doing 40 in a 40, and the guy in front braked suddenly. This way it appeared that you were following too close because it took you a split second to react to the fact that the driver in front slowed down without good reason (that reason being a cop). Also, do bring up the point that you did not rear-end into the guy in front. The guidelines suggests 2 seconds between cars, maintain that you followed that. You might even have a good chance to win this in court.
Yup, just like that.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Thanks for the responses. Out of curiosity, since it was a speed trap and there were two officers on site at the time even though only the one issued the ticket do both have to show in court if I can't get this bargained down?
Thanks for the responses. Out of curiosity, since it was a speed trap and there were two officers on site at the time even though only the one issued the ticket do both have to show in court if I can't get this bargained down?
Disclosure will tell you. I would say that the officer that witnessed the incident was the one that ticketed you, so only one will have to be there.
Plenderzoosh wrote:
Thanks for the responses. Out of curiosity, since it was a speed trap and there were two officers on site at the time even though only the one issued the ticket do both have to show in court if I can't get this bargained down?
Disclosure will tell you. I would say that the officer that witnessed the incident was the one that ticketed you, so only one will have to be there.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
will disclosure always tell you who will appear as a witness..I requested disclosure and all I got was a photocopy of the cops notes, and the accident reports...at this point I don't really know if they have any witnesses beyond the cop that issued me the ticket?
will disclosure always tell you who will appear as a witness..I requested disclosure and all I got was a photocopy of the cops notes, and the accident reports...at this point I don't really know if they have any witnesses beyond the cop that issued me the ticket?
If one identified you as the offending vehicle and the other one flagged you down, then yes, both have to attend. Also, "following too closely" requires that the police identify an affected driver (the person you allegedly followed too closely) in order to get a conviction. Usually the only way to do this is if a collision occurred. If they do not have an affected driver to present, the chances of a conviction are very low. The officer cannot be the "affected driver." The officer's notes in the disclosure package should tell you if they managed to identify the affected driver (which, 99.5% chance, they did not). Nope. Even if someone is subpoenaed to testify as a witness, they still may not appear. I don't think the disclosure package would tell you if a subpoena was issued.
Plenderzoosh wrote:
Out of curiosity, since it was a speed trap and there were two officers on site at the time even though only the one issued the ticket do both have to show in court if I can't get this bargained down?
If one identified you as the offending vehicle and the other one flagged you down, then yes, both have to attend. Also, "following too closely" requires that the police identify an affected driver (the person you allegedly followed too closely) in order to get a conviction. Usually the only way to do this is if a collision occurred. If they do not have an affected driver to present, the chances of a conviction are very low. The officer cannot be the "affected driver." The officer's notes in the disclosure package should tell you if they managed to identify the affected driver (which, 99.5% chance, they did not).
dgs wrote:
will disclosure always tell you who will appear as a witness..
Nope. Even if someone is subpoenaed to testify as a witness, they still may not appear. I don't think the disclosure package would tell you if a subpoena was issued.
Really...I'd be willing to put bet they definitely couldn't have identified the driver. I feel a lot better about my case now. Thanks everyone for the help so far.
Radar Identified wrote:
Also, "following too closely" requires that the police identify an affected driver (the person you allegedly followed too closely) in order to get a conviction. Usually the only way to do this is if a collision occurred. If they do not have an affected driver to present, the chances of a conviction are very low. The officer cannot be the "affected driver." The officer's notes in the disclosure package should tell you if they managed to identify the affected driver (which, 99.5% chance, they did not).
Really...I'd be willing to put bet they definitely couldn't have identified the driver. I feel a lot better about my case now.
Negative, do not require the other driver for a conviction.
Radar Identified wrote:
Also, "following too closely" requires that the police identify an affected driver (the person you allegedly followed too closely) in order to get a conviction. .
