A question came up at car show this weekend that I was not able to answer for a fellow classic car enthusiast. He owns a 1969 Camaro and a couple weeks ago he was pulled over by a police officer and ordered to attend a municipally owned bus depot about 1 km away. Once there his vehicle was inspected for about 40 minutes by representatives of the MTO and the e-brake was found to be deficient. They removed his plates and he had the car towed home and got it re-certified and new plates. So his question to me as a fellow gearhead, and former paralegal with some basic HTA experience, was the legality of the initial order to attend another location. We all know that the police or MTO have the authority to inspect a vehicle. But under what authority do the police have to order a motorist to move themselves or their vehicle anywhere other than safely off the road at a traffic stop? What options does the officer have if you refuse? 1. Place you under arrest for disobey lawful order. 2. Have your vehicle towed and impounded for inspection. 3. Have your vehicle towed to the location of the MTO inspectors. 4. Radio the MTO inspectors to come to the roadside and check the vehicle so thoroughly the plates are guaranteed to be removed (most likely).
A question came up at car show this weekend that I was not able to answer for a fellow classic car enthusiast. He owns a 1969 Camaro and a couple weeks ago he was pulled over by a police officer and ordered to attend a municipally owned bus depot about 1 km away. Once there his vehicle was inspected for about 40 minutes by representatives of the MTO and the e-brake was found to be deficient. They removed his plates and he had the car towed home and got it re-certified and new plates.
So his question to me as a fellow gearhead, and former paralegal with some basic HTA experience, was the legality of the initial order to attend another location.
We all know that the police or MTO have the authority to inspect a vehicle. But under what authority do the police have to order a motorist to move themselves or their vehicle anywhere other than safely off the road at a traffic stop? What options does the officer have if you refuse?
1. Place you under arrest for disobey lawful order.
2. Have your vehicle towed and impounded for inspection.
3. Have your vehicle towed to the location of the MTO inspectors.
4. Radio the MTO inspectors to come to the roadside and check the vehicle so thoroughly the plates are guaranteed to be removed (most likely).
Safety inspections are covered under section 82 of the Highway Traffic Act. It allows police to make a demand to the operator of a motor vehicle to submit it for a safety inspection at a different location. Failure to do so can result in a fine of up to $1,000 for a regular vehicle or $20,000 for a commercial motor vehicle. Failure to comply could also result in your plates being seized and your vehicle deemed unfit. Highlights are below:
Safety inspections are covered under section 82 of the Highway Traffic Act. It allows police to make a demand to the operator of a motor vehicle to submit it for a safety inspection at a different location. Failure to do so can result in a fine of up to $1,000 for a regular vehicle or $20,000 for a commercial motor vehicle. Failure to comply could also result in your plates being seized and your vehicle deemed unfit. Highlights are below:
Inspections, unsafe vehicles
82. (2) Every police officer and every officer appointed for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act may require the driver of any motor vehicle or motor assisted bicycle to stop, move the vehicle to a safe location as directed by the police officer or officer and submit the vehicle, together with its equipment and any vehicle drawn by it, to the examinations and tests that the police officer or officer may consider expedient. 1999, c. 12, Sched. R, s. 14.
Offence
(9) Every person is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $1,000 who,
(a) refuses or fails to comply with a requirement made under subsection (2), (3), (4), (5), (8) or (12); or
(11) Despite subsections (9) and (10), a person is not guilty of an offence for refusing or failing to comply with a requirement under subsection (3), (4) or (5) unless the police officer or officer appointed for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act gave the person a written notice as required by subsection (6).
Thanks for the reply. I guess the question now is what constitutes "move the vehicle to a safe location" under the legislation. Is a motorist justified in arguing that where they pulled over is safe if for example it is adjacent to a nearby parking lot that they agree to move into for example? To what lengths do motorists have to go to satisfy this section?
Thanks for the reply. I guess the question now is what constitutes "move the vehicle to a safe location" under the legislation. Is a motorist justified in arguing that where they pulled over is safe if for example it is adjacent to a nearby parking lot that they agree to move into for example? To what lengths do motorists have to go to satisfy this section?
think the wording in 82(2) is very clear in..."move the vehicle to a safe location as directed by the police officer", anything other than directed would be disobey an officer. Sounds like the above is a target of unsafe vehicle day, where the safe location are set up well in advance with whatever parking lot that is going to be used for inspections, there are a multiple reasons to use a particular lot - surface condition (to roll the creepers to get under vehicles) - accessibility for multiple vehicles to enter - ability to set up a safety perimeter (often the whole parking lot) to prevent other vehicles from entering: have inspections in an arena parking lot in summer as opposed to a mall parking lot, too many vehicles/pedestrians all over - access to washroom facilities on premise - access to telephone for those to call tows etc..
think the wording in 82(2) is very clear in..."move the vehicle to a safe location as directed by the police officer", anything other than directed would be disobey an officer.
