Hi there, Good to see there's a place for all this! I am hoping to get some direction on what to do with this incident. My wife was turning left onto a main road. A police car had there right turn signal on and was turning onto the same road. She went to turn in front of the car, and the police car turned her signal off and accelerated, changing their mind about turning there. My wife was halfway through the turn, and the police car hit her, damaging her truck. The police car was undamaged. After looking at the damage, there were two witnesses,neither of which we have their names, as my wife was in shock, that stopped and stated they saw the cop had the signal on, and was braking, to which the cop agreed. The cop then called in her supervisors, who said my wife was in the wrong, not waiting for the intersection to be clear. The supervisor wrote up the accident report and no charges were pressed. We are reluctant to go through insurance as my wife is already had two tickets and charges under her belt, and any more and our insurance will skyrocket. Even though no ones at fault, can our insurance go up? And are the police at fault, or is it my wifes fault? I am laid off and although I'm handy with tools, I don't have the money to put up to fix the truck. Any help/info is appreciated!
Hi there,
Good to see there's a place for all this! I am hoping to get some direction on what to do with this incident.
My wife was turning left onto a main road. A police car had there right turn signal on and was turning onto the same road. She went to turn in front of the car, and the police car turned her signal off and accelerated, changing their mind about turning there. My wife was halfway through the turn, and the police car hit her, damaging her truck. The police car was undamaged. After looking at the damage, there were two witnesses,neither of which we have their names, as my wife was in shock, that stopped and stated they saw the cop had the signal on, and was braking, to which the cop agreed.
The cop then called in her supervisors, who said my wife was in the wrong, not waiting for the intersection to be clear. The supervisor wrote up the accident report and no charges were pressed. We are reluctant to go through insurance as my wife is already had two tickets and charges under her belt, and any more and our insurance will skyrocket. Even though no ones at fault, can our insurance go up? And are the police at fault, or is it my wifes fault? I am laid off and although I'm handy with tools, I don't have the money to put up to fix the truck.
The fact that no charges were laid under the Highway Traffic Act is helpful, but the HTA does not determine "fault" for insurance purposes. Fault determination for insurance purposes is made under the Insurance Act of Ontario and Fault Determination Rules. They can look at the collision report and any possible witness statements. In theory (and it happens occasionally), you could be charged by police for an HTA infraction but be held 0% "at fault" by your insurance provider; conversely, you could also not be charged and held 100% "at fault." Try to get a copy of the collision report from the police, if you don't have it already. The collision report is critical. Were both your wife and the officer facing a stop sign? Did it happen at a traffic light? Here is a link to the Fault Determination Rules: http://www.canlii.org/on/laws/regu/1990 ... whole.html Scroll down to part 12 (Vehicles Travelling in Opposite Direction) and diagram (5). If your wife turned in front of the officer, and the officer was "proceeding straight," then she is considered 100% at fault. However, if both were at a STOP sign, take a look at part 14 (intersections with traffic signs). There are any number of possibilities. You do not have to submit a claim to your insurance company, but you should be aware of section 258.1 of the Insurance Act of Ontario: That is available at http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK258. It is permissible to report the collision but not put the claim in. I can't say with any degree of certainty how reporting it to your insurer but not filing to a claim to fix the truck would affect your rates. I'm sure some regular posters here will have more info on this as well. Any claim you do file for an at-fault collision will definitely bring your rates up.
The fact that no charges were laid under the Highway Traffic Act is helpful, but the HTA does not determine "fault" for insurance purposes. Fault determination for insurance purposes is made under the Insurance Act of Ontario and Fault Determination Rules. They can look at the collision report and any possible witness statements.
In theory (and it happens occasionally), you could be charged by police for an HTA infraction but be held 0% "at fault" by your insurance provider; conversely, you could also not be charged and held 100% "at fault." Try to get a copy of the collision report from the police, if you don't have it already. The collision report is critical. Were both your wife and the officer facing a stop sign? Did it happen at a traffic light?
Scroll down to part 12 (Vehicles Travelling in Opposite Direction) and diagram (5). If your wife turned in front of the officer, and the officer was "proceeding straight," then she is considered 100% at fault. However, if both were at a STOP sign, take a look at part 14 (intersections with traffic signs). There are any number of possibilities. You do not have to submit a claim to your insurance company, but you should be aware of section 258.1 of the Insurance Act of Ontario:
Notice of accident
258.1 (1) If an automobile insured under a contract is involved in an incident that is required to be reported to the police under the Highway Traffic Act or in respect of which the insured intends to make a claim under the contract, the insured shall give the insurer written notice of the incident, with all available particulars.
Same
(2) Subject to subsection (3), the notice required by subsection (1) shall be given to the insurer within seven days of the incident.