Negative, do not require the other driver for a conviction.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
My bad. :oops: I'd still be willing to bet that this charge can be beaten in court. Without a collision, where's the proof that he was following too close? Gets very subjective from there. racer already outlined a pretty good defence. There is no specific following distance between vehicles, just "reasonable and prudent" (unless you are a commercial vehicle going over 60 km/h). Can the officer say what your following distance was? How did that following distance equate to being less than "reasonable and prudent"? One other thing to ask the officer: For a private vehicle, what is the specific following distance that is allowed in the HTA? (There is none.) The fact that you were able to react to the other vehicle's sudden braking indicates, if anything, that you were at a "reasonable and prudent" following distance.
My bad. I'd still be willing to bet that this charge can be beaten in court. Without a collision, where's the proof that he was following too close? Gets very subjective from there.
racer already outlined a pretty good defence. There is no specific following distance between vehicles, just "reasonable and prudent" (unless you are a commercial vehicle going over 60 km/h). Can the officer say what your following distance was? How did that following distance equate to being less than "reasonable and prudent"? One other thing to ask the officer: For a private vehicle, what is the specific following distance that is allowed in the HTA? (There is none.) The fact that you were able to react to the other vehicle's sudden braking indicates, if anything, that you were at a "reasonable and prudent" following distance.
Excellent point how do you exactly define following to close? Have you driven on the 401 through Toronto during the evening rush hour or sat on stop and go traffic on the QEW? What happens if the flow of traffic is going at 130 and some ass in a bus behind a slow truck going in the middle lane behind a truck stuck at 105 km/hr and this bus now wants to pass the truck? So he cuts infront of the whole left lane travelling at 125-130 and then they are all riding the next guys ass and have to slam on their brakes as they wait for that big bus to pass the truck going 3 km/hr faster? Would these people be following to close? It seems to me the officer has alot of power and there is many ways to "define following to close." Does it mean over a period of time? What are you to do with left lane road blocks who do this on purpose and try to police the road themselves and always slow it down? Following to close is a serious charge but its definition confuses me. There is a specific distance to travel i dont know but okay, but what happens when the amount of traffic on the road is way more then the volume it was designed for and is not ideal conditions at all (GTA rush hour)
Excellent point how do you exactly define following to close?
Have you driven on the 401 through Toronto during the evening rush hour or sat on stop and go traffic on the QEW?
What happens if the flow of traffic is going at 130 and some ass in a bus behind a slow truck going in the middle lane behind a truck stuck at 105 km/hr and this bus now wants to pass the truck?
So he cuts infront of the whole left lane travelling at 125-130 and then they are all riding the next guys ass and have to slam on their brakes as they wait for that big bus to pass the truck going 3 km/hr faster?
Would these people be following to close?
It seems to me the officer has alot of power and there is many ways to "define following to close."
Does it mean over a period of time?
What are you to do with left lane road blocks who do this on purpose and try to police the road themselves and always slow it down?
Following to close is a serious charge but its definition confuses me.
There is a specific distance to travel i dont know but okay, but what happens when the amount of traffic on the road is way more then the volume it was designed for and is not ideal conditions at all (GTA rush hour)
Now today I had my car brought in to have it safetied and e-tested as I'm looking to sell it and I hear back that the brake lines have a break in them. I got a new car soon after the ticket was issued and the car I was driving has rarely been driven since the issuing of the ticket. My question is, can this be used in my defense or to try and talk the prosecutor into an alternate charge (one that wouldn't have implications to my insurance)?
Now today I had my car brought in to have it safetied and e-tested as I'm looking to sell it and I hear back that the brake lines have a break in them. I got a new car soon after the ticket was issued and the car I was driving has rarely been driven since the issuing of the ticket. My question is, can this be used in my defense or to try and talk the prosecutor into an alternate charge (one that wouldn't have implications to my insurance)?
I wanna hear what others thing about what R.I said. Alot of these charges in the OHTA are subject to alot of discression. With Lidar and Radar you get a reading okay. But alot of other stuff can be very hard to prove. How do they prove for example many lange changes, unsafe lane change, and especially following to close. So lets say your on the highway going 125 and someone butts infront of you at 105. What are you to do???? There needs to be time to slow down and brake to get a safe distance again. Some of this stuff i wonder how they can prove or justify it.
