Hello, The other day I got a following too closely ticket while on the 401. Going through this certain region in Mississauga there is always traffic but this day it wasn't too bad. I was traveling roughly 80 km/h as the pace of traffic was a bit slower. The driver in front of me was a good 10 car lengths away when all of a sudden she was stopped on the highway because of traffic. I was behind her and for whatever reason couldn't stop in time and just barely clipped her rear fender leaving a small dent. The OPP officer who arrived on scene told me he could have given me a careless driving ticket (lol) but said I was a "good kid" and gave me a following too closely ticket instead, even though that wasn't the case. Is there anything I can do about this and get the charges dropped in court? ALSO, as I was stopped after hitting the car in front of me, 2 seconds later the vehicle traveling behind me hit me and squeezed between me and the center barrier and cause almost $8 000 worth of damage! She received to charge or ticket whatsoever. If anyone has any input I would really appreciate it!
Hello,
The other day I got a following too closely ticket while on the 401. Going through this certain region in Mississauga there is always traffic but this day it wasn't too bad. I was traveling roughly 80 km/h as the pace of traffic was a bit slower. The driver in front of me was a good 10 car lengths away when all of a sudden she was stopped on the highway because of traffic. I was behind her and for whatever reason couldn't stop in time and just barely clipped her rear fender leaving a small dent. The OPP officer who arrived on scene told me he could have given me a careless driving ticket (lol) but said I was a "good kid" and gave me a following too closely ticket instead, even though that wasn't the case.
Is there anything I can do about this and get the charges dropped in court?
ALSO, as I was stopped after hitting the car in front of me, 2 seconds later the vehicle traveling behind me hit me and squeezed between me and the center barrier and cause almost $8 000 worth of damage! She received to charge or ticket whatsoever.
If anyone has any input I would really appreciate it!
He is correct that you could have got a careless ticket for it, especially if you were 10 car lengths back. That should have given you plenty of time to stop. The problem with laying Follow to Close in rear end collisions (and the reason we were instructed not to do it in my jurisdiction) is because it's very difficult to prove the elements of following too closely if no one can give evidence as to how long you were following the vehicle in front of you, how fast, and at what distance. If you apply for disclosure and there is no evidence of these elements in the report you could bring it to the prosecutors attention and see what they say. In my region they would almost certainly drop it. Not because you don't deserve a ticket, but because they can't prove the one that was laid.
He is correct that you could have got a careless ticket for it, especially if you were 10 car lengths back. That should have given you plenty of time to stop.
The problem with laying Follow to Close in rear end collisions (and the reason we were instructed not to do it in my jurisdiction) is because it's very difficult to prove the elements of following too closely if no one can give evidence as to how long you were following the vehicle in front of you, how fast, and at what distance.
If you apply for disclosure and there is no evidence of these elements in the report you could bring it to the prosecutors attention and see what they say. In my region they would almost certainly drop it. Not because you don't deserve a ticket, but because they can't prove the one that was laid.
. .. Hi george: I can not think of a reason why the driver that hit your car would have not been charged. Is it possible that she stated that you cut her off and suddenly stopped your vehicle within her headway distance (HTA s. 158)? I noticed that you estimated the time between collisions to be 2 secs., which would show that you did not cut her off. Similarly, if your estimation of the distance between your vehicle and the one you hit (about 10 car lengths) is correct, then you should not be convicted of following too closely. If you do the math, you'll see that, as Simon Borys states, you had time to stop your vehicle. If you have not done so, file the Notice of Intention to Appear (NIA) and when you get a trial date you request disclosure. That way you'll be able to see what is the evidence the prosecutor will bring in support of the charge at trial. It sounds good to me. You have nothing to lose by doing so. Cheers .. .
.
..
Hi george:
george wrote:
ALSO, as I was stopped after hitting the car in front of me, 2 seconds later the vehicle traveling behind me hit me and squeezed between me and the center barrier and cause almost $8 000 worth of damage! She received to charge or ticket whatsoever. [/color]
george wrote:
yeah sorry I meant to say she received NO charge whatsoever
I can not think of a reason why the driver that hit your car would have not been charged. Is it possible that she stated that you cut her off and suddenly stopped your vehicle within her headway distance (HTA s. 158)?
I noticed that you estimated the time between collisions to be 2 secs., which would show that you did not cut her off.
Similarly, if your estimation of the distance between your vehicle and the one you hit (about 10 car lengths) is correct, then you should not be convicted of following too closely. If you do the math, you'll see that, as Simon Borys states, you had time to stop your vehicle.
