Our friends in Queen's Park having passed Bill 118 2009 and its now having royal assent, the amended version of OHTA Section 78 is about to come into effect. The wording of Bill 118 is here: http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_ ... l_the_bill I think the penalties will include 6 demerit points -- correct? Do we know yet how much they're going to ding us for fines? And they will ding us -- the sloppily-written bill prohibits, possibly by accident, all satellite car radios and virtually all standard car radios (since they have display screens visible to the driver and are not specifically exempted like GPS units or collision avoidance systems, etc.), so any of us with one of those will be an easy target. Banning the use of hand-held cell phones was such a no-brainer that even the legislators could get that right -- but then they decided that the probably more dangerous hands-free phoning while driving can continue, which is silly. One might be forgiven for wondering if those deep thinkers at Queen's Park were at least as much interested in raising funds as they were in promoting safety.
Our friends in Queen's Park having passed Bill 118 2009 and its now having royal assent, the amended version of OHTA Section 78 is about to come into effect. The wording of Bill 118 is here:
I think the penalties will include 6 demerit points -- correct? Do we know yet how much they're going to ding us for fines?
And they will ding us -- the sloppily-written bill prohibits, possibly by accident, all satellite car radios and virtually all standard car radios (since they have display screens visible to the driver and are not specifically exempted like GPS units or collision avoidance systems, etc.), so any of us with one of those will be an easy target.
Banning the use of hand-held cell phones was such a no-brainer that even the legislators could get that right -- but then they decided that the probably more dangerous hands-free phoning while driving can continue, which is silly.
One might be forgiven for wondering if those deep thinkers at Queen's Park were at least as much interested in raising funds as they were in promoting safety.
Your hunch may be right, Bear, but about the best I've been able to find so far is the Canadian Press story from 30 September. http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CT ... b=CP24Home Details are hazy there, but CP seems to think that there will be fines "up to $500" and no points, which seems pretty light, to me. But then the story ends: "However, Ontario motorists using a banned cellphone could also be charged under careless driving laws and face fines, six demerit points, a driver's licence suspension and even jail time." Maybe having the new Section 78 and its associated regulations will make convictions under Careless more likely to stick??
Your hunch may be right, Bear, but about the best I've been able to find so far is the Canadian Press story from 30 September.
Details are hazy there, but CP seems to think that there will be fines "up to $500" and no points, which seems pretty light, to me. But then the story ends: "However, Ontario motorists using a banned cellphone could also be charged under careless driving laws and face fines, six demerit points, a driver's licence suspension and even jail time." Maybe having the new Section 78 and its associated regulations will make convictions under Careless more likely to stick??
I really hope it is $500, although I think that the "up to $500" may be because of the fact it is a Part 1 Certificate, which can have fines of up to $500, e.g. certain speeding offences, follow too closely, etc. I hope so. Just about everyone I know in Toronto has been in a collision caused by someone yakking on a cellphone.
I really hope it is $500, although I think that the "up to $500" may be because of the fact it is a Part 1 Certificate, which can have fines of up to $500, e.g. certain speeding offences, follow too closely, etc.
Proper1 wrote:
Maybe having the new Section 78 and its associated regulations will make convictions under Careless more likely to stick??
I hope so. Just about everyone I know in Toronto has been in a collision caused by someone yakking on a cellphone.
yes and no, the fail to move left is $490 and about 90% go to trial. I do not know if it is b/c the fine is so high or the 3 points? I rarely have a seatbelt at $110 2 points go to trial.
Radar Identified wrote:
I really hope it is $500, .
yes and no, the fail to move left is $490 and about 90% go to trial. I do not know if it is b/c the fine is so high or the 3 points? I rarely have a seatbelt at $110 2 points go to trial.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
yes and no, the fail to move left is $490 and about 90% go to trial. I do not know if it is b/c the fine is so high or the 3 points? I rarely have a seatbelt at $110 2 points go to trial. Maybe because EVERYONE knows better then not to wear the seatbelt, and thus they agree to charge when caught. Then comes the "Fail to move left" (for stopped emergency vehicles), which people see as "Fail to move left for no reason, because I don't even know the charge exists, let alone comes with a $500 fine", and thus fight it.
hwybear wrote:
Radar Identified wrote:
I really hope it is $500, .
yes and no, the fail to move left is $490 and about 90% go to trial. I do not know if it is b/c the fine is so high or the 3 points? I rarely have a seatbelt at $110 2 points go to trial.
Maybe because EVERYONE knows better then not to wear the seatbelt, and thus they agree to charge when caught. Then comes the "Fail to move left" (for stopped emergency vehicles), which people see as "Fail to move left for no reason, because I don't even know the charge exists, let alone comes with a $500 fine", and thus fight it.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Hi, my husband was in an accident last July. He was making a left hand turn into a side road and the other driver passed on the left side. His turn signals and taillights were not working. When the officer showed he checked the lights and the brake lights did work. Tickets were not issued.…
I was driving on highway 7 on a day when it had been raining, though wasn't at the time, going under 100 when while going on a bend in the road, I wafted out onto the gravel at the side of the road, and overcompensated for that by doing a hard turn back- which put me over…
i was travelling on the 401 (posted speed 100km/h) in the far left lane, when i caught up to a vehicle going ~110km/h. I patiently waited for the vehicle to move over a lane, but they did not. The vehicle behind me moved to the center lane to pass, but because he was a safe distance behind me, i…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural…
Was stopped for speeding. Officer put 95kmh in a posted 80kmh zone.... but failed to put in the section information - it was left out. Will that amount to a "law doesn't exist" fatal error? I asked because I cannot find "95kmh in a posted 80kmh zone" in the HTA....
I want to get some help with a speeding ticket i'm fighting.
On Jun 23, 2012 I was charged with speeding 106 in an 80 zone. I filed my ticket for trial on Jun 27, 2012. Late July i received my 'notice of trial' indicating a trial date for Jan 8, 2013. On August 1, 2012 I requested for disclosure…
How long does an officer/crown have to charge or alter a Highway Traffic Act charge?
An officer charged my mom under 141(6) but it should have been 141(5). Six months have passed already and the court date is set for a few months from now. My hope is that the crown will not be able…