I wanna hear what others thing about what R.I said.
Alot of these charges in the OHTA are subject to alot of discression.
With Lidar and Radar you get a reading okay.
But alot of other stuff can be very hard to prove.
How do they prove for example many lange changes, unsafe lane change, and especially following to close.
So lets say your on the highway going 125 and someone butts infront of you at 105.
What are you to do????
There needs to be time to slow down and brake to get a safe distance again.
Some of this stuff i wonder how they can prove or justify it.
You slow down and then have to drive a speed that someone else is comfortable with. However, IMHO this is now a unsafe lane change if you had to immediately hit your brakes to avoid a collision. To my take on a unsafe lane change and/or fail to yield to traffic on a thru highway (someone on another road left/right onto a road) is when someone makes a driving action and other traffic travelling on the thru highway has to drastically change their driving to avoid a collision. Following too close is easy to prove. One has to be able to stop without striking the vehicle in front, should the vehicle in front immediately stop. The problem is obtaining the evidence that I like to have while driving a big billboard. On 400 series.....I usually move up in the open lane and use the cruiser as a reference between the 2 vehicles for 1km. I know a vehicle travels 28m per second at 100km/hr and the cruiser is 6m long. If I can not fit at least 4 lengths of a cruiser (24m) in this is way too close. I believe this is more than fair, people reaction time is longer than 1 second to react, so in essesence they should be farther than 1 sec back(28m) apart. 2 lane hwy is hard unless the person is following me. If I can not see the plate or headlights they are too close, again I like a 1km distance, so that it is just not a fluke movement but a controlled action by the driver.
tdrive2 wrote:
So lets say your on the highway going 125 and someone butts infront of you at 105.
What are you to do????.
You slow down and then have to drive a speed that someone else is comfortable with. However, IMHO this is now a unsafe lane change if you had to immediately hit your brakes to avoid a collision.
To my take on a unsafe lane change and/or fail to yield to traffic on a thru highway (someone on another road left/right onto a road) is when someone makes a driving action and other traffic travelling on the thru highway has to drastically change their driving to avoid a collision.
Following too close is easy to prove. One has to be able to stop without striking the vehicle in front, should the vehicle in front immediately stop.
The problem is obtaining the evidence that I like to have while driving a big billboard.
On 400 series.....I usually move up in the open lane and use the cruiser as a reference between the 2 vehicles for 1km. I know a vehicle travels 28m per second at 100km/hr and the cruiser is 6m long. If I can not fit at least 4 lengths of a cruiser (24m) in this is way too close. I believe this is more than fair, people reaction time is longer than 1 second to react, so in essesence they should be farther than 1 sec back(28m) apart.
2 lane hwy is hard unless the person is following me. If I can not see the plate or headlights they are too close, again I like a 1km distance, so that it is just not a fluke movement but a controlled action by the driver.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
That makes things a little more interesting. You were following another vehicle at the posted speed limit who suddenly braked. You then did not hit the vehicle while your car had defective brakes. Could it help? It could prove that you undoubtedly maintained a safe and proper following distance, particularly since no collision occurred. However... it could also prove that you were driving an unsafe vehicle. :shock: Might depend on how aggressive the Prosecutor is.
Plenderzoosh wrote:
Now today I had my car brought in to have it safetied and e-tested as I'm looking to sell it and I hear back that the brake lines have a break in them.
That makes things a little more interesting. You were following another vehicle at the posted speed limit who suddenly braked. You then did not hit the vehicle while your car had defective brakes. Could it help? It could prove that you undoubtedly maintained a safe and proper following distance, particularly since no collision occurred. However... it could also prove that you were driving an unsafe vehicle. Might depend on how aggressive the Prosecutor is.