Sounds like the above is a target of unsafe vehicle day, where the safe location are set up well in advance with whatever parking lot that is going to be used for inspections, there are a multiple reasons to use a particular lot
- surface condition (to roll the creepers to get under vehicles)
- accessibility for multiple vehicles to enter
- ability to set up a safety perimeter (often the whole parking lot) to prevent other vehicles from entering: have inspections in an arena parking lot in summer as opposed to a mall parking lot, too many vehicles/pedestrians all over
- access to washroom facilities on premise
- access to telephone for those to call tows
etc..
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Agree, "as directed by police" is the key. I can see you might have an argument if you were stopped in Toronto but directed to North Bay for the testing since it's supposed to be expedient, but I've never heard of Courts finding fault with directions to attend local testing areas. If you read 82(3), you'll also see that you can be served written notice as the vehicle owner to submit your vehicle for testing and that sections makes no mention of location requirements.
Agree, "as directed by police" is the key. I can see you might have an argument if you were stopped in Toronto but directed to North Bay for the testing since it's supposed to be expedient, but I've never heard of Courts finding fault with directions to attend local testing areas. If you read 82(3), you'll also see that you can be served written notice as the vehicle owner to submit your vehicle for testing and that sections makes no mention of location requirements.
The officer MUST serve the driver with a notice form pursuant to s. 82(6) before the driver can be charged with failing/refusing to comply with any directions under s. 82 related to moving the vehicle or assisting in the examination. The approved form is the Vehicle Defect Report Notice.
The officer MUST serve the driver with a notice form pursuant to s. 82(6) before the driver can be charged with failing/refusing to comply with any directions under s. 82 related to moving the vehicle or assisting in the examination. The approved form is the Vehicle Defect Report Notice.
I also find sec 82. (8) interesting as you are required to assist in the examination of your vehicle. This section is in fact enforced as the motorists I have spoken to have reported they were ordered to actually do this for up to an hour. This ordering motorists to travel somewhere and basically detain them just seems bizarre in respect to sec. 9 of the Charter. There may be other examples but I cant think of any other situations where you are required by law to go with a police officer and assist in potentially incriminating yourself. "Requirement to assist (8) The driver of a vehicle submitted for examinations and tests as required under subsection (2), (3) or (4) and any other person in charge of the vehicle who is present shall, if directed by a police officer or officer appointed for the purposes of carrying out the provisions of this Act, assist with the examinations and tests of the vehicle and of its equipment. 1999, c. 12, Sched. R, s. 14."
I also find sec 82. (8) interesting as you are required to assist in the examination of your vehicle. This section is in fact enforced as the motorists I have spoken to have reported they were ordered to actually do this for up to an hour. This ordering motorists to travel somewhere and basically detain them just seems bizarre in respect to sec. 9 of the Charter. There may be other examples but I cant think of any other situations where you are required by law to go with a police officer and assist in potentially incriminating yourself.
"Requirement to assist (8) The driver of a vehicle submitted for examinations and tests as required under subsection (2), (3) or (4) and any other person in charge of the vehicle who is present shall, if directed by a police officer or officer appointed for the purposes of carrying out the provisions of this Act, assist with the examinations and tests of the vehicle and of its equipment. 1999, c. 12, Sched. R, s. 14."
Impaired driving comes to mind. While criminal, you're still required to attend a testing facility and provide samples of your breath.
peterboro wrote:
There may be other examples but I cant think of any other situations where you are required by law to go with a police officer and assist in potentially incriminating yourself.
Impaired driving comes to mind. While criminal, you're still required to attend a testing facility and provide samples of your breath.
It may well be considered a s. 9 violation, as the Charter is probably engaged at the time they are detained, but if so, it would be justified under s. 1 of the Charter.
It may well be considered a s. 9 violation, as the Charter is probably engaged at the time they are detained, but if so, it would be justified under s. 1 of the Charter.
So for arguments sake would this reasonable limit under sec. 1 of the Charter be justified in pulling over vehicles without RPG if they fit a profile for example ricers, antiques or classic cars? After all this seems to be standard operating procedure on these MTO and Ministry of the Enviroment fishing expiditions in a lot of cases at least around here (Peterborough).
Simon Borys wrote:
It may well be considered a s. 9 violation, as the Charter is probably engaged at the time they are detained, but if so, it would be justified under s. 1 of the Charter.
So for arguments sake would this reasonable limit under sec. 1 of the Charter be justified in pulling over vehicles without RPG if they fit a profile for example ricers, antiques or classic cars?
