I got a ticket for obstruct plate on morning of Feb 4 2009. I was driving in front of a police officer who was wearing sun glasses. He pulled me over and insisted he cannot see my plate but it was just some dirt or salt. Is it possible for me to fight the ticket? Also I went on york.ca to check the ticket but it says that the offence not found. It has been over 10 days since i got the ticket so I want to know how long does it take normally for it to show up on the website and is there another way i could check the ticket?
Obstruct plate
I got a ticket for obstruct plate on morning of Feb 4 2009. I was driving in front of a police officer who was wearing sun glasses. He pulled me over and insisted he cannot see my plate but it was just some dirt or salt. Is it possible for me to fight the ticket? Also I went on york.ca to check the ticket but it says that the offence not found. It has been over 10 days since i got the ticket so I want to know how long does it take normally for it to show up on the website and is there another way i could check the ticket?
Re: Obstruct plate
Sounds like you were charged with 13(2). Please confirm that 13(2) is what you were charged with. It is in the middle of the yellow ticket, handwritten, following "Contrary to:". If the officer had laid the charge contrary to any of 13(3) then he wrote the wrong offense, and "Obstruct the plate" specifies any device, while 13(2) specifically states "...kept free from dirt...", unless 13(4) was used. The charge does not carry demerit points. What is the fine amount? If you really want to fight the charge, what you should have done is taken the photograph of your license at the day of the offence to prove that the plate is visible. Have you cleaned the plate yet? If not - don't. You have 15 days after the ticket was written to decide to fight or pay the ticket. Suggest look up and get the exact date, you should still have a couple days. If you blow your 15 days though you cannot fight the ticket anymore - it's gonna be an appeal. If you want to try to fight it you have to either hand in the ticket at the Provincial court office or mail it there (at the address on the back of your ticket), with the 3-rd option ("I wish to dispute my ticket" or similar) checked off. If you can get the message across that the plate was visible without the sunglasses (glare reflection on the shades, faded but visible numbers from salt, etc), then you can win this case. Insurance implications are nil. About york.ca - that is a municipal website. You were charged with a provincial offense. Neither your ticket nor your offense can be found there. You should find municipal by-laws there, including parking information and infraction notices, but not the provincial OHTA. To check the ticket you have to hand it to a cop, or to a court (clerk?), to look up. Give us some details, date, time of day, place, direction, weather conditions, etc... All of these can be important to decide whose eyes the sun was blinding, and whose rear plates were cast in the shade. You did mention LEO was wearing shades (no pun intended), was there a need for them?
Sounds like you were charged with 13(2).
Number plates, further violations
No other numbers to be exposed
13
Number plate to be kept clean
(2) Every number plate shall be kept free from dirt and obstruction and shall be affixed so that the entire number plate, including the numbers, is plainly visible at all times, and the view of the number plate shall not be obscured or obstructed by spare tires, bumper bars, any part of the vehicle, any attachments to the vehicle or the load carried. 1994, c. 27, s. 138 (7).
Offence
(4) Every person who contravenes subsection (2), (3), (3.0.1) or (3.1) is guilty of an offence. 1993, c. 31, s. 2 (5); 1996, c. 1, Sched. E, s. 2 (2); 1998, c. 38, s. 2 (2).
Please confirm that 13(2) is what you were charged with. It is in the middle of the yellow ticket, handwritten, following "Contrary to:". If the officer had laid the charge contrary to any of 13(3) then he wrote the wrong offense, and "Obstruct the plate" specifies any device, while 13(2) specifically states "...kept free from dirt...", unless 13(4) was used.
The charge does not carry demerit points. What is the fine amount? If you really want to fight the charge, what you should have done is taken the photograph of your license at the day of the offence to prove that the plate is visible. Have you cleaned the plate yet? If not - don't.
You have 15 days after the ticket was written to decide to fight or pay the ticket. Suggest look up and get the exact date, you should still have a couple days. If you blow your 15 days though you cannot fight the ticket anymore - it's gonna be an appeal. If you want to try to fight it you have to either hand in the ticket at the Provincial court office or mail it there (at the address on the back of your ticket), with the 3-rd option ("I wish to dispute my ticket" or similar) checked off.
If you can get the message across that the plate was visible without the sunglasses (glare reflection on the shades, faded but visible numbers from salt, etc), then you can win this case. Insurance implications are nil.
About york.ca - that is a municipal website. You were charged with a provincial offense. Neither your ticket nor your offense can be found there. You should find municipal by-laws there, including parking information and infraction notices, but not the provincial OHTA. To check the ticket you have to hand it to a cop, or to a court (clerk?), to look up.
Give us some details, date, time of day, place, direction, weather conditions, etc... All of these can be important to decide whose eyes the sun was blinding, and whose rear plates were cast in the shade. You did mention LEO was wearing shades (no pun intended), was there a need for them?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Ontario Traffic Ticket | Ontario Highway Traffic Act
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Ontario Traffic Ticket | Ontario Highway Traffic Act
Re: Obstruct plate
So this person is now the officer's optometrist?
racer wrote:
You did mention LEO was wearing shades (no pun intended), was there a need for them?
So this person is now the officer's optometrist?