If you have not done so, file the Notice of Intention to Appear (NIA) and when you get a trial date you request disclosure. That way you'll be able to see what is the evidence the prosecutor will bring in support of the charge at trial.
Simon Borys wrote:
If you apply for disclosure and there is no evidence of these elements in the report you could bring it to the prosecutors attention and see what they say. In my region they would almost certainly drop it. Not because you don't deserve a ticket, but because they can't prove the one that was laid.
It sounds good to me. You have nothing to lose by doing so.
My opinion is that the officer has laid the wrong ticket and that if you hire a paralegal that knows about accident investigation that you should be able to have the charge dropped completely. The charge has 4 demerit points on it, and if you pay the ticket it will on your driving record for 3 years, and together with being deemed at fault in the accident that your insurance rates will be affected. Get some legal advise, My opinion is based upon being a Toronto OPP officer and investigating many of these accidents in the past.
My opinion is that the officer has laid the wrong ticket and that if you hire a paralegal that knows about accident investigation that you should be able to have the charge dropped completely.
The charge has 4 demerit points on it, and if you pay the ticket it will on your driving record for 3 years, and together with being deemed at fault in the accident that your insurance rates will be affected.
Get some legal advise,
My opinion is based upon being a Toronto OPP officer and investigating many of these accidents in the past.
Chris Conway
Retired Toronto Traffic Officer, Hit & Run Squad Detective,
Breathalyzer Tech, Radar/Highway Patrol
Licenced Paralegal
If you are charged with FTC, and it's clear from the evidence that really you were just driving carelessly, then there's no way they can convict on FTC, and no way that they can substitute a Careless Driving charge for the FTC (definitely no way after 6 mos from the offence date). If you are charged with Careless Driving, you can be convicted for FTC in its place, b/c it's an included offence, but the opposite is not true. Take the stand and testify that you were 10 car lengths back from the car in front. There is no way you could be convicted on FTC from that distance. For sure the person who you ran into will have to testify to have any chance to convict, and they will have to testify that they saw you following them before you hit them, and at a distance that would be considered not reasonable. The officer of course cannot testify to witnessing the following, as they only arrived after the fact. Get your disclosure, see what they have on you, and then come back and let us know. FTC's are usually given in the hopes that you'll just pay them out of court. Don't.
If you are charged with FTC, and it's clear from the evidence that really you were just driving carelessly, then there's no way they can convict on FTC, and no way that they can substitute a Careless Driving charge for the FTC (definitely no way after 6 mos from the offence date). If you are charged with Careless Driving, you can be convicted for FTC in its place, b/c it's an included offence, but the opposite is not true.
Take the stand and testify that you were 10 car lengths back from the car in front. There is no way you could be convicted on FTC from that distance. For sure the person who you ran into will have to testify to have any chance to convict, and they will have to testify that they saw you following them before you hit them, and at a distance that would be considered not reasonable. The officer of course cannot testify to witnessing the following, as they only arrived after the fact.
Get your disclosure, see what they have on you, and then come back and let us know. FTC's are usually given in the hopes that you'll just pay them out of court. Don't.
I have to disagree with the comment that Follow too closely is an included offence for Careless Driving. That is simply INCORRECT. The test for an included offence is: ...one must necessarily commit the offence of ....... before the offence of ...........could be made out.
I have to disagree with the comment that Follow too closely is an included offence for Careless Driving. That is simply INCORRECT.
The test for an included offence is:
...one must necessarily commit the offence of ....... before the offence of ...........could be made out.
. Hi Traffic Law: JUST MY OPINION While what you say is correct, follow to closely could be an included offense respecting a careless driving charge. For instance, a driver who contemporaneously commits a few offences such as, speeding, follow to closely, changing lanes unsafely and cutting other vehicles off, -I have seen this in a highway a few times, could be charge and convicted with careless driving. By itself, however, as you clearly state, follow too closely is not an included offence respecting careless driving. Cheers. .
.
Hi Traffic Law:
JUST MY OPINION
Traffic Law wrote:
I have to disagree with the comment that Follow too closely is an included offence for Careless Driving. That is simply INCORRECT.
The test for an included offence is:
...one must necessarily commit the offence of ....... before the offence of ...........could be made out.
While what you say is correct, follow to closely could be an included offense respecting a careless driving charge.