After all this seems to be standard operating procedure on these MTO and Ministry of the Enviroment fishing expiditions in a lot of cases at least around here (Peterborough).
R v Ladouceur (1990) Supreme Court decided that random stops are a violation of s. 9 but are a limit prescribed by law (what is now s. 216(1) of the HTA in Ontario) and are justified under s. 1. Selective stops of vehicles that are committing offences are even more easily justified because there is a specific reason to stop them. Selective stops of certain TYPES of vehicles, as you have suggested, does not necessarily render the stop an unjustified violation of s. 9 (see Brown v Durham Police Service Board (1998) Ontario Court of Appeal), though that may be the case if the reason for the stop is for some prohibited ground of profiling - i.e. race, gender, etc. But of course the onus is on the person claiming that is the reason they were stopped - not an easy thing to prove. One more thing I would note is that Brown specifically said that stopping of young or novice drivers is a proper selective style stop, so youth is not a prohibited ground for profiling in this context.
R v Ladouceur (1990) Supreme Court decided that random stops are a violation of s. 9 but are a limit prescribed by law (what is now s. 216(1) of the HTA in Ontario) and are justified under s. 1.
Selective stops of vehicles that are committing offences are even more easily justified because there is a specific reason to stop them.
Selective stops of certain TYPES of vehicles, as you have suggested, does not necessarily render the stop an unjustified violation of s. 9 (see Brown v Durham Police Service Board (1998) Ontario Court of Appeal), though that may be the case if the reason for the stop is for some prohibited ground of profiling - i.e. race, gender, etc. But of course the onus is on the person claiming that is the reason they were stopped - not an easy thing to prove.
One more thing I would note is that Brown specifically said that stopping of young or novice drivers is a proper selective style stop, so youth is not a prohibited ground for profiling in this context.
Negative on the driver part Simon. The notice in the approved form (as you have mentioned) must be served on the owner (if other than the driver) for reporting "after the fact". Driver at the time of the stop does not require a form notice. Notice only applies to subs 3, 4 and 5. Driver is subsection 2.
Simon Borys wrote:
The officer MUST serve the driver with a notice form pursuant to s. 82(6) before the driver can be charged with failing/refusing to comply with any directions under s. 82 related to moving the vehicle or assisting in the examination. The approved form is the Vehicle Defect Report Notice.
Negative on the driver part Simon. The notice in the approved form (as you have mentioned) must be served on the owner (if other than the driver) for reporting "after the fact". Driver at the time of the stop does not require a form notice. Notice only applies to subs 3, 4 and 5. Driver is subsection 2.
So heres my case, does it have any validity? Im argueing that the officer did not have a justified view of where and if my car stopped or not, which it did.
This is the officers view of the stop sign i "disobeyed"
Another possible viewpoint, just so i can say that he cant see regardless
As you can see he cannot see the line where i must stop
As close are possible (which he wasnt) to the intersection,…
I need some help to settle a "Right of Way" argument. I know this question has probably been asked a thousand times before, but after doing a search, I was unable to find a posting on the forum, or the specific section in the OHTA relating to it.
Scenario:
Two cars approach an intersection where the east and westbound directions are controlled by stop signs, and the north and southbound…
I was pulled over for doing 123 in an 80 zone on highway 7 near Peterborough. The officer reduced it to 109 in an 80. It was HIGHLY unlikely that I was going 109, let alone 123, so for the merit of it I am taking this to court. Court case mid January.
Please could you help me to decipher the officer's notes. Are there any errors in the notes or on the ticket that you can see?
Ive already done searches, read the act as best i can but still haven't read a complete answer. Where in the HTA does it state that the front license plate must be attached to the front bumper? I have it on the passenger sun visor (if ppl remember the old temp permits that taped to the pass side of windshield) i figured that this spot would be the same. However now they have got rid of…
Was pulled over earlier today for going 95km/h in posted 60km/h, 2nd offense (same cop that pulled me over the first time >.<) ticket of $265. going down dougall toward cabana where it goes from the 80 to 60 zone (yes was over slightly coming in and kept speed)
Just wondering what the best way to handle this? (location: windsor ontario)
I am a bartender and last saturday night while I was working someone backed into my car (2000 Acura Integra) in the prking lot. One of the cooks in the kitchen ran to tell me my car alarm is going off. Immediately I ran outside to discover my driver side mirror smashed on the ground and my driver door dented. There was nobody around to claim responsibility. I had already begun to suspect one…
Scenario regarding speeding charge - if a charge is not reduced at all at roadside, i.e. the charge, for example is "speeding 75 km/h in a 60 km/h zone contrary to s. 128," should that not mean the prosecution needs to prove that you are guilty of what you are being charged with, and not, simply, of speeding generally? I understand that if they prove a charge of even 61 km/h in a 60 km/h, they…
In a nutshell, in York Region, ran a stale yellow, cop was on a 407 off ramp and tickets me for red light. 2 week old pink slip, I forgot I put the new behind the expired one so I got a ticket for that as well.