I'm getting closer to my date to meet with the prosecutor and I've got a couple of questions that I would appreciate answers to if anybody knows the answers: If I were to bargain down to a defective brakes ticket do insurance companies still count this as a minor offense? In my mind it's not on the same level as many other traffic tickets but I have this funny feeling insurance companies don't look at it this way since they would just like some more money. If I can manage to bargain down to a bylaw infraction of a similar fine amount, does the insurance company even get notified of this when I go to renew my insurance? If I'm not satisfied with what the prosecution has to offer in terms of a deal am I out of line requesting items that would disclosed in a speeding case such as the radar/lidar manual? I ask because the officer was there catching speeders and operating the radar/lidar gun at the time and my justification is that I need to know how much attention the officer had to devote to reading the radar gun to know whether she could have accurately judged how closely I was following. If she was only half paying attention to me her judgment of the situation goes into question. Now this one is bear and I could see you not wishing to answer this but I figure it doesn't hurt to ask. You mentioned in another thread that you rarely see a follow too close beat in court, I'm curious as to how often those cases involve collisions? And, for those cases that didn't see convictions was there any similar strategy to the defense? :lol: Finally, I know your notes are very detailed (at least this is what I've gathered), when I receive my disclosure package should I expect it to be the same (in other words are most officers as diligent as you with their note taking?) Thanks again for all the help everyone.
I'm getting closer to my date to meet with the prosecutor and I've got a couple of questions that I would appreciate answers to if anybody knows the answers:
If I were to bargain down to a defective brakes ticket do insurance companies still count this as a minor offense? In my mind it's not on the same level as many other traffic tickets but I have this funny feeling insurance companies don't look at it this way since they would just like some more money.
If I can manage to bargain down to a bylaw infraction of a similar fine amount, does the insurance company even get notified of this when I go to renew my insurance?
If I'm not satisfied with what the prosecution has to offer in terms of a deal am I out of line requesting items that would disclosed in a speeding case such as the radar/lidar manual? I ask because the officer was there catching speeders and operating the radar/lidar gun at the time and my justification is that I need to know how much attention the officer had to devote to reading the radar gun to know whether she could have accurately judged how closely I was following. If she was only half paying attention to me her judgment of the situation goes into question.
Now this one is bear and I could see you not wishing to answer this but I figure it doesn't hurt to ask. You mentioned in another thread that you rarely see a follow too close beat in court, I'm curious as to how often those cases involve collisions? And, for those cases that didn't see convictions was there any similar strategy to the defense? Finally, I know your notes are very detailed (at least this is what I've gathered), when I receive my disclosure package should I expect it to be the same (in other words are most officers as diligent as you with their note taking?)
I will guess 50% have collisions. Here are a few reasons my notes are detailed.... - # of yrs experience - # of yrs experience only working traffic - when I lose a case in court due to a "technicality", I will never be beat again on that again - being on sites like this and ALL the kind folk in here with their defence "tactics"......this helps me write my notes better each day... so I "tip my hat" to yall :wink: Keep up the good work for me!
Plenderzoosh wrote:
Now this one is bear and I could see you not wishing to answer this but I figure it doesn't hurt to ask. You mentioned in another thread that you rarely see a follow too close beat in court, I'm curious as to how often those cases involve collisions? And, for those cases that didn't see convictions was there any similar strategy to the defense? Finally, I know your notes are very detailed (at least this is what I've gathered), when I receive my disclosure package should I expect it to be the same (in other words are most officers as diligent as you with their note taking?).
I will guess 50% have collisions.
Here are a few reasons my notes are detailed....
- # of yrs experience
- # of yrs experience only working traffic
- when I lose a case in court due to a "technicality", I will never be beat again on that again
- being on sites like this and ALL the kind folk in here with their defence "tactics"......this helps me write my notes better each day... so I "tip my hat" to yall Keep up the good work for me!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Correct. Many insurance companies frown far more on the "follow too close" than defective brakes, particularly with no collision. Your insurer might just ignore it all together. Nope. That's why a lot of times we suggest plea-bargaining to municipal by-law infractions on this board. It does not show up on your driver abstract, either. The only things they care about are essentially HTA, some Insurance Act and Criminal Code convictions. I don't see why that would be a problem, particularly since you have a good reason for requesting it. That's okay we'll just keep coming up with new ones. :P And really, how many other officers have browsed this website to educate themselves and others? Maybe...what... one? Two? (Picture this at OPC: "Your new mandatory reading is ontariohighwaytrafficact.com.") :shock:
Plenderzoosh wrote:
Well the defective brakes ticket doesn't carry demerit points unlike the follow too close.