Same
(3) If the insured is unable because of incapacity to comply with subsection (1) within seven days of the incident, the insured shall comply as soon as possible thereafter.
It is permissible to report the collision but not put the claim in. I can't say with any degree of certainty how reporting it to your insurer but not filing to a claim to fix the truck would affect your rates. I'm sure some regular posters here will have more info on this as well. Any claim you do file for an at-fault collision will definitely bring your rates up.
Last edited by Radar Identified on Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
I'm pretty sure as long as you don't file a claim and weren't charged with anything, your rates won't be affected (even if you inform your insurance company). Our oldest boy had a wreck a while back. We called insurance for advice. THEY suggested paying the damages in cash to avoid an insurance increase. So even though they KNOW he had a wreck, they won't increase his rates because he didn't file a claim... weird, eh? I'm not sure I'd try to put the (legal) blame on the copper. Just because a signal light is on, doesn't absolve one from yielding to the right-of-way of the oncoming vehicle. I RARELY trust a guy with his signal on. I know of no section in the HTA that prevents a driver from changing their minds and canceling a signaled turn (even though it totally screws everyone else up!). The HTA makes no allowances for "apparent intentions" of oncoming traffic. Just my opinion though...
I'm pretty sure as long as you don't file a claim and weren't charged with anything, your rates won't be affected (even if you inform your insurance company). Our oldest boy had a wreck a while back. We called insurance for advice. THEY suggested paying the damages in cash to avoid an insurance increase. So even though they KNOW he had a wreck, they won't increase his rates because he didn't file a claim... weird, eh?
I'm not sure I'd try to put the (legal) blame on the copper. Just because a signal light is on, doesn't absolve one from yielding to the right-of-way of the oncoming vehicle. I RARELY trust a guy with his signal on. I know of no section in the HTA that prevents a driver from changing their minds and canceling a signaled turn (even though it totally screws everyone else up!). The HTA makes no allowances for "apparent intentions" of oncoming traffic.
Just my opinion though...
Last edited by Bookm on Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He said the copper had his signal on. Then that the copper hit her in the rear of the car. If all the post was correct then the copper was in the wrong. Cheers Viper1
Bookm wrote:
I'm pretty sure as long as you don't file a claim and weren't charged with anything, your rates won't be affected (even if you inform your insurance company). Our oldest boy had a wreck a while back. We called insurance for advice. THEY suggested paying the damages in cash to avoid an insurance increase. So even though they KNOW he had a wreck, they won't increase his rates because he didn't file a claim... weird, eh?
I'm not sure I'd try to put the (legal) blame on the copper. Just because a signal light is on, doesn't absolve one from yielding to the right-of-way of the oncoming vehicle. I RARELY trust a guy with his signal on. I know of no section in the HTA that prevents a driver from changing their minds and canceling a signaled turn (even though it totally screws everyone else up!). The HTA makes no allowances for "apparent intentions" of oncoming traffic.
Just my opinion though...
He said the copper had his signal on.
Then that the copper hit her in the rear of the car.
If all the post was correct then the copper was in the wrong.
Cheers
Viper1
"hang onto your chair when reading my posts
use at your own risk"
Wouldn't the driver, who had decided to change his mind to proceed despite his signal and apparent intention, be responsible to ensure that he can proceed in safety?
Bookm wrote:
The HTA makes no allowances for "apparent intentions" of oncoming traffic.
Wouldn't the driver, who had decided to change his mind to proceed despite his signal and apparent intention, be responsible to ensure that he can proceed in safety?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
For arguement sake, take the cruiser out of this as it does not affect anything (lights,sirens not on). We have two vehicles, one turning left, one going straight with a signal on The vehicle going straight always has the right of way. You can never cut across the path of another vehicle(ie 2 lane hwy, 1 vehicle passing 8, lead vehicle turns left in front of vehicle passing, turning vehicle is at fault) Think both should have been issued tickets. - Left turn - fail to afford reasonable opportunity to avoid collision - Improper signal device
For arguement sake, take the cruiser out of this as it does not affect anything (lights,sirens not on).
We have two vehicles, one turning left, one going straight with a signal on
The vehicle going straight always has the right of way. You can never cut across the path of another vehicle(ie 2 lane hwy, 1 vehicle passing 8, lead vehicle turns left in front of vehicle passing, turning vehicle is at fault)
Think both should have been issued tickets.