R. v. Ereddia, 2006 ONCJ 303, at Paragraph 6 wrote:
Careless driving, generally speaking, requires proof of a departure from the standard of care that a reasonably prudent driver would have exercised in the circumstances, and normally involves, I would think, conduct that includes other less serious Highway Traffic Act infractions.
For instance, a driver who contemporaneously commits a few offences such as, speeding, follow to closely, changing lanes unsafely and cutting other vehicles off, -I have seen this in a highway a few times, could be charge and convicted with careless driving.
By itself, however, as you clearly state, follow too closely is not an included offence respecting careless driving.
Agreed, follow too close is not an included offence in careless. It's just often the offence that people plea to when charged with careless. However, you can not be convicted of follow too close at a trial for careless, or vice versa.
Agreed, follow too close is not an included offence in careless. It's just often the offence that people plea to when charged with careless. However, you can not be convicted of follow too close at a trial for careless, or vice versa.
This is not the right case to refer to in our argument. I am very familliar with R. v. Erredia and that case deals with a minor mistake by the driver who miscalculated a distance to the parked vehicle. That type of conduct cannot be deserving punishment for Careless Driving. You are correct, in some situations Follow too Close could be an included offence but it is far from automatic. Further I would like to add to yours and mine previous posts that determination of an included offence is a tricky business and has to be considered on the factual scenario of a particular violation. I happened to prepare a factum on similar situation <a href="http://www.trafficlawparalegal.com/red_ ... .aspx">Red Light Fail to Stop vs. Red Light Proceed Before Green</a>
R. v. Ereddia, 2006 ONCJ 303, at Paragraph 6 wrote:
Careless driving, generally speaking, requires proof of a departure from the standard of care that a reasonably prudent driver would have exercised in the circumstances, and normally involves, I would think, conduct that includes other less serious Highway Traffic Act infractions.
This is not the right case to refer to in our argument. I am very familliar with R. v. Erredia and that case deals with a minor mistake by the driver who miscalculated a distance to the parked vehicle. That type of conduct cannot be deserving punishment for Careless Driving.
You are correct, in some situations Follow too Close could be an included offence but it is far from automatic.
Further I would like to add to yours and mine previous posts that determination of an included offence is a tricky business and has to be considered on the factual scenario of a particular violation. I happened to prepare a factum on similar situation <a href="http://www.trafficlawparalegal.com/red_ ... .aspx">Red Light Fail to Stop vs. Red Light Proceed Before Green</a>
R. v. Reiber, 2007 ONCJ 343, para 15: In R v Smith, [2002] OJ No 3270, Halikowski J, sitting as a POA appellate court accepted the necessity of having all of the essential elements of the included offence as part of the original offence. In that decision, the court at paragraph 8 stated: So yes, it's not an automatic included offence (i.e. you can drive carelessly w/o following too closely), but if you did follow too closely while you drove carelessly, then you can be convicted for follow too close as an included offence. Having said all that, para 15 might be in conflict with the last sub-paragraph in para 12, and the words of Justice Binnie of the SCC.
In R v Smith, [2002] OJ No 3270, Halikowski J, sitting as a POA appellate court accepted the necessity of having all of the essential elements of the included offence as part of the original offence. In that decision, the court at paragraph 8 stated:
Mr. Smith also argued that the offence of following too closely is not an included offence in the offence of driving. His argument is not accepted, all the elements of the offence of following too closely clearly being part in the totality of the offence of careless driving in this particular set of circumstances.
So yes, it's not an automatic included offence (i.e. you can drive carelessly w/o following too closely), but if you did follow too closely while you drove carelessly, then you can be convicted for follow too close as an included offence.
Having said all that, para 15 might be in conflict with the last sub-paragraph in para 12, and the words of Justice Binnie of the SCC.
The fine is not the issue but I am worried about insurance rates. First speeding ticket in my life Any suggestions on how to handle this? I can't afford to spend a day at the court
So was at court today in Orillia for a friend, and I had submitted a couple notice of motion a couple weeks ago that I wanted to deal with before arraignment. I met with prosecutor before hand, and it went something like this:
Prosecutor: "Do you have the case law?"
Me: "What do you mean?"
Prosecutor: "Do you have the case law for your motion?"
Me: "All the case law is quoted in the motion that I…
1)failure to change address on license (i got married a couple of months earlier and moved)
2) license plate not fully visible
I got pulled over because I had 2 letters peeling off my license plate. I know ignorance isn't a defense, but I really had no idea that this was an issue. Plus, you see many cars on the road with peeling plates. I got both tickets and…
I was driving around 140km/h on a 100km/h posted on the highway. I was in the fast lane. The officer was very nice and reduced it to no points and just 15km/h over.