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Re: Obstruct plate
So this person is now the officer's optometrist? Nope, as in "would you need shades on that day" was what I meant lol.
hwybear wrote:
racer wrote:
You did mention LEO was wearing shades (no pun intended), was there a need for them?
So this person is now the officer's optometrist?
Nope, as in "would you need shades on that day" was what I meant lol.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Ontario Traffic Ticket | Ontario Highway Traffic Act
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Ontario Traffic Ticket | Ontario Highway Traffic Act
Re: Obstruct plate
Sort half on topic.....coworked (a clone of me....i coached him :evil: ) came into court and had sunglasses on. :shock: I mentioned it to him.....turned out there is new presciption type glasses that react to sunlight and go dark and then go clear once indoors after about 5min.....interesting!
Sort half on topic.....coworked (a clone of me....i coached him 
) came into court and had sunglasses on. 
I mentioned it to him.....turned out there is new presciption type glasses that react to sunlight and go dark and then go clear once indoors after about 5min.....interesting!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Re: Obstruct plate
Oh yeah, I saw te commercials of those on the TV a few times. Useless things for me, I don't need glasses (knock on wood). But I doubt that these self-tinting shades come in this shape:
Oh yeah, I saw te commercials of those on the TV a few times. Useless things for me, I don't need glasses (knock on wood). But I doubt that these self-tinting shades come in this shape:
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Ontario Traffic Ticket | Ontario Highway Traffic Act
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Ontario Traffic Ticket | Ontario Highway Traffic Act
Re: Obstruct plate
The offence notice shows 13(2) and the fine amount is $110. Unfortunately I had already clean my plates so I wont have any prove. By "insurance implications are nil", you mean only if I fight the ticket or not fight the ticket?
The offence notice shows 13(2) and the fine amount is $110. Unfortunately I had already clean my plates so I wont have any prove. By "insurance implications are nil", you mean only if I fight the ticket or not fight the ticket?
Re: Obstruct plate
Normally if you win the fight, your ticket is null and void, so no insurance implications whatever the ticket you received (and successfully defended). The offenses that have insurance implications are: speeding, Careless driving, DUI, even Seatbelt, anything that has demerit points associated with it! You can check with "Demerit Points" link we have on the bottom of the site which violations have demerit points associated with them. Obviously, a seatbelt ticket won't increase your insurance rate as much as Careless or Speeding 50+ might. These offenses are termed "Moving violations", that means that the vehicle was in motion (and therefore had a chance of being involved in a collision). Some companies have different policies, such as allowing the 1-st minor ticket slide or whatnot. Some tickets have no insurance implications (like parking tickets). These tickets are termed "non-moving violations" and will not increase your insurance rates. This can be "Imporper brake light", etc. This is not a "Moving violation", it has no points associated with it. Whether you fight or not, your insurance will not (or I should say, should not) increase, but some companies have different policies.. Give them an anonymous call and ask whether such an offence will increase your insurance. By anonymous I mean dial their 1-800 number from a Bell payphone (it's free for you, but not for them, but what do you care anyway?) and not tell them your name (just in case I was wrong here)... Normally we would want to fight a traffic ticket: a) When you are not guilty b) not to loose the license c) to avoid insurance hike Since there are no points associated with it, b) is gone. This is not a moving violation, but I do not even know what insurance company you're with (quite frankly I don't really need to know - you need to deal with them), so c) is out of question again. That leaves us with the question of whether or not you are completely innocent. You do not need to prove complete innocence. All you have to do is to cast a reasonable doubt as to whether the officer was in a position to clearly see your license plate. If he was wearing sunglasses, and you were both driving towards the sun (so, eastward in the morning, southward midday, or west in the afternoon), then you can cast a reasonable doubt as to LEO's ability to properly see the license plates that were cast in a shade by the car, while LEO was wearing sunglasses further reducing his ability to see darkened objects.
After8 wrote:
The offence notice shows 13(2) and the fine amount is $110. Unfortunately I had already clean my plates so I wont have any prove. By "insurance implications are nil", you mean only if I fight the ticket or not fight the ticket?
Normally if you win the fight, your ticket is null and void, so no insurance implications whatever the ticket you received (and successfully defended). The offenses that have insurance implications are: speeding, Careless driving, DUI, even Seatbelt, anything that has demerit points associated with it! You can check with "Demerit Points" link we have on the bottom of the site which violations have demerit points associated with them. Obviously, a seatbelt ticket won't increase your insurance rate as much as Careless or Speeding 50+ might. These offenses are termed "Moving violations", that means that the vehicle was in motion (and therefore had a chance of being involved in a collision). Some companies have different policies, such as allowing the 1-st minor ticket slide or whatnot.
Some tickets have no insurance implications (like parking tickets). These tickets are termed "non-moving violations" and will not increase your insurance rates. This can be "Imporper brake light", etc.
This is not a "Moving violation", it has no points associated with it. Whether you fight or not, your insurance will not (or I should say, should not) increase, but some companies have different policies.. Give them an anonymous call and ask whether such an offence will increase your insurance. By anonymous I mean dial their 1-800 number from a Bell payphone (it's free for you, but not for them, but what do you care anyway?) and not tell them your name (just in case I was wrong here)...