- Left turn - fail to afford reasonable opportunity to avoid collision
- Improper signal device
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Maybe... But it could get rather complicated I think. What if I just noticed my blinker has been on for miles, and I cancel it as I approach an intersection. Have I now given up my right to proceed straight through the intersection. What if an old fellar were to drive for miles with his blinker on, unknowingly. Has he now given up his right to proceed FIRST through the many intersections along his route? Maybe, but the HTA only states you must yield to oncoming traffic. Nothing about oncoming traffic that "clearly intends" to proceed through the intersection. And here's a scenario I read about all the time. A guy waiting to make a left believes the approaching car is going to stop for the light which has now turned yellow. It appears to be slowing so he turns in an attempt to clear the intersection before the light turns red, and WHAM! Who gets the blame?
racer wrote:
Wouldn't the driver, who had decided to change his mind to proceed despite his signal and apparent intention, be responsible to ensure that he can proceed in safety?
Maybe...
But it could get rather complicated I think.
What if I just noticed my blinker has been on for miles, and I cancel it as I approach an intersection. Have I now given up my right to proceed straight through the intersection.
What if an old fellar were to drive for miles with his blinker on, unknowingly. Has he now given up his right to proceed FIRST through the many intersections along his route?
Maybe, but the HTA only states you must yield to oncoming traffic. Nothing about oncoming traffic that "clearly intends" to proceed through the intersection.
And here's a scenario I read about all the time. A guy waiting to make a left believes the approaching car is going to stop for the light which has now turned yellow. It appears to be slowing so he turns in an attempt to clear the intersection before the light turns red, and WHAM! Who gets the blame?
Last edited by Bookm on Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Well no one can say it's not a contestable issue. Thanks for the help and the thoughtful discussion. Just to clarify, not sure if I did in the first post, the police officer said she was going to turn, was braking, as evidenced by the two witnesses, then changed her mind. After thinking about it, and with everyone that posted's help, we have decided not to press ahead with insurance, and just fix it ourselves. I'm fairly handy, and it's just easier for everyone. Thanks for everyones help!
Well no one can say it's not a contestable issue. Thanks for the help and the thoughtful discussion.
Just to clarify, not sure if I did in the first post, the police officer said she was going to turn, was braking, as evidenced by the two witnesses, then changed her mind.
After thinking about it, and with everyone that posted's help, we have decided not to press ahead with insurance, and just fix it ourselves. I'm fairly handy, and it's just easier for everyone.
You also say that the cop accelerated further, even though it must have been apparent that the collision is imminent. Could that be classified as "using a vehicle as a weapon" or "dangerous driving failing to prevent a collision"?
You also say that the cop accelerated further, even though it must have been apparent that the collision is imminent. Could that be classified as "using a vehicle as a weapon" or "dangerous driving failing to prevent a collision"?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Hi so I have a bizzare situation. Today I received a summons for "being the owner of a motor vehicle bearing Vehicle Identification Number ###, failed to submit the vehicle, equipment or drawn vehicle for inspection or tests as required by an officer" for a vehicle I previously owned. Apparently a violation of HTA 82(9).
The date of offense is June 15, the summons was issued on October 26th and I…
Hi, I need some help for the ticket of lmproper left turn.
When i drove my car from east to west, intending to make a left turn and stop in front of stop line. There was a car in front of me, which has turn on yellow light. The light was turning red and then I thought I cannot leave in the intersection and turned, an incoming car was runing the light and hit me. No one got hurt but both cars had…
Have a ticket in which the radar used was a Genesis VP Directional. I had downloaded the manual for a Genesis VP but I now realize that the unit is not the same so it is the wrong manual. My trial is very soon so I do not have time to ask for disclosure of the manual.
Does anyone have access to an electronic version of the manual for Genesis VP Directional?
I was pulled over today in the city of Oakville for going 75 in a 40 zone. However, I am 100 percent certain that I was going only 50 in the 40 zone. When I was pulled over, I was driving my Dad's car which I felt was the reason I was getting stopped since two teenagers driving a 2013 S Class. He asked does I know why I am being pulled over and I…
I really need help on fighting my 9 tickets i received from one police officer. Here is some background of what happened!
I was caught speeding 66km on a 40km (school zone) on January 29, 2010. I was driving my friend's car and turns out she didnt renew the validation on the vehicle and didnt leave the up to date insurance paper on the car.
Hey question that I think here's probably the best place to get the answer:
I was charged with a careless driving offence in oct, trail in early april, so as of right now my insurance record is 100% clean... except the officer did file an accident report at the scene where I was classified at fault due to it being PI (although very minor). The person I hit did not sue etc, so the insurance company…
Very much unintentionally passed a stopped bus, with sign and flashing lights. Didn't realize I had done it until I was at the end of the bus. I'll save you my sob story, but it was truly accidental. I'm generally very cautious and have a perfect driving record. Never been stopped.
While I realize if a cop had seen me that I would have gotten a ticket, there were none in sight. Though I may very…
I was recently pulled over for running a red and I wasnt able to find my wallet in the car at the time to hand over my license. I had a passport in the vehicle that he used. The wallet was in the vehicle, it just fell through the seats. (Tough to find a black leather wallet in a black/black leather truck at night).
