Stunt Suspension affecting insurance if you get off?

I know I seen this somewhere in the forum but can't find it. I'd like to clarify two things:

1. 7 day Suspension happens (sadly you are assumed guilty) and you get the charges dropped or stayed, I understand suspension stays on record and no way to remove it? (obviously not fair)

2. In the above case, Insurance companies still ask you if your license was even suspended in the last 6 years for any reason, so now your rates are affected even if proven innocent? Can they still use a suspension for something you are not guilty of against you? Obviously this is even more unfair, either you need to be able to remove a suspension from your record for something your not guilty of OR Insurance companies should not be able to use it against you.

3. A spin on the above, if you get a deal from the Crown for speeding or a lesser charge, again the Suspension from the Stunt Driving is still on your record and affecting your Insurance with no way to remove it?

TIA

To the best of my knowledge, a stunt driving administrative suspension should NOT impact your insurance rates. The Financial Services Commission of Ontario (which oversees auto insurance) has a bulletin dealing with this matter: http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/autob ... 04_06.aspx

The bulletin appears to be dated prior to stunt driving legislation, but it states that administrative suspensions (such as the 90 day ADLS suspension you'd get if charged with impaired/over 80) cannot be used to increase rates, as there is no conviction. The 7 day stunt driving suspension is administrative suspension, so my understanding is that it should not impact your rates. If you receive an additional suspension upon conviction then your rates could be increased.

That being said, someone else posted their father's rates were increased due to a 7 day suspension, so you may have to argue this point with your provider.

Awesome thanks Stanton.

I'll bet companies, some knowingly, some probably not, are charging you for these Suspensions (certainty shows up in quotes I just did) even though they are not supposed to according to that Bulletin hoping the average person doesn't know better, which likely they don't

The one case that could be questionable maybe is my point 3 above but it would seem for all intensive purposes even then it should not count against Insurance.

Insurance = legalized crime in my books as it is

I think I will go email that 'person' you referred to as I just found the link I was looking for and see how they made out.

jayjonbeach wrote:

The one case that could be questionable maybe is my point 3 above but it would seem for all intensive purposes even then it should not count against Insurance.

Just to clarify, the outcome of the charges shouldn't change anything. Even if you're found guilty, the initial 7 day suspension was still just administrative, just like how a 90 day ADLS is administrative even if you're found guilty of impaired driving. The only suspension that insurance providers can look at would be an additional suspension imposed by the Court upon being found guilty.

So for example if you were going 50 over and found guilty, the 7 day suspension still doesn't count, but the 6 month suspension the Justice of the Peace issues upon conviction would.

Thanks again. You read my mind about this and was thinking about the clarification after my last post.

The Bulletin is almost misleading in what it says.

First it says " where the lapse or suspension is not connected to driving offence convictions ". Well at first glance this would seem to point to yes, a suspension for Stunt Driving IS connected to a driving offence, and especially if you got convicted.

Then it goes on to say: "Insurers may continue to use suspensions as a result of a driving offence conviction as currently filed." Now this says something just a little different, which agrees with what you said in your last post, AS A RESULT of a driving offence conviction, these are two very subtle but different statements if you ask me.

That first point, could be taken as, if you have a suspension that is connected to a driving offence conviction, the Insurance companies can use it against you.

What do you think about this?

-----

Maybe I should have been a lawyer, I'm a pretty good 'hair splitter' overall and a hell of a debater too. This thread where you helped as well really shows a finely split hair, I asked Simon about it and he didn't know what to answer either: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic3794.html

It would seem to be a very tricky question overall IMO, that is the one near the end of the thread

Relating to a driving offence conviction is the key. The seven day suspension takes place prior to any Court proceedings, and therefor isn't connected to any conviction, regardless of what later happens. To me the clarification is the following:

An Administrative Drivers Licence Suspension (ADLS) is also considered an administrative lapse because there is no driving offence conviction connected with the suspension

This refers to the 90 day suspension you get when charged with over 80/refusal. So you can later be convicted in Court, but the 3 month suspension itself can't be held against you. Street racing suspensions, just like the ADLS, are administrative suspensions.