Correct. Many insurance companies frown far more on the "follow too close" than defective brakes, particularly with no collision. Your insurer might just ignore it all together.
Plenderzoosh wrote:
If I can manage to bargain down to a bylaw infraction of a similar fine amount, does the insurance company even get notified of this when I go to renew my insurance?
Nope. That's why a lot of times we suggest plea-bargaining to municipal by-law infractions on this board. It does not show up on your driver abstract, either. The only things they care about are essentially HTA, some Insurance Act and Criminal Code convictions.
Plenderzoosh wrote:
If I'm not satisfied with what the prosecution has to offer in terms of a deal am I out of line requesting items that would disclosed in a speeding case such as the radar/lidar manual?
I don't see why that would be a problem, particularly since you have a good reason for requesting it.
hwybear wrote:
being on sites like this and ALL the kind folk in here with their defence "tactics"......this helps me write my notes better each day... so I "tip my hat" to yall
That's okay we'll just keep coming up with new ones. And really, how many other officers have browsed this website to educate themselves and others? Maybe...what... one? Two? (Picture this at OPC: "Your new mandatory reading is ontariohighwaytrafficact.com.")
"And make sure you pay attention to the posts by that R.I. guy, he's sneaky". :D
Radar Identified wrote:
That's okay we'll just keep coming up with new ones. Razz And really, how many other officers have browsed this website to educate themselves and others? Maybe...what... one? Two? (Picture this at OPC: "Your new mandatory reading is ontariohighwaytrafficact.com.") Shocked
"And make sure you pay attention to the posts by that R.I. guy, he's sneaky".
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Jeez, I think that there is more text here now than in the entire Ontario Highway Traffic Act itself! 7000 articles as of now, and counting...
Radar Identified wrote:
That's okay we'll just keep coming up with new ones. And really, how many other officers have browsed this website to educate themselves and others? Maybe...what... one? Two? (Picture this at OPC: "Your new mandatory reading is ontariohighwaytrafficact.com.")
Jeez, I think that there is more text here now than in the entire Ontario Highway Traffic Act itself! 7000 articles as of now, and counting...
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Yeah and I think our members are more familiar with the HTA than the people who wrote it. :shock: :lol: That would be funny... or I could wake up and see 10 cruisers parked outside waiting for me to get into my car. "So you think you know the HTA, eh?" :shock: Then again, they'd have to know who I am and my address. 8)
Yeah and I think our members are more familiar with the HTA than the people who wrote it.
Reflections wrote:
"And make sure you pay attention to the posts by that R.I. guy, he's sneaky".
That would be funny... or I could wake up and see 10 cruisers parked outside waiting for me to get into my car. "So you think you know the HTA, eh?" Then again, they'd have to know who I am and my address.
I thought insurers only differentiated between the "major" and "minor" convictions. That can be arranged...how many Toronto pilots drive an '07 Civic and used to live in Michigan? 8)
Radar Identified wrote:
Correct. Many insurance companies frown far more on the "follow too close" than defective brakes, particularly with no collision. Your insurer might just ignore it all together.
I thought insurers only differentiated between the "major" and "minor" convictions.
Radar Identified wrote:
Then again, they'd have to know who I am and my address.
That can be arranged...how many Toronto pilots drive an '07 Civic and used to live in Michigan?