The officer still wrote the tickets for both he signed the one ticket (failure to…
I was passing a vehicle that was going slow for me and there was an oncoming vehicle coming at me. I speed up to get around the person I was passing and the oncoming vehicle turns out to be a cop who turns around and tickets me for going 110km in a 80km zone. How does it work with passing a vehicle? Once I passed the vehicle I went back down to my original speed of just under 100. The officer…
I picked up a brand new (old stock) Fuzzbuster a while ago at auction (wopping $5!!) and I want to mount it on the dash of my old GTO as a cool accessory when I show it at car shows. But I'm not sure if it's legal or not.
Here's my thoughts:
- It is early 70's technology (x-band) so it won't detect modern police radar. That's assuming no police force uses the old x-band frequency.
Hi guys, I'm still a little in shock of getting my first traffic ticket...
On Monday afternoon, I was returning from Toronto to Ottawa on HW416, I was driving about 15 over 100 like always. Then a car came very close to me on the left lane and made me nervous, I speed up unintentionally to pass the car and change lane, but while doing that a police car pull out of the median. He was hiding in…
May i ask this question regarding transport trucks limited to 105 km/h. Moving road blocks or safety?
IMO it isnt speed that kills. I find transport trucks infact help keep the road going. With cars that choose to not move to the right and slow down the middle lane the trucks would try to pass in their passing lane therefore the slower traffic would move right.
Received a notice from the police that a motion is being put forward to adjourn upcoming trial date. Notice indicates that an officer has sworn an affidavit that the crucial witness cannot attend date trial is set for (we know there is a social engagement at 7:30 pm for the witness, trial time is 1:30 pm). This further delay is a big problem to my daughter's case. She is moving away to…
This is what happened. I was travelling west on a four lane city street that was very light with traffic. I was making a left hand turn into a wide driveway of a business. There was traffic lights about 100 yards past the driveway and were red for the east-west traffic. I was in the left lane with my signal on and there was no oncoming traffic due to the red light. I was slowed right down…
I was driving my families older car and got pulled over, and the police officer informed me my plate was dirty. He issued me a ticket of $110 for the 13(2) act and obstruct plate as the offense. He informed me that such a plate could be used to avoid red lights as well as 407 tolls, also that buying a new plate can help to lower the ticket if I fight the charge, and that he also took a picture…
I received a red light camera ticket. In the picture, you see an ambulance in front of me with flashing lights. I had moved to alleviate the traffic behind me for the emergency vehicles coming behind it.
Is this a possible defense, if so, does anyone know any good case law to justify this position?
what happens if they charge someone for driving at 151Km/hr in montreal and they put for trial, appear after some months and sadly lost the trial ?
In montreal its $300 fine and 5demerit points ...
I heard Ontario and Qubec share the information. So once the trial is over ( and when the file moved to ontario) will his car gets towed and licence get suspended for 7days (later to 30 days ) ? and he…
I got a notice in the mail that trial is set four weeks from today, so it's time to request disclosure. I have zero chance of getting an 11b since trial is less than two months after the offense date and the officer did not reduce the charge. I really want to try and create delays on the trial, to reduce the chance of the officer showing up on multiple occasions. Is there any known loop-holes…
This weekend my father was involved in an accident with a transit bus in Burlington, ON. After the police showed up he was charged with "Fail to obey stop sign" Sec. 136(1)(a). At this particular intersection there NO stop signs but there are traffic lights. There is construction going on there so one of the light posts is smaller.
Driving conditions were terribly wet and visibility was low.…
So my boyfriend and I recently started dating. I have a vehicle that was insured. Insurance cost too much and I found it was just as easy to walk to work due to how close it was. But I didn't want to get rid of my car just yet, plus I'm still making payments on it as well. When we moved into our appartment together, I had it towed to my parking spot out back.
I was making a left hand legal turn on a green light, a driver came through the lane I was supposed to be going into ran the red and hit me head on as I was turning into my lane. When the officer came he was telling me that I was racing and driving recklessly because apparently there was reports of street racing in the area. I was not charged on the scene for this but I'm scared i am going to be…
I got a ticket for failure to surrender insurance because I did not have my new insurance stubs with me, just a bunch of expired ones. My policy number has not changed, so I asked the officer to just run the policy number so I could prove that I was in fact insured. He said they don't have that ability, handed me the ticket and reminded me that my car could have been impounded.
So I'm in a bit of a pickle and would appreciate if someone could clarify something for me.
I'm less than a month away (test on April 6th) from getting my full G license, and got a speeding ticket recently. The ticket was for 49km/h over the posted limit of 100km/h on the 403 in Oakville/Halton region, but was reduced from the initial ~60km/h over.