Normally we would want to fight a traffic ticket:
a) When you are not guilty
b) not to loose the license
c) to avoid insurance hike
Since there are no points associated with it, b) is gone. This is not a moving violation, but I do not even know what insurance company you're with (quite frankly I don't really need to know - you need to deal with them), so c) is out of question again. That leaves us with the question of whether or not you are completely innocent.
You do not need to prove complete innocence. All you have to do is to cast a reasonable doubt as to whether the officer was in a position to clearly see your license plate. If he was wearing sunglasses, and you were both driving towards the sun (so, eastward in the morning, southward midday, or west in the afternoon), then you can cast a reasonable doubt as to LEO's ability to properly see the license plates that were cast in a shade by the car, while LEO was wearing sunglasses further reducing his ability to see darkened objects.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Ontario Traffic Ticket | Ontario Highway Traffic Act
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Ontario Traffic Ticket | Ontario Highway Traffic Act
Re: Obstruct plate
What about a ticket for the very top of the word Ontario being covered by the dealership plate holder , can they actually give a ticket for such an assinine reason ? What is best way to fight it ?
What about a ticket for the very top of the word Ontario being covered by the dealership plate holder , can they actually give a ticket for such an assinine reason ? What is best way to fight it ?
Re: Obstruct plate
Any sort of alteration to the plate can be ticketed - this includes dealer signs, transparent/translucent covers, even if a kid took a magic marker to the plate. I'm not sure if the old "fixit" tickets are still valid - the ones where you had a certain number of days to show that you are now in compliance with the law and no fine would be given. The courts are now discouraging several types of those goodwill tickets, or so I'm told by a TPS officer. They've been around for a while; I remember first seeing one in the mid-90s. Since I have 20/15 vision and don't need corrective lenses, I felt dorky wearing clear glasses indoors. Now I wear shooting glasses in the sun which look even more dorky to anyone except gun nuts and Earl Strickland. 8)
CoolChick wrote:
What about a ticket for the very top of the word Ontario being covered by the dealership plate holder , can they actually give a ticket for such an assinine reason ? What is best way to fight it ?
Any sort of alteration to the plate can be ticketed - this includes dealer signs, transparent/translucent covers, even if a kid took a magic marker to the plate. I'm not sure if the old "fixit" tickets are still valid - the ones where you had a certain number of days to show that you are now in compliance with the law and no fine would be given. The courts are now discouraging several types of those goodwill tickets, or so I'm told by a TPS officer.
hwybear wrote:
Sort half on topic.....coworked (a clone of me....i coached him
They've been around for a while; I remember first seeing one in the mid-90s. Since I have 20/15 vision and don't need corrective lenses, I felt dorky wearing clear glasses indoors.
Now I wear shooting glasses in the sun which look even more dorky to anyone except gun nuts and Earl Strickland. 
Re: Obstruct plate
Doesn't this type of ticket fly in the face of our rights? Doesn't any 'crime' have to have a valid cause of action? For instance, doesn't a 'crime' have to have caused harm loss or injury to a person ? I find many of these traffic tickets to be quite unlawful. How does a licence plate with few bugs for example stuck over a number constitute a person having been harmed in any way? Surely this can't be right ! Due to recent happenings on another matter I am really getting to the point where I firmly believe our rights and freedoms are being abused regularly for monetary gain by provinces, courts and the like. Anyone else feel this way ?
Doesn't this type of ticket fly in the face of our rights? Doesn't any 'crime' have to have a valid cause of action?
For instance, doesn't a 'crime' have to have caused harm loss or injury to a person ? I find many of these traffic tickets to be quite unlawful. How does a licence plate with few bugs for example stuck over a number constitute a person having been harmed in any way? Surely this can't be right !
Due to recent happenings on another matter I am really getting to the point where I firmly believe our rights and freedoms are being abused regularly for monetary gain by provinces, courts and the like. Anyone else feel this way ?
-
Plenderzoosh
- Jr. Member
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:52 am
-
Posting Awards
Re: Obstruct plate
Having a dirty plate isn't a criminal offense (no criminal record associated with it obviously) so therefore it is not a crime. Yeah that's basically the definition of a crime: something that the government deems to be a criminal offense.
Having a dirty plate isn't a criminal offense (no criminal record associated with it obviously) so therefore it is not a crime. Yeah that's basically the definition of a crime: something that the government deems to be a criminal offense.
Re: Obstruct plate
But isn't it deemed to be an offence ? Isn't all statute law supposed to be based on common law to protect rights and freedoms ? What I mean is.... what actually defines a valid charge criminal or otherwise ? Shouldn't we be told why a bug on our licence plate is an offence and if it is an offence shouldn't it be due to the fact that it has caused harm injury or loss? Traffic Acts appear to conflict with common law and bill of rights which is what our laws and statutes are supposed to protect. I thought all Acts were supposed to reflect our rights as per common law. The more I read the more I understand and the more I understand the more violation of our rights is what I see. A dirty plate may not be criminal but I think the Act that tells us it is an offence most definately is, imo. I thought Common Law depicted whether or not something was a crime and governments are supposed to uphold the elements of Common Law.... and this doesn't appear to be the case with many Acts passed thru parliament. I really think we are being hoodwinked on many many levels. i also find it odd that for Common Law direct crimes/offences the penalty is jail, probation etc and possibly a fine also. But the penalty for all Act/Statute offences is always a monetary penalty. Does anyone else find this interesting ?
