Officer forgot to sign the ticket.

Moderators: Reflections, admin, hwybear, Radar Identified, Decatur, bend

Heatbag
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined:

Officer forgot to sign the ticket.

Unread post by Heatbag on

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 surrender DL) but not the other (red light). My question is.. Does the officer have to sign both tickets with badge number and all. Or is one ticket good enough?.. Is this worth a fight?


daggx
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 392
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by daggx on

If the tickets are hand written, as opposed to computer generated, then yes the officer has to sign both tickets. An unsigned ticket is a considered a fatal error, and thus the best thing for you to do is ignore the unsigned ticket. Here is a link that talks about what to do if your ticket has a fatal error, the article talks about what to do when the set fine on your ticket is wrong but the same principle applies to an unsigned ticket as well. http://ticketcombat.com/offences/fines.php#forceerror

You can also use the search function on this site to search for the terms "force fatal error" and "London vs Young" that should bring up a number of threads from people who have used this strategy to defeat tickets with fatal errors on them.


argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by argyll on

The officer has to sign the actual ticket that goes to court. The part that goes to the driver does not require a signature.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

There are two parts to the ticket... the Certificate of Offence which the officer files with the court and the Notice of Offence which the officer gives to you.

The Certificiate of Offence definitely needs to be signed. If it is not signed, then it is a fatal error. But the only way to determine whether it is signed or not, is to go to the Clerk's officer and request a copy of it.

Now I know @argyll above says the Notice of Offence that you received does not need to be signed. However I think (but am not 100% sure) that it also must be signed...

I believe Provincial Offences Act section 3(2)(b) which says that it must be signed:
"3(2) A provincial offences officer who believes that one or more persons have committed an offence may issue, by completing and signing in the form prescribed under section 13, (b) either an offence notice indicating the set fine for the offence or a summons. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 4, s. 1 (2)."

Provincial Offences Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.33
PART I - COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS BY CERTIFICATE OF OFFENCE
Certificate of offence and offence notice
3. (1) In addition to the procedure set out in Part III for commencing a proceeding by laying an information, a proceeding in respect of an offence may be commenced by filing a certificate of offence alleging the offence in the office of the court. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33, s. 3 (1).
Issuance and service
3. (2) A provincial offences officer who believes that one or more persons have committed an offence may issue, by completing and signing in the form prescribed under section 13,
(a) a certificate of offence certifying that an offence has been committed; and
(b) either an offence notice indicating the set fine for the offence or a summons. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 4, s. 1 (2).


This following case law, at paragraph 18 supports that section 3(a) says the Certificate of Offence MUST be signed, which means it should also apply to the Notice of Offence in 3(b):
R. v. McPherson, 2012 ONCJ 807 (CanLII) http://canlii.ca/t/fvrkp
[18] Sections 3(2)(a)&(b) of the POA are of further guidance. These sections set out that an officer may issue a Certificate of Offence but must complete and sign it to certify an offence has been committed and she/he has issued either an Offence Notice including the Set Fine or a Summons.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by argyll on

I read the case law differently. It says:

"Sections 3(2)(a)&(b) of the POA are of further guidance. These sections set out that an officer may issue a Certificate of Offence but must complete and sign it to certify an offence has been committed and she/he has issued either an Offence Notice including the Set Fine or a Summons. The use of the word ‘or’ in s. 3(2)(b) satisfies this Court that the issuing officer must be precise on the Certificate of Offence as to whether an Offence Notice or a Summons was issued. Hence the police procedure referenced above, by this Court in Djurcik. "

The Certificate of Offence (the bit that goes to the court) must be signed TO CERTIFY THAT...she/he has issued....an Offence Notice (the bit that goes to the driver). Therefore the ticket should not actually be signed until after it has been served on the driver.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !


argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by argyll on

In fact technically no ticket given to a driver should be signed as the officer is signing after the fact to say that the ticket has been issued.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

Again, just my opinion, but...

3(2) says "by completing and signing" ... what is it that must be completed and signed?

In (a) it says the Certificate of Offence is what must be completed and signed.

And in (b) is says either Notice of Offence (with set fine) or the Summons is what must be completed and signed.

If "completing and signing" applies to (a) then it must apply to (b) in the same way.
Last edited by jsherk on Fri Jan 29, 2016 8:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by argyll on

Yes they are contradictory. Of course the only person who's opinion matters is the justice. Yet another case of laws being badly written ! Of course that allows lawyers to make lots of money arguing over ambiguous legislation.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !


jimm
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 24
Joined:

Unread post by jimm on

no previous court case for reference?


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined:

Unread post by jsherk on

Posted R. v. McPherson case law a few replies up above.




+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


Post Reply

Return to “General Talk”