I only have my G2.
1. Will this affect me taking the G test next month?
2. I am very grateful for the officer lowering the ticket... should I just pay the 52.5$ and leave it as is.. I am a secondary driver under my dads name and we have…
Hi, thanks in advance for the help. Been driving for 10 years, clean record until today when I got slapped with two tickets. First: going 135 at 100 on the 401, second: not having a valid sticker (I recently moved and completely forgot about it)
My friend tells me I should fight the speed ticket, if anything to reduce the fine and points. Would be alot of help if anyone could walk me through…
My wife, who has never had a traffic ticket in her life, just got 11 points.
Two tickets: "following too closely" and "failure to stop"
She was on a residential street and was behind a car at a crosswalk waiting for a pedestrian. Pedestrian crossed, they continued. Cop was drivig towards them down a side street , and as they passed he went after my wife.
I was driving in mid lane and was following a line of cars around speed limit.
The vehicle in front of me was large and I decided to change to the left lane to get better line sight.
As soon as I entered the left lane, I saw the car in front of me approximately 200m away stopped dead (for some odd reason, there was more traffic on the left lane).
Over the last few months I have received several parking tickets from the City of Kitchener. I haven't paid any of them and have attempted to dicuss the situation with the parking authority of the City, however, they're very unreceptive and defensive.
I work at a downtown construction site....ironically a Court House. The site takes up a whole city block, of which ONE side has 2 hour parking…
I was driving on a teusday night in the rain and fog at whites and highview by St. Mary CSS in Pickering, ON. At the time I was waiting at a red light to make a left north onto whites. There was also a car on the opposite side of the intersection making a left. The cars beams were pointed almost directly at my face and as a result, with the combination of the rain and fog, I…
I am new to this website and this is my first post so please forgive me if I've put this question in the wrong place. Please bear with me until I learn the ropes a bit.
So here are my questions:
Antique cars and hot rods (1930's- early '60's) and seat belt use in Ontario. If these vehicles never came from the respective factories with any seat belts, do they have to be retrofitted ?
OK so Jshreck has been taking some heat for the concept of providing the DL as being not required and therefore inadmissable in court. Personally, I think that argument would fall on deaf ears in the lower court and any chance at victory would have to be in the highest court. That would be quite something. When pigs fly I think, but along that line of thought, allow me to continue.......
I have a court date soon and am wondering whether the officers just read off their disclosure notes when interrogated.
Basically, according to the disclosure notes and the said distances and speeds quoted, by doing some simple math it just doesn't add up. My concern is whether the officer can change his story when on the stand after maybe realizing this?
Last week I was driving home from college in the sauga area. I drive a 1995 Chevy Monte Carlo v6 which I've owned since 2000, I really haven't done anything to the car except tinted windows (not completely darken) and some rims, and Nothing Engine wise. Anyway I look in my rear view mirror and out of no where i see cherry flashing. When pulled over the officer asked do you…
I was charged 2 days ago with RED LIGHT - FAIL TO STOP and set fined $150 and I guess 3 points. I was driving turning left on the intersection with a traffic light, and when I jst about to turn left the light turned to orange and I didn't have enough time to stop. Once I turned I saw the light turned to red and 2seconds later I saw a police beacon flashing through my rear-view mirror. It…
I figured pleading not guilty is the same as saying it was signed which is stupid. A friend of mine told me I could plead guilty with explanation and try to get the fine reduced when I come in.
So this Friday I was stopped by a local officer for going 110 in a 80zone. He also claims I was going 105 in a 50zone,which we literally passed when he stopped me as I was braking. It has been 3 days already and I can't seem to locate my ticket on their Internet site "pay ticket". Is there a way to determine if he has filed for certificate of offence to the courts? It has been 3 days I presume…
My trial date is in a couple days for a speeding ticket (york region) and i am nervous it is my first ticket ever as well as first trial
I did notice my ticket was filed beyond 7 days, 10 days after the day i got the ticket to be exact, which is stamped on the ticket. is this enough to have it dismissed?
If you look close enough, beside the drivers' side "A" pillar you will see a white circle = front antenna of Genesis radar......plus look above the dash pad...there is the Spectre RDD.
Any suggestions on how to handle this? I can't afford to spend a day at the court 