But isn't it deemed to be an offence ? Isn't all statute law supposed to be based on common law to protect rights and freedoms ? What I mean is.... what actually defines a valid charge criminal or otherwise ?
Shouldn't we be told why a bug on our licence plate is an offence and if it is an offence shouldn't it be due to the fact that it has caused harm injury or loss? Traffic Acts appear to conflict with common law and bill of rights which is what our laws and statutes are supposed to protect. I thought all Acts were supposed to reflect our rights as per common law. The more I read the more I understand and the more I understand the more violation of our rights is what I see.
A dirty plate may not be criminal but I think the Act that tells us it is an offence most definately is, imo.
I thought Common Law depicted whether or not something was a crime and governments are supposed to uphold the elements of Common Law.... and this doesn't appear to be the case with many Acts passed thru parliament. I really think we are being hoodwinked on many many levels. i also find it odd that for Common Law direct crimes/offences the penalty is jail, probation etc and possibly a fine also. But the penalty for all Act/Statute offences is always a monetary penalty. Does anyone else find this interesting ?
Re: Obstruct plate
Just for fun, I've been taking note of rear number plates recently. (Many cars pass me on the highway: I am a boring driver.) It's remarkably consistent -- just about 60 percent have some part of the wording on the plate obscured and the drivers are thus vulnerable to a conviction. I'm not talking about the "dirt" provision -- every driver can be nailed for that, practically all the time -- but the common number plate frames that many cars carry. My own plates are OK in that respect because I got rid of the dealer frames when I realized the danger, but because of the quality of their construction ("shoddy" comes to mind), the word "Ontario" on the rear plate after years of exposure on a succession of vehicles is not easy to read because of rust. The Act says nothing about rust. Would "and obstruction" in 13(2) be sufficient to get me? Can I get these plates, with this number, replaced? (They are not vanity plates: nothing that I am vain about would lend itself to advertisement on the highways.)
Just for fun, I've been taking note of rear number plates recently. (Many cars pass me on the highway: I am a boring driver.) It's remarkably consistent -- just about 60 percent have some part of the wording on the plate obscured and the drivers are thus vulnerable to a conviction. I'm not talking about the "dirt" provision -- every driver can be nailed for that, practically all the time -- but the common number plate frames that many cars carry.
My own plates are OK in that respect because I got rid of the dealer frames when I realized the danger, but because of the quality of their construction ("shoddy" comes to mind), the word "Ontario" on the rear plate after years of exposure on a succession of vehicles is not easy to read because of rust. The Act says nothing about rust. Would "and obstruction" in 13(2) be sufficient to get me? Can I get these plates, with this number, replaced? (They are not vanity plates: nothing that I am vain about would lend itself to advertisement on the highways.)
Re: Obstruct plate
We have an old plate that holds sentimental value (first plate ever issued) and we did get a warning about the rust, but no ticket. I have since cleaned up the majority of the rust and moved the worse of the set to the front, but now the paint looks very faded, though still legible. I'm also curious if non-vanity-plates can be replaced, and whether we would be allowed to keep the old ones.
We have an old plate that holds sentimental value (first plate ever issued) and we did get a warning about the rust, but no ticket. I have since cleaned up the majority of the rust and moved the worse of the set to the front, but now the paint looks very faded, though still legible. I'm also curious if non-vanity-plates can be replaced, and whether we would be allowed to keep the old ones.
Re: Obstruct plate
The word of "ONTARIO" missing and or blocked is obstruction. There are other provinces and states that have plates that are white background and blue letters. Rusted plates I generally issue a report in notice to go get new plates. It's funny, most often it is with older drivers....not wanting to spend $20 on new plates, yet have the plates attached to a brand new plus $30k car.
The word of "ONTARIO" missing and or blocked is obstruction. There are other provinces and states that have plates that are white background and blue letters.
Rusted plates I generally issue a report in notice to go get new plates. It's funny, most often it is with older drivers....not wanting to spend $20 on new plates, yet have the plates attached to a brand new plus $30k car.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Re: Obstruct plate
What/who is actually being obstructed by being unable to see the word Ontario ?
What/who is actually being obstructed by being unable to see the word Ontario ?
Re: Obstruct plate
HwyBear, do you know if that $20 gets you the same number or are you issued a completely new one? No word even has to be obstructed to be able to get a ticket (conviction is another matter) - even something like a trailer hitch ball covering a small bit of the border would technically be illegal. There are novelty plates available that look very real aside from a small difference that allows them to be legally sold - something like "Not for road use" instead of "Keep it beautiful," the shop's name instead of "Ontario," or some decorative border instead of the solid blue line. Some sort of partial covering may make a novelty plate pass as a real one. The clear/translucent coverings can increase glare when trying to read the plate, reduce the reflective properties for reading them at night (especially if they are scratched up), or even have "evasion" gadgets built in like turning opaque with an electrical charge, or the weird magnifying-glass covers that are supposed to thwart 407 cameras. EDIT: "Keep it beautiful"? Er...I mean "Yours to discover"
HwyBear, do you know if that $20 gets you the same number or are you issued a completely new one?
