Parking wrong way on road

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

jccaw229
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined:

Parking wrong way on road

Unread post by jccaw229 on

Hi everyone I just received a ticket for parking the wrong way on the street in front of my house. There is not sign saying I have to park a certain way and I have been unable to find anything that says you have to park in a certain direction.

SO can anyone help me, I think I want to appeal the ticket but would like some advice to see if I am way off the watt with this one, or should I per sure appealing this ticket .


Jason


User avatar
ticketcombat
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 486
Joined:
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Unread post by ticketcombat on

A couple of things:
  1. You don't "appeal" a ticket, you fight it. IF you loose in court, you appeal the verdict.
  2. Parking facing the wrong way is usually a municipal by-law infraction. For example, in the City of Mississauga it is "Parking vehicle facing wrong direction" – By-Law 555-00 Section 5(1)(a).
  3. Your chances are really good.
  4. Request a trial.
  5. Request disclosure. If they don't provide a certified copy of the by-law to you or submit it in court, then there is no evidence against you. (By the way, don't ask for it and don't remind them, you want them to forget it.)
  6. Research the Municipal Act especially Part III Highways and section 102.1 Parking. Your argument is to look for a reg or legislation requiring there be a sign.
  7. You can also try Regulation 239/02 under the Municipal Act or the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices published by the Ministry of Transportation for regulatory signs.
I've seen signs stating you must park facing the same direction of traffic and you should find examples of them to show in court. Your argument: there was no sign, a reasonable person would expect a sign if it was illegal to park that way.

Good luck!


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

ticketcombat wrote: I've seen signs stating you must park facing the same direction of traffic and you should find examples of them to show in court. Your argument: there was no sign, a reasonable person would expect a sign if it was illegal to park that way.
A reasonable person would not drive across the path of oncoming traffic just to park on the opposite side, facing traffic.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
ticketcombat
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 486
Joined:
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Unread post by ticketcombat on

A reasonable person would not drive across the path of oncoming traffic...
You have to do it to make a left turn or to pull into a driveway. And he would have to make a u-turn or 3pt turn to park facing the right way which would be across the path of oncoming traffic.

If the residential street is small enough, less than 150 metres, the U-turn would be illegal but parking facing the wrong way may not be.


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

ticketcombat wrote:If the residential street is small enough, less than 150 metres, the U-turn would be illegal but parking facing the wrong way may not be.
So the u-turn is also a bylaw?
And park parking signs...the city would then have to put signs up facing the wrong way, just in case someone parked the wrong way? Otherwise the next defence would be the sign was not visible for the direction parked
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
ticketcombat
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 486
Joined:
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Unread post by ticketcombat on

So the u-turn is also a bylaw?
It's covered under Rules of the Road in the HTA:
U-turns prohibited

143. No driver or operator of a vehicle upon a highway shall turn the vehicle so as to proceed in the opposite direction when,

(a) upon a curve where traffic approaching the vehicle from either direction cannot be seen by the driver of the vehicle within a distance of 150 metres;

(b) on a railway crossing or within 30 metres of a railway crossing;

(c) upon an approach to or near the crest of a grade where the vehicle cannot be seen by the driver of another vehicle approaching from either direction within 150 metres; or

(d) within 150 metres of a bridge, viaduct or tunnel where the driver’s view is obstructed within such distance. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 143.
the city would then have to put signs up facing the wrong way, just in case someone parked the wrong way?
The issue at bar will be whether a sign is required. I have seen signs placed parallel to the street (you can read it in either direction) stating you must park in the direction of traffic. They are probably erected in areas where that's a problem. A prosecutor will argue it's common sense to park in the direction of traffic. Otherwise vehicles coming down the road will think they are going the wrong way on a one way street and panic. Then you've got safety issues. But if we all used common sense, we wouldn't have traffic court!


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

Don't think the u-turn charge applies to this scenario at all.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
ticketcombat
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 486
Joined:
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Unread post by ticketcombat on

Don't think the u-turn charge applies to this scenario at all.
Agreed. The u-turn came up as an example of when you have to cross the path of oncoming traffic to park facing the right direction. Someone has to see you do it in order to be charged and only if the 150 metre rule applies.

The point is Jason has to convince the judge he's innocent somehow. One way to do it is to suggest the requirement of a sign. Or claim the charge is subject to a strict liability defence.


DeeLan
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined:

Unread post by DeeLan on

Hi Jason. If you look here

http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/pa ... ations.htm

you will see a list of headings.
Go down that list of bullets in the middle of the page to find :

"Parking infractions that require no signs".

Under <i>that </i>heading is a chart which includes "Park left wheels to curb" which is what I think you're actually describing and it requires no sign to be posted.

Hope it helps.


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

ticketcombat wrote:The point is Jason has to convince the judge he's innocent somehow. One way to do it is to suggest the requirement of a sign. Or claim the charge is subject to a strict liability defence.
10-4
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


DeeLan
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined:

Unread post by DeeLan on

hwybear wrote:
ticketcombat wrote: I've seen signs stating you must park facing the same direction of traffic and you should find examples of them to show in court. Your argument: there was no sign, a reasonable person would expect a sign if it was illegal to park that way.
A reasonable person would not drive across the path of oncoming traffic just to park on the opposite side, facing traffic.
Good point. In order to be parked facing the wrong way, a person would have to drive down the wrong side of the road (even very briefly) to do the parking - and to pull away from the curb, the vehicle would be put in motion on the wrong side of the road also. Sadly the thing you really have going against you is that some by-laws just dont require signs.

As to strict liability ... well that generally means the onus is reversed and you are guilty unless you can prove you're not so it may be worth staying away from that phrase.

DO make sure all of the other relevant info is correct on the face of the ticket though: is your licence plate correct, is the address correct, is the time correct ... maybe there's a small detail somewhere that makes the ticket itself invalid?


User avatar
Bookm
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 632
Joined:
Location: Stratford, Ontario

Unread post by Bookm on

Can the officer prove YOU were the one that parked there? Did he see you park there?

You wouldn't want to take the stand and lie about who was driving, but there's nothing wrong with ensuring the Crown can prove their case by proving who was driving.


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

Bookm wrote:Can the officer prove YOU were the one that parked there? Did he see you park there?

You wouldn't want to take the stand and lie about who was driving, but there's nothing wrong with ensuring the Crown can prove their case by proving who was driving.
Is this just not a plain ole parking ticket? that does not go on a driver's licence anyway? Just registered against the owner's plate until it is paid, otherwise the owner can't renew the validation sticker.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
Bookm
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 632
Joined:
Location: Stratford, Ontario

Unread post by Bookm on

Good Question. Is this just a cheapo parking ticket, or a $100+ ticket?

BTW. though I also occasionally park on the wrong side (on quiet back streets) I really don't think it's good practice. It's unsafe when re-entering traffic, and it could cause others to think it is a one-way street.


User avatar
ticketcombat
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 486
Joined:
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Unread post by ticketcombat on

I think the parking ticket would be a Part 2 Provincial Offences Act charge. It can be issued to the driver [section 15(5)] at the time of the alleged infraction or the plate owner [section 15(4)].
DeeLan wrote:As to strict liability ... well that generally means the onus is reversed and you are guilty unless you can prove you're not...
Absolute liability offences are ones where you are liable whether or not you were at fault. Strict liability offences allow you to prove that you took reasonable care not to commit the illegal act regardless of whether you did it or not.






Post Reply

Return to “General Talk”