Yes, for the most part. Some of them only count "moving" violations (unsafe vehicle/defective brakes wouldn't be one of them), though, and a few others (such as mine) have certain "minor" offences that, if you only have one or two of them, it results in no increase, such as speeding 15 km/h over limit. But "follow too closely" would almost certainly result in an insurance increase, whereas a ticket for improper brakes or whatever might not. Hmm... good point. :shock: No cruisers outside today though. :o
Squishy wrote:
I thought insurers only differentiated between the "major" and "minor" convictions.
Yes, for the most part. Some of them only count "moving" violations (unsafe vehicle/defective brakes wouldn't be one of them), though, and a few others (such as mine) have certain "minor" offences that, if you only have one or two of them, it results in no increase, such as speeding 15 km/h over limit. But "follow too closely" would almost certainly result in an insurance increase, whereas a ticket for improper brakes or whatever might not.
Squishy wrote:
That can be arranged...how many Toronto pilots drive an '07 Civic and used to live in Michigan?
Hmm... good point. No cruisers outside today though.
Dang it, I'll have to train my dog to sniff those things out now. I guess that also explains why that car with the licence plate "IMPOUND U" has been following me all day... :shock:
Reflections wrote:
That's because they're in the trees and have already attached a GPS device to your car..
Dang it, I'll have to train my dog to sniff those things out now. I guess that also explains why that car with the licence plate "IMPOUND U" has been following me all day...
Oh ya that 07 civic with the pilot from Michigan. Isn't he also the one that carries all the doughnuts in his car from Essex to London on the 401??? :roll: I bet bear is going to go on a blitz for stopping civic's on the 401 in an attempt to find R.I and impound his car and (accidentally put him in the trunk) of his car. :twisted:
Oh ya that 07 civic with the pilot from Michigan.
Isn't he also the one that carries all the doughnuts in his car from Essex to London on the 401???
I bet bear is going to go on a blitz for stopping civic's on the 401 in an attempt to find R.I and impound his car and (accidentally put him in the trunk) of his car.
Fortunately my driver record doesn't show that I lived in Michigan for two years. :D They also don't have access to Transport Canada's database, fortunately. However... the FAA's (US Federal Aviation Administration) has a public database... hmm... and I have both licenses... :shock: Funny you mention that, this coming Friday and Sunday I'm going to be going through Bear's territory. :lol: Wait a minute... :shock:
tdrive2 wrote:
Oh ya that 07 civic with the pilot from Michigan.
Fortunately my driver record doesn't show that I lived in Michigan for two years. They also don't have access to Transport Canada's database, fortunately. However... the FAA's (US Federal Aviation Administration) has a public database... hmm... and I have both licenses...
tdrive2 wrote:
I bet bear is going to go on a blitz for stopping civic's on the 401 in an attempt to find R.I and impound his car and (accidentally put him in the trunk) of his car.
Funny you mention that, this coming Friday and Sunday I'm going to be going through Bear's territory. Wait a minute...
Hey R.I i heard if you want to attract some bears you should put a big thing of Honey on the hood of your car and or a massive be hive on your roof as you go through "bear country." Either that or bring out the Fuzz Buster 2000 west of London :twisted: I can see it now, bear is under a overpass somewhere between London and Essex, he pulls out the lidar on a civic that is going at 118 then he hears the Spectre go off, suddenly you'll see a blueberry fritter smash all over the window and see his crown vic take off like batman!!! And knowing R.I i assume his Civic would be Black? Ha i just though of a great license plate name to! "AIM HERE" "LASR HERE" Anyways i would assume all OPP Cars got spectres now as it is?
Hey R.I i heard if you want to attract some bears you should put a big thing of Honey on the hood of your car and or a massive be hive on your roof as you go through "bear country."
Either that or bring out the Fuzz Buster 2000 west of London
I can see it now, bear is under a overpass somewhere between London and Essex, he pulls out the lidar on a civic that is going at 118 then he hears the Spectre go off, suddenly you'll see a blueberry fritter smash all over the window and see his crown vic take off like batman!!!
And knowing R.I i assume his Civic would be Black?
Ha i just though of a great license plate name to!