CoolChick wrote:
Thank you HwyBear.... the word Ontario could clearly be read in this case...just tip of the letters was covered by dea;ership cover .
What/who is actually being obstructed by being unable to see the word Ontario ?
Apparently you can also be ticketed for any of the part of 'Yours To Discover' the Ontario slogan too.....how is this a crime.... I am just asking as it perturbs me as to how a person can be fined for such a frivolity.
No word even has to be obstructed to be able to get a ticket (conviction is another matter) - even something like a trailer hitch ball covering a small bit of the border would technically be illegal.
There are novelty plates available that look very real aside from a small difference that allows them to be legally sold - something like "Not for road use" instead of "Keep it beautiful," the shop's name instead of "Ontario," or some decorative border instead of the solid blue line. Some sort of partial covering may make a novelty plate pass as a real one.
The clear/translucent coverings can increase glare when trying to read the plate, reduce the reflective properties for reading them at night (especially if they are scratched up), or even have "evasion" gadgets built in like turning opaque with an electrical charge, or the weird magnifying-glass covers that are supposed to thwart 407 cameras.
EDIT: "Keep it beautiful"? Er...I mean "Yours to discover"
Re: Obstruct plate
I get a kick out of the crappy paint quality on the newer "florescent" plates. Over and over again, I see the blue lettering has faded almost completely off the plate. Are we really supposed to pay $20 for a mistake the MTO made? Can't help but suspect yet another government tactic by making us spend MORE money replacing worn out plates. I have a vanity plate from the '80s and the paint is still in perfect condition. Might not reflect laser quite as well as the new ones, but much better paint quality?
I get a kick out of the crappy paint quality on the newer "florescent" plates. Over and over again, I see the blue lettering has faded almost completely off the plate. Are we really supposed to pay $20 for a mistake the MTO made? Can't help but suspect yet another government tactic by making us spend MORE money replacing worn out plates.
I have a vanity plate from the '80s and the paint is still in perfect condition. Might not reflect laser quite as well as the new ones, but much better paint quality?
Re: Obstruct plate
Bookm...everything is made cheaper these days...from car frames to furniture to clothing etc.... nothing surprise me anymore!
Bookm...everything is made cheaper these days...from car frames to furniture to clothing etc.... nothing surprise me anymore!
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
-
Reflections
- High Authority
- Posts: 1489
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
Re: Obstruct plate
Bear, to the best of your knowledge, if I was to touch up the rusty plate on my own, is it a ticket?
hwybear wrote:
Bookm...everything is made cheaper these days...from car frames to furniture to clothing etc.... nothing surprise me anymore!
Bear, to the best of your knowledge, if I was to touch up the rusty plate on my own, is it a ticket?
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
Re: Obstruct plate
:lol: :lol: Did someone click the edit button on CoolChick's post by mistake? (I quoted the original, and now it looks like she answered her own question :shock: ) Bear, to the best of your knowledge, if I was to touch up the rusty plate on my own, is it a ticket? Good question. I've thought about doing that to my own, but would have to special-order the reflective paint unless I can get some connections through my old sign-shop job. I'm thinking that, while technically illegal, you should be fine if you do a good job. You'll likely get a ticket if it looks visibly altered (e.g., don't use a blue Sharpie).
Did someone click the edit button on CoolChick's post by mistake? (I quoted the original, and now it looks like she answered her own question )
Reflections wrote:
hwybear wrote:
Bookm...everything is made cheaper these days...from car frames to furniture to clothing etc.... nothing surprise me anymore!
Bear, to the best of your knowledge, if I was to touch up the rusty plate on my own, is it a ticket?
Good question. I've thought about doing that to my own, but would have to special-order the reflective paint unless I can get some connections through my old sign-shop job.
I'm thinking that, while technically illegal, you should be fine if you do a good job. You'll likely get a ticket if it looks visibly altered (e.g., don't use a blue Sharpie).
Re: Obstruct plate
The most important, I'm guessing is for the public to see the plate, in wondering why there are many reasons.. - hit and run - robberies - abductions / AMBER ALERTS etc.. Proper plate information is critical to locating and apprehending the vehicle and persons inside as quickly as possible. In various parts of our Province the level of out-of-province visitors is higher, but some out of province plates look very similiar. here is one example of a similiar plate... IT WOULD APPEAR THAT SOMEONE HAS LOGGED INTO MY ACCOUNT ????? I DID NOT POST THIS POST...... any takers ?????
CoolChick wrote:
What/who is actually being obstructed by being unable to see the word Ontario ?
The most important, I'm guessing is for the public to see the plate, in wondering why there are many reasons..
- hit and run
- robberies
- abductions / AMBER ALERTS
etc..
Proper plate information is critical to locating and apprehending the vehicle and persons inside as quickly as possible. In various parts of our Province the level of out-of-province visitors is higher, but some out of province plates look very similiar.
here is one example of a similiar plate...
IT WOULD APPEAR THAT SOMEONE HAS LOGGED INTO MY ACCOUNT ?????
I DID NOT POST THIS POST...... any takers ?????