Had the first court date adjourned because I did not receive disclosure. I used the Ticketcombat template and faxed it over, they told me I never left a phone number. No surprise there, I…
Was stopped in an OPP speed trap on eastbound QEW near Hamilton at 1:30 AM last week (Apr 25th). Officer said I was doing 131 km/h based on radar gun but I thought I was around 120 km/h (I let off the gas and looked at my speedo when I saw the 2 cars on the shoulder). It was a dark stretch and it was not busy but there were a few other cars on the highway. I asked to see the reading but they said…
1) Discovery info includes 3 pages of Genesis radar manual. Officer's notes show he used "Atlantic Laser" to measure speed. Didn't show model # (only s/n). The Genesis was used earlier on in the day, but not for my case. Can I grill him on this or is it simply a clerk's error in sending me the wrong manual?
I got a ticket for an expired licence sticker. The next day I went to the Ministry office to renew my sticker. I thought that I HAD to pay any outstanding tickets BEFORE I was eligible to renew my sticker. The lady at the desk informed me that I had an outstanding balance and 407 bill that I had a to pay and I told her that I was aware of that. I thought everything was cleared.
Last week I was driving though downtown and because of the slippery / wet conditions could not stop when the light was turning yellow to red and slid in to the intersection. I was hit by another car (near the headlamp). None of us were injured, there was significat damge to the cars. The air bags did not deploy.
I was given a ticket that reads : Red Light - fail to stop - H.T.A sect 144 (18) Fine…
I was just wondering if there was any text in the HTA that suggests that when driving on a highway with three lanes going in each direction, drivers should generally always be in the rightmost lane unless they are passing.
At first, I thought 154(b) was what I was looking for, but now I'm not so sure?
"Officials in West Vancouver, Canada apparently aren't satisfied with the driver-slowing properties of traditional speed bumps. Yesterday, the town unveiled a new way to entice motorists to ease off the gas pedal in the vicinity of the ÃÂcole Pauline Johnson Elementary School: A 2-D image of a child playing, creating the illusion that…
Does anybody know how you can check the status of your Demerit Points and how many you have collected over the last two years?
I just received a ticket as I was travelling through Barrie and am debating whether or not to fight it. My decision will be based on whether or not an infraction I received a year ago came with Demerit Points.
I have a question I would like to ask concerning turning right on a red light.
I was approaching on the right turn only lane to the traffic light which turned from amber to red. As soon as the red light came on, there were advance green left turn arrow for the intersection I was for the cars that were traveling right to left and left to right of me. Since there was a lot of traffic from where I…
So I got pulled over for speeding and following too close, on HWY 11 north of Barrie. The airplane caught me! I will fight this as I have fought ALL my tickets and won EVERY ONE of them (one per year... man I need to drive slower). So any thoughts out there on how to fight this one? Does the Crown have to bring the 2 officers in the plane, plus the one in the cruises to court? If 1 in 3 doesn't…
I am new to this forum and before making this post I did some digging and was unable to find anything on this method of officer note taking.
A little back ground of my case:
charged with 25km/h over the posted limit.
After numerous disclosure requests, finally received a detailed disclosure including several pages of the lidar manual and typed officer notes describing the events of my…
My wife was just pulled over for running a yellow light and instead was ticketed for an expired drivers licence. The license expired on her birthdate 4 months ago and she didn;t recieve a renewal. $325 !!!!!!
Hope someone can help. She was ticketed under HTA 32 (1) with the offense shown as
"Drive Motor Vehicle no license"
Can anyone tell me if this is worth the effort to get a reduction in the…
So I got pulled over for supposedly for running a stop sign. The problem is that I did a complete stop, waited a split second and started again. And yes I did stop behind the white line.
He took my information and went back to his car to write me up a ticket, came back and gave me my fine and explained to me the process. He gave me a reduced fine (65$ and ne points).
Someone has an accident in a car worth very little on highway 401 but the car is not drivable (but not in terrible shape), there is a police report filed right away in which no other cars were involved, however the car did strike a guardrail. Is it possible to handle this without involving insurance? Or is a forgone conclusion insurance will be notified by the police?
I made a minor mistake on my disclosure request - I put a "Request Date" of September 10, 2014 instead of 2015. The rest of the form is correct including offense date, fax date, trial date.
Will this affect my disclosure? Do I need to clear it up?
Also, I noticed the Ticket Combat disclosure form has a lot more information than what was posted in on this site. Is it OK to send a second…