"AIM HERE"
"LASR HERE"
Anyways i would assume all OPP Cars got spectres now as it is?
I searched but could not retrieve a satisfactory answer.
It seems matter-of-fact that all sorts of work equipment, namely backhoes, loaders and other similar mororized vehicles without licence plates, sometimes equipped with a slow moving vehicle sign, often not, some with an amber beacon, some without, are encountered on a highway, travelling under their own power, sometimes on multi-lane roads…
Hello everyone I'm not sure if this is the right place to put it but I need some answers as I'm very scared and don't know what to do. Recently if got a Novice Driver B.A.C Above zero I am 23 years old and I'm pretty due to get my G class license in a couple of weeks. I understand that I was wrong for drinking a beer and half and driving with a G2 Class license.
I have been reading Fight Your Traffic Ticket site and have a couple of comments.
I was issued two tickets at the same time, one for invalid left turn (Hwy 7 in Markham and Swansea). Another one, because the officer did not like my copy of registration documents.
I am planning to challenge it in the court. Actually I already submitted the request.
Hi, I have a court date Oct. 21,08 for parking in the fire route of my friends building. How can i get this $100 fine reduced or eliminated? only argument i really have is that visitor parking was full and i went around a few times. I wasn't there for long either.
+
I just got a ticket for going right on red fail to stop(114[18])$180. No pedestrians were in the way. I'm not a unsafe driver, so I'm…
My mom received a ticket under OHTA 159(1). She was turning left at an intersection. The light was green and there were no cars in front of her. She entered the intersection and waited for incoming traffic to clear so that she could complete the turn. As she waited, a fire truck with its sirens on was driving from the street onto which she was turning (perpendicular). He honked at her (presumably…
Basically, I was selling the car and I informed the buyer that the car was in not insured at the time.
He bought dealer plates from his work place and assured me that it was fine. We got pulled over by OPP and they asked for our information.
I explained that it was my car and the test driver was working at a dealership with his plates that has insurance, they told us that the plates don't apply
The other day I was given a ticket for speeding 119 in a 90, on highway 17 near Marathon, ON (Speeding ticket capital of the universe, BTW). The officer claims to have "clocked" me using the vehicle mounted radar at 121 KMH and dropped it (presumably to lower fine and demerits).
I was not going that fast, but there was a larger, and faster moving, vehicle behind me, gaining fast (I was driving a…
Location: 401 exit to Homer Watson Blvd, Kitchener/ Cambridge.
I was going on 401. When I was approaching the location mentioned at the topic, I tried to over take a truck in front of me, and realized a car tailgating me right after I went out to the fast lane. At first I thought it was some other fast drivers so I just thought that I would go back into the middle…
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.
I'm just curious how long will a Driving while suspended affect my insurance rates? Initially when I got my conviction with DWS my rates went from 180 a month to 390, since then I've had no tickets or even been pulled over and my rates have gone down to 240 since then. I believe it will be 3 years in Sept 2017. Will the DWS affect my insurance for 6 years because thats how long it stays on my…
It's winter, and there's been a cold snap. The highway you are traveling on is wet, but not slippery. You take your exit, but the salt trucks haven't been on this ramp, and despite slowing down to below the recommended speed, your car slips on some black ice, and you find the car rotating clockwise. The car rotates 180 degrees, and slides backwards off the ramp…
So about a month ago I received a stunt/racing charge for going 140 in an 80 zone. I decided to go with a paralegal, and was notified by the paralegal that on the summon's it states to go to a criminal court. The paralegal was confused as this should be at a Provincial court. They said that since I do not have any criminal charges, that the officer wrote the wrong address down including…
I got a careless driving ticket and I was involved in quite a serious accident. I was driving at about 60 km/h arriving towards a stop sign. Unfortunately when I tried to stop, my shoes were sliding off from my foot as they did not have any strap and were perhaps oversized and slippery. I could not stop at the sign and hit a van that had the right of way. Both vehicles were badly damaged and…
In some cases, it takes too long for the Crown to bring a charge against a defendant to trial. If your charge has taken too long to come to trial, you can stop the proceedings by "filing an 11B." This is filing paperwork to bring a motion at your trial, where you essentially say, "my rights to a speedy trial have been violated, and I want the case stopped." It is called an 11B because section…
Hi I'm new to this forum but I hope I'm bringing you all good news.