Re: Obstruct plate
Don't worry, my guess is that one of the admins/mods did it by accident. They have an "Edit" button for every post on here which is right next to the "Quote" button.
Don't worry, my guess is that one of the admins/mods did it by accident. They have an "Edit" button for every post on here which is right next to the "Quote" button.
Re: Obstruct plate
Actually that is not lawful or true... Our laws and rights are based on pre-government law. Thats known as Common Law. Governments are elected by the people for the people...governments cannot (they don't tell us this of course) govern if a person or people do not accept its governance. Also statutes should be based on the law that preceded government as these laws cannot be refuted. Therefore all subsequent statutes (acts) are simply legislations that are only bound by a person accepting it...it is a two way street. Just like any traffic ticket if you don't 'accept it' it is not valid....and BY LAW a plea cannot be entered for you regardless of what you are told. Only the accused can plea.... if any plea is made without your consent the person making that plea is now responisible for your ticket. If a JP or magistrate enters a plea for you then they are now acting as your counsel and can be fired for misrepresenting you.
Plenderzoosh wrote:
Having a dirty plate isn't a criminal offense (no criminal record associated with it obviously) so therefore it is not a crime. Yeah that's basically the definition of a crime: something that the government deems to be a criminal offense.
Actually that is not lawful or true...
Our laws and rights are based on pre-government law. Thats known as Common Law. Governments are elected by the people for the people...governments cannot (they don't tell us this of course) govern if a person or people do not accept its governance. Also statutes should be based on the law that preceded government as these laws cannot be refuted. Therefore all subsequent statutes (acts) are simply legislations that are only bound by a person accepting it...it is a two way street.
Just like any traffic ticket if you don't 'accept it' it is not valid....and BY LAW a plea cannot be entered for you regardless of what you are told. Only the accused can plea.... if any plea is made without your consent the person making that plea is now responisible for your ticket. If a JP or magistrate enters a plea for you then they are now acting as your counsel and can be fired for misrepresenting you.
Re: Obstruct plate
CoolChick - YES, I take the blame on that incorrect button press.....went to "quote" your words....not add to them by hitting the "edit" button. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: *********************************** this was meant to be mine The most important, I'm guessing is for the public to see the plate, in wondering why there are many reasons.. - hit and run - robberies - abductions / AMBER ALERTS etc.. Proper plate information is critical to locating and apprehending the vehicle and persons inside as quickly as possible. In various parts of our Province the level of out-of-province visitors is higher, but some out of province plates look very similiar. here is one example of a similiar plate...
CoolChick - YES, I take the blame on that incorrect button press.....went to "quote" your words....not add to them by hitting the "edit" button. 
***********************************
this was meant to be mine
What/who is actually being obstructed by being unable to see the word Ontario ?
The most important, I'm guessing is for the public to see the plate, in wondering why there are many reasons..
- hit and run
- robberies
- abductions / AMBER ALERTS
etc..
Proper plate information is critical to locating and apprehending the vehicle and persons inside as quickly as possible. In various parts of our Province the level of out-of-province visitors is higher, but some out of province plates look very similiar.
here is one example of a similiar plate...
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Re: Obstruct plate
My father inquired about obtaining replacement plates for his van, as his are rusty, but keeping the same number and was told that it would be treated as a "Personalized Plate Replacement" and cost $93.50. I assume the additional charge is because the plate is not in sequence with the main line, that produces new plates, and requires the "special line" for personalized plates.
Squishy wrote:
We have an old plate that holds sentimental value (first plate ever issued) and we did get a warning about the rust, but no ticket. I have since cleaned up the majority of the rust and moved the worse of the set to the front, but now the paint looks very faded, though still legible. I'm also curious if non-vanity-plates can be replaced, and whether we would be allowed to keep the old ones.
My father inquired about obtaining replacement plates for his van, as his are rusty, but keeping the same number and was told that it would be treated as a "Personalized Plate Replacement" and cost $93.50. I assume the additional charge is because the plate is not in sequence with the main line, that produces new plates, and requires the "special line" for personalized plates.
Re: Obstruct plate
I thought $20 was too good to be true.
I thought $20 was too good to be true.
Re: Obstruct plate
The most important, I'm guessing is for the public to see the plate, in wondering why there are many reasons.. - hit and run - robberies - abductions / AMBER ALERTS etc.. Proper plate information is critical to locating and apprehending the vehicle and persons inside as quickly as possible. In various parts of our Province the level of out-of-province visitors is higher, but some out of province plates look very similiar. Well I can understand a licence plate being a tool to identify a vehicle....but a plate doesn't need to be registered or have a province name slapped across it in order to be identifiable. I mean, you could stick anything on it for it to have a uniqueness that could be identified. Usually criminals who abduct children or commit robberies steal a car to commit the crime...so the plates registered owner gets you no closer to finding the criminal. The word Ontario is of no relevance at all really in such situations.... and has no bearing on a crime. Soon they will be fining someone for having a worn drivers licence...and then charging them money to get a new one....
hwybear wrote:
CoolChick - YES, I take the blame on that incorrect button press.....went to "quote" your words....not add to them by hitting the "edit" button.
***********************************
this was meant to be mine
What/who is actually being obstructed by being unable to see the word Ontario ?
