Hey I have a speeding ticket that was reduced by the officer from 31 over to 15 over. I believe it was kind of him to reduce the ticket and my ticket is now only $52.50. There is no points taken off with a ticket of 15 and under if I am correct. My question is this, would the insurance company still find out about this?

Thanks in advance - Kevin

Less than 15 over is as low as you can go for a speeding ticket and you don't get any demerit points (contrary to popular belief, you don't loose demerit points, you gain them). It's very tempting to accept this.

Many insurance companies count convictions, not necessarily the number of demerit points you got. Typically they are looking for three convictions which will put you in a higher rate. Most insurance companies send you a questionnaire in the mail around policy renewal time asking how many KMs you drive annually, do you drive to work, have you received any convictions... It's the last question that's trouble. If you say no, that's insurance fraud and they can deny you benefits later, even years later.

The last time I renewed my insurance I ignored the questionnaire, they sent me another notice, which I ignored and then I got my pink slip in the mail anyway. I know other companies will actually call you to ask you why you haven't filled it out.

Also your driving record will have the conviction on it. Every cop that stops you from now till the day you die will see it on their computer. It doesn't go away and you are more likely to get another ticket since you didn't learn your lesson.

This is just a guess on my part, and I know I'm going to get a reaction for saying it, but my experience has been that if the cop reduces the ticket at the traffic stop, they are less likely to show up in court if you fight it. They are doing themselves a favour knowing you are more likely to pay a lower fine and they don't have to show up in court or prepare disclosure.

On the top corner of your ticket, they can make a notation as to the actual speed you were going. Sometimes the prosecutor will threaten to bring the charge back up to your original speed. If you fight the ticket and the cop shows up, you can still plead guilty and pay the original fine. You've lost nothing but your time and at least you tried to avoid the insurance hit. And since the conviction isn't registered until after the trial, which can take more than a year in Toronto for example, you delay the conviction till after your insurance renewal date, so you can answer the insurance questionnaire honestly. (sorry for the long response!)

ticketcombat wrote:This is just a guess on my part, and I know I'm going to get a reaction for saying it, but my experience has been that if the cop reduces the ticket at the traffic stop, they are less likely to show up in court if you fight it. They are doing themselves a favour knowing you are more likely to pay a lower fine and they don't have to show up in court or prepare disclosure.

Nice thought....but now at my 3rd detachment and I have always had court scheduled on my working dayshift 95% of the time. I'm at work anyway so off to court I go. If it happens to be day off...WooHoo overtime.

I'm seeing more people challenging minimal offences, even thou they were given a significant break (saving money and points).

People don't seem to appreciate the breaks which relates into less reductions at roadside on not only the speed, but laying every offence possible on each stop.

hwybear wrote:

I'm seeing more people challenging minimal offences, even thou they were given a significant break (saving money and points).

The money you save, you need it for the renewal of your insurance policy, as they don't even need a traffic ticket for justification for an increase on your premium!

There was a time I would own up and pay the piper, now I fight everyone I recieve, traffic or parking, guilty or innocent!

Thanks for the well balanced comments! I was hoping for a majority wins and thus I follow there foot steps but.. I am still on the fence

Hwybear, I hear you and do appreciate the breaks given on the spot! In my case the officer was friendly and easy to work which in turn would then make me feel unappreciative have I go to court! Its not the uniform in my rear view that scares me, there is a much bigger monster that I fret, and that is the insurance company's. They once offered a product to protect you and now they are out to rob you.

I have no problem paying $53 bucks, especially knowing it could have been $300 but I don't want to pay $1000 annually through my insurance co. for years to come because of this and a minor other conviction (hanging a right between 4-6!!! don't get me going... a right hand turn!?!?). Thus my consideration of testing the system and hope the officers don't show.

What to do!.....1 week to go.

kebin wrote:

Hwybear, I hear you and do appreciate the breaks given on the spot! In my case the officer was friendly and easy to work which in turn would then make me feel unappreciative have I go to court! Its not the uniform in my rear view that scares me, there is a much bigger monster that I fret, and that is the insurance company's. They once offered a product to protect you and now they are out to rob you.

Comments appreciated.....if more people were more forthwith with the real reason of a challenge (ie insurance increase) it would be taken a lot easier.

On the flip side, a ticket could have been avoided from the very beginning

kebin wrote:What to do!.....1 week to go.

If you go to trial, request a "Disobey Sign" from the prosocuter. I think it's $90 but it's not the speeding and I think no points. Correct me if I'm wrong you regulars.

In the demerit point list at the bottom of the page there is a

Failing to obey signs prescribed by regulation under subsection 182 (1)

And section 182 states

182. (1) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations requiring or providing for the erection of signs and the placing of markings on any highway or any type or class thereof, and prescribing the types of the signs and markings and the location on the highway of each type of sign and marking and prohibiting the use or erection of any sign or type of sign that is not prescribed. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 182 (1); 2002, c. 18, Sched. P, s. 32.

Signs to be obeyed

(2) Every driver or operator of a vehicle or street car shall obey the instructions or directions indicated on any sign so erected. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 182 (2).

ummmmm, yeah, like he said......

Disobey "Official" Sign...somewhere around HTA 151 (guessing) is no demerit points.

Thanks to everyone for there comments! I have challenged the ticket. I have more time now at least!

If I were to plead guilty lets say, and the officer is a no show, would I then be found 'guilty' due to my own plea, or would it be disqualified for the no show officer?

They will not bring to your attention the officer's absence, unless it's a very busy court day and the Crown is looking to "dump" one or two cases. It's far more likely he would try to "bluff" you in to pleading guilty to a lesser charge.

It's up to you to confirm if the officer is present and make your decision accordingly. Even if you plead not-guilty, there's still a chance the Crown will win a motion for a continuance (reschedule to a future date). It would be up to you to convince the JP that you have spent enough time, money, and effort already and you don't feel it's fair to be further inconvenienced due to the officers absence.

You won't need to be an expert on court proceedings. The JP will guide you through procedural matters. Just go with the flow and stick to your guns.