I recently wrote a book short titled ABUSE OF POWER
This book is all about how the Ontario government broke the law to enact the new street racing legislation.
To start with the denial of the right to remain innocent until proven guilty was enacted without due process under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. How it wasn't done…
I have been caught 3 times driving while suspended for unpaid fines . I have still not paid the fines and did not go to the first 2 court dates. When I was pulled over the second time the police officer said he would put down as it was my first time . But I had to work as I just started a new job. I called in to have the date changed but they said it was to late . So I did not go to court .…
Today I received a hand held device ticket on Gardiner. I was pulled over by the police officer and told i was using my cell phone while driving but i never even touched my cell phone. He told me my hand was not on steering. I am sure i didn't touch the phone. The phone was on the right passenger seat connected to my car. I was using mobile gps which was on dashboard display and never touched…
As the title states, I received a ticket for failing to proceed at a green light. I have gained a lot of knowledge from this site for various things, however even a google search of this ticket doesn't seem to pull up much info. Someone else had made a post about this back in 2009 but my story is quite different.
So I shall explain...
On the night of February 23/2013 I had decided to be the…
Need some advice on reaching a plea deal with the prosecutor and how to go about talking to the crown. I'm not here to be lectured ect. I'm aware I made a mistake, and need advice on fixing it. So kindly keep comments about my impulsive decision to yourself.
Backstory:
I'm 19 with a g2 license. Was going home late at night and decided to go down a road that I knew was smooth with zero traffic so I…
I recently got pulled over and issued a ticket for following too closely and am looking to challenge the charges. However, I will be at school by the trial date. This is significant because I received the ticket in Ottawa (where my family lives), but attend school in Waterloo (almost 6 hours away). I will also be starting co-op this summer and as such likely won't be returning home in order to…
I was charged with careless driving for a one-vehicle accident, and would like to know how to go about pleading not guilty. I was driving on a rural road at night in an 80 kmh zone. I was driving up a hill. At the top of the hill is a 90 degree turn sign (no stop sign, no kmh posted). I hit the brakes too late, and because the road goes downhill and there's a lot of gravel, skidded one or two…
Not sure the right place for this so if it needs to be moved please do so.
I was stopped today for 15 over the speed limit, I gave all the documents to the officer and he said he could not accept a photocopy of my ownership only the original I had a photo copy front and back and I had my plate sticker number with it.
he gave me a ticket for HWY ACT Section 7(5)(a) he said only the original would…
Tonight, I was pulled over for apparently doing 132km in an 80km zone. Although I'd only caught myself doing 120km(yes, still over, I'm aware). After about 30 min of sitting on the side of the road, the officer came over and kindly decided not to take away my license or impound the car on the spot. I did not recieve any fines. He did, however, give me a court date in August. Never mentioning…
I have been a frequent visitor of this site for a while now but I just made an account today to ask a question that I have gotten no real clear cut answer on in the past.
What I'm talking about here is H.I.D. (High Intensity Discharge) Headlight Conversion Kits. For those of you who don't know what they are all about you can just google it and you will receive more than enough…
I'd still be willing to bet that this charge can be beaten in court. Without a collision, where's the proof that he was following too close? Gets very subjective from there.
Might depend on how aggressive the Prosecutor is.
Finally, I know your notes are very detailed (at least this is what I've gathered), when I receive my disclosure package should I expect it to be the same (in other words are most officers as diligent as you with their note taking?)
Keep up the good work for me!
And really, how many other officers have browsed this website to educate themselves and others? Maybe...what... one? Two? (Picture this at OPC: "Your new mandatory reading is ontariohighwaytrafficact.com.") 