The most important, I'm guessing is for the public to see the plate, in wondering why there are many reasons..
- hit and run
- robberies
- abductions / AMBER ALERTS
etc..
Proper plate information is critical to locating and apprehending the vehicle and persons inside as quickly as possible. In various parts of our Province the level of out-of-province visitors is higher, but some out of province plates look very similiar.
Well I can understand a licence plate being a tool to identify a vehicle....but a plate doesn't need to be registered or have a province name slapped across it in order to be identifiable. I mean, you could stick anything on it for it to have a uniqueness that could be identified. Usually criminals who abduct children or commit robberies steal a car to commit the crime...so the plates registered owner gets you no closer to finding the criminal. The word Ontario is of no relevance at all really in such situations.... and has no bearing on a crime. Soon they will be fining someone for having a worn drivers licence...and then charging them money to get a new one....
Re: Obstruct plate
Not everything is about guns and robbers. I would say in the majority of cases where a plate needs to be run (all traffic stops, hit-and-run reports, surveillance tapes, etc.) the plates are valid and being used by the registered owner. Why shouldn't they? That sounds reasonable to me. If it is worn to the point of being hard to read, it should be replaced.
CoolChick wrote:
Well I can understand a licence plate being a tool to identify a vehicle....but a plate doesn't need to be registered or have a province name slapped across it in order to be identifiable. I mean, you could stick anything on it for it to have a uniqueness that could be identified. Usually criminals who abduct children or commit robberies steal a car to commit the crime...so the plates registered owner gets you no closer to finding the criminal. The word Ontario is of no relevance at all really in such situations.... and has no bearing on a crime.
Not everything is about guns and robbers. I would say in the majority of cases where a plate needs to be run (all traffic stops, hit-and-run reports, surveillance tapes, etc.) the plates are valid and being used by the registered owner.
CoolChick wrote:
Soon they will be fining someone for having a worn drivers licence...and then charging them money to get a new one....
Why shouldn't they? That sounds reasonable to me. If it is worn to the point of being hard to read, it should be replaced.
Similar Topics
Featured Topics
driving to US - questions
Planning on going to the US (NY from TO) for about a week, next year;
so some questions and points,
1> Do I need to get special cover from my insurance
2> My car speedo is in KM's , would it help to put a couple of stickers to note where the MPH limits are
3> IF I get a ticket, do I have to go back to NY, to deal with it?
4> If I ignore it can I be extradited or fined…
HTA 144(18.1) - photo evidence of "approaching" the intersection
I will be going to trial for my red light camera offence.
I'll be arguing two issues, centered on the fact that there are two essential elements of 144(18) - a) a vehicle approaching the intersection shall stop; and b) the vehicle shall not proceed until green. Both essential elements must be contravened beyond a reasonable doubt to be an offence.
1) My ticket says I (being the owner) am "charged…
RIDE program, your rights, weigh in
I know that the RIDE program has been covered extensively in these great forums, but I have a question about the stop itself:
I recently was stopped for a RIDE Program and the officer asked me to roll the window down all of the way (I had it at half and could easily communicate with them). I told them that I could hear them just fine and they insisted I roll it down all of the way. Again I told…
Fail To Surrender Valid Permit for Motor Vehicle
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…
Underglow Lighting
Hey! I'm from Sudbury Ontario. Hope that general talk is fine for this subject
I am very serious about looking for exact ruling about underfacing lighting
Section 14 clearly states:
Red and blue lights to the front restricted
(14.1) In addition to the lighting requirements in this Part, a police department vehicle may carry lamps that cast red and blue lights, but no other motor vehicle shall carry…
can i represent my dad for red light camera violation
hi all,
i was driving my dad's car when i was caught by the red light camera in Brampton. My dad would've to take time off work to go ask for a trial and then go to one.
Can i represent him? if yes, what do i need to do?
thank you
144(18) - Alleged rolling stop on a red light.
I was pulled over and told I went through a red light during a right turn. I learned through a friend who is a police constable that the one who pulled me over is new to the job (under a year, and possibly even the first month or two of real duty).
I was given a ticket for $180. I have some questions:
(1) Is this offense automatically associated with 3 demerit points? I see no mention of them on…
bluetooth devices / cell phones / distraction
so I have a cell phone on a dash mount, (so I can see it)
I have a bluetooth handsfree in the visor.
If I'm driving, and the phone goes, if I press the button on the bluetooth device to take a call and just talk into the mic
Will you be ticketed ?
I think you can set it for auto or voice answer but my phone doesnt support that
Also I heard somewhere that you can't have the phone in sight ?
Is talking…
Confused about something
I got a ticket for 'Disobey Stop Sign' in November of 2013 (in York Region), requested disclosure and went to court in August of 2014. At my first appearance, I did not plea but requested an ajournment to to consult legal advice. The JOP set the next appearance in September.
I contacted a paralegal about my options. He told me that on my next appearance, if the police officer did not show, the…
Grounds for appeal ?
I had a trial and found guilty, but the trial seemed to go wrong since the beginning.
The JP asked me if i am intending to take the stand- I said NO.
I asked how to submit my evidence-documents and photos.
JP said-i have to take the stand if i want to submit evidence.(Now i am finding this is wrong-i could introduce my evidence during cross examination and my defense would be much stronger)
Me-OK i…
Quebec also has "Street Racing" legislation
Ottawa, Canada (AHN) - Beginning Tuesday, or April Fool's Day 2008, fines on Quebec drivers caught overspeeding will be doubled. It is not only the money penalty that will go up, but also demerit points.
The new law, Bill 42, is similar to Ontario's street racing rule. It stipulates fines for motorists who drive at over 40 km/h at under 60 km/h zones, speed at 50 km/h at 60 to 90 km/h areas and…
Jim Kenzie on truck Speed limiters
www.wheels.ca/Columnists/article/515144
Make big trucks go slower and the roads will become safer.
Obvious, isn't it? It's also obvious when you look out the window that the world is flat.
Last Monday, truckers in Ontario tried to mount a convoy to Queen's Park to show their opposition to electronic speed limiters. These devices, electronic chips in trucks' engine management systems, restrict speeds…
notice of motion?
I received a ticket for 40 over in Mississauga, I called in to set a trial date, which is sometime in January.
THe other day I received a letter in the mail labelled as 'notice of motion'
it states that i go into court on the date specified ....
i do not understand what this is for...
any input?
Courts have lost jursdiction
In my case, the Crown stated that there was a defect on the Certificate of Offense and essentially the Courts have lost jursdiction.
What exactly does that mean?
Also, the Crown submitted a white form. Im not sure what that is.
Can someone explain what that form is?
Failure to stop for a school bus
I was out on a four lane highway around Orangeville Ontario and I noticed a school bus coming south (I was going north). I kept my eyes on the bus in case it was going to stop. As I approached it, it was slowing down a little, but no lights, and especially no arm with the STOP sign. As I was just about to pass the bus, I still did not see the lights, nor did I see the STOP sign.
Next thing I…
Trial/disclosure strategy for Speeding ticket
Hey everyone first off I'd like to say great website, I have been reading and it is very useful 
I'm posting today as I'd like to get some feedback on my situation and have a couple of questions. Please excuse the vagueness in some areas - I don't want my case to be identifiable given the small town.
So I was driving up north and was pulled over by an OPP SUV for doing 31 over. Cop drove past me,…
deciding what to do
Driving on a 80km/hr highway the car ahead hits the brakes and slows to 55, l slow down right behind him no reason to slow down traffic was moving between 80 and 90. I notice the driver is on the phone and looking through papers on the passenger seat. He begins to start to go a opp officer drives by doing 80 plus in oncoming lane turns around and says l was following to close. Told him what was…
Slid into a car at intersection - Careless Driving.
My son was making a right turn at the intersection he had a green so slowed down looked and proceeded into the turn. It was pouring rain and the was a big pool of water as he got arround the curb. He tried to keep the car going sharp right however it slid into the car making a left turn. the lane he was turning into is very narrow and at a very busy corner. He paniced and left the scene only…
Turn Not in Safety - Collision
Hi,
I had an collision the other day. I was turing left and ran into a car going straight in the opposite direction. The insurance company has already determined that I'm at fault, since I made the left turn. But I'm wondering whether I should go on trail and at least I might get rid of the ticket. The ticket was under 142(1)
I was told that if I go on court, both the guy I hit and the officer who…
3 day suspension / roadside A
question for a friend of mine.....says she got a 3 day suspension for giving a A on a roadside. Thing is she wasnt driving. She is a g2 driver and the car was parked in a parking lot, she just ran out to get something and turned the car on. Can a 3 day be issued if you arent driving on a highway - (I've read for impaired it doesnt matter, but 3 day isnt criminal)? And is there any way to…
Golf carts
I can't find the category for this post so I'm posting it here.
Two questions...
1. Are golf carts considered a 'vehicle' under the Highway traffic act? I know carts can't drive across roads or on roads but if you try to bring one from the USA into Canada they are considered a 'vehicle'.
2. If you are on private property are you allowed to carry 'opened' alcohol in your golf cart? I know golf…
Disobey Sign - 182(2) - No signature on ticket?
I got pulled over (along with about 10 other cars) for going through a road closed sign. I had just pulled out of a parking lot pretty much right beside the road closed sign, and with about 4 cars behind me there wasn't much I could do but go through, so I think I have a good chance of fighting it. However, on my ticket under the Signature of issuing Provincial Offences Officer, it's left…
An absolute nightmare
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 area and I sometimes see vehicles doing mail delivery. The vehicle then started accelerating and…
34 over in community safety zone - auto summons
I was pulled over yesterday in a community safety zone and told I was doing 84 in a 50. When i passed the officer I looked at my odometer and I was only doing 64. I was given a summons on the spot to appear in court at the end of June. Do I have any chance in this if it comes down to his word over mine. I was in the car alone but have travelled these same roads every day, twice a day for 6 years…
passenger exit of vehicle
who is at fault when :a) a passenger opens door and jumps out of vehicle onto the road with traffic. b) he gets hit by a car travelling in the adjoining lane. c) traffic lights were green. d) pedestrian crossing was further up and indicated "no crossing" light e) the vehicle that he exited from leaves the scene as soon as accident occurred. f) no charges have been laid after police filed report…
