Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.

Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Discuss the Ontario Highway Traffic Act.


Post Your Traffic Ticket, and Get Help!


The Ontario Traffic Ticket Forum!


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Check It Out
No unread posts New Set Fines Starting Sept 1st, 2015! Read and Learn Here.
  Print view

Was this helpful?
Yes 100%  100%  [ 4 ]
No 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 4

Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:16 am 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:58 pm
Posts: 19
The Charter is a rewrite of the Bill (of rights) and upon rewriting it changed a few things. But yes I agree that guy didnt deserve that treatment.Fact is many rights are already stripped but people don't recognise it. They have become too complacent and have been conned into believing that it is all in their best interest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:32 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:49 pm
Posts: 1490
Location: somewhere in traffic
siriusone wrote:
The Charter is a rewrite of the Bill (of rights) and upon rewriting it changed a few things. But yes I agree that guy didnt deserve that treatment.Fact is many rights are already stripped but people don't recognise it. They have become too complacent and have been conned into believing that it is all in their best interest.


The confussing thing is the wording. If an officer "asks" to look in your car, you can say no. And to the layman, I am not excluded, the knowledge of what the average citizen is entitled to is a fuzzy gray area...I think that law courses should be manditory in high school and definitely post secondary.

_________________
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 4:02 pm 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:58 pm
Posts: 19
Reflections wrote:
siriusone wrote:
The Charter is a rewrite of the Bill (of rights) and upon rewriting it changed a few things. But yes I agree that guy didnt deserve that treatment.Fact is many rights are already stripped but people don't recognise it. They have become too complacent and have been conned into believing that it is all in their best interest.


The confussing thing is the wording. If an officer "asks" to look in your car, you can say no. And to the layman, I am not excluded, the knowledge of what the average citizen is entitled to is a fuzzy gray area...I think that law courses should be manditory in high school and definitely post secondary.


The confusing thing in my opinion is that the average 'citizen' is entitled to remain private. Yet, they seem to believe they have no choice but to be controlled and submit to another.

I think there should definitely be courses on the true laws in schools. They will then learn that in ALL of the Supreme courts of Canada the governing law is Common Law whereas the magistrates courts ie. traffic courts operate under admiralty law or commercial law.

I think it would be wise also for police officers to learn the difference between the two and why traffic courts operate under commercial law and not Common Law.

The fuzzy grey area that you mention comes from people not understanding the difference between the two types of law and how each needs to be applied in the court system. This accounts for the confusion about the Charter/Bill of Rights and our rights as men and women.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 7:14 pm 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:39 am
Posts: 254
Location: The Valley
Really?

That's a tired old argument that been tried in a many a court with the defendant leaving a few hundred dollars poorer...please save all this Common Law talk for another board, as much as you think it applies, our courts don't recognize and the intent of this board was to discuss traffic issues not obscure legal pretexts from a bygone era.

Maybe we could start a folder fro you to go and fill your boots with talk of contracts and conspiracy...

Our courts have evolved as have our laws...I watched a guy try and spout that stuff one time in court, his second No Insurance charge, the Justice laughed his head off in the hallway later, after fining the guy $10K nonetheless.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:18 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 139
Yes, I second that request for a cease and desist posting about that Maritime Law nonsense.

Also, I witnessed a woman get her second No Insurance charge and despite the fact that she WAS poor (it was evident) the justice imposed a $5k fine, and if it took years to pay it off, that was fine with him. He gave leniency to her regarding payment plans, but said that since she was already given a break of $2,500 the first time 3 years prior, the second he WAS doubling it, to half the second set fine, the same way the first justice ordered a fine of half of the first set fine.

It was either that, or a 30 day jail stint.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:30 am 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:39 am
Posts: 254
Location: The Valley
Yeah the fine structure is supposed to be $5k, $10k, $15k etc...I'm sure those a major hardships that will hopefully get the message across...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:48 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 139
Yes, it will, but I have to be honest, I think it's a racket. I think it is so unjust when we are forced by law to deal with these insurance companies who, in all honesty, rip us off. Try fighting them or appealing a decision regarding injuries.

At least, and if the government is going to force you to embark on private contracts or else charge you fines, they should have much more regulation on these scams. It's nothing but a license to print money and it is not Just -at all. IMO, it's no different than extortion (okay, that's harsh, but you get my point). BC does so, and while it is not cheaper per se for insurance premiums ALL of the time, it is more economical on average. You can't be refused insurance. You aren't going to pay crazy amounts. You won't be dinged in legalized discrimination. Okay, I realize statistics and actuarists say a certain sub-group are responsible for more accidents, and I do agree (to a point), but please tell me what my status as single person had to do with my risk of carelessness, especially when my insurance company made money off of me because of my lack of claims as compared to what my risk assessment was? Anywhere else, that would be called discrimination and the Human Rights Tribunal and Commission would be involved.

It does need to change. We need insurance because people do need insurance in order to compensate victims in accidents, but this is a poor system as it is. Don't misunderstand me; we NEED insurance. But as it stands now, Joe Public driver is forced to deal with companies who get approval for increases every 4 months as of late, post profits in the hundreds of millions, making money off of us because we are legislated to deal with them. That is a racket. Something is NOT right with that picture. It should be non-profit at the very least.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:18 pm 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:01 pm
Posts: 371
Location: GTA
Actually, the biggest reason why we have high insurance rates is the Accident Benefits portion. In Ontario (especially the GTA) there's a thriving industry that milks the AB system for what it's worth and then some. They have been driving up the costs in addition to some insane lawsuits. As for the high penalties for uninsured drivers...
I'm aware of one who got into a hit and run while driving a vehicle that he never transferred in his name, drove with stolen plates and sure as hell didn't insure. I hope that guy gets the statutory maximum.

_________________
What kind of a man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:46 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 139
Yes, we do have a thriving AB milking business, which may or may not be what I was victim to yesterday, since it couldn't have been timed better. But, that said, the increases in premiums continue as to PROFITS for the company. If this is to be a legislatively mandated system, forcing citizens to partake in the raping of their bank accounts, WHY are these companies and their shareholders becoming RICH when it could be a provincially run non-profit system like in BC where the BC citizens are the shareholders and any positive balance is put back into our pockets through provincially run programs and services, roadways, etc? I find it wrong that fatcats are making profits because the government has their paychecks and dividends snug and securely protected because they legally force people who need to drive to do business with them.

Yes, I'm advocating for a socialized insurance program. I know some won't agree.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 1:36 pm 
Offline
Sr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 6:01 pm
Posts: 371
Location: GTA
I don't necessarily disagree with you on implementing a non-profit system here in Ontario. However, remember that the rates are lower elsewhere because the legal climates are less permissive of abuse, which keeps the claims down, which in turn keeps the rates down. That's why if we ever implemented a government-run system without dealing with the abuse first, we might be in for a good dose of sticker shock. Especially those of us riding supersport bikes :shock:

_________________
What kind of a man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 2:04 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:14 am
Posts: 139
I agree. We are almost as litigious as the U.S. here in Ontario, but we too have limits to what we are awarded, whereas in the U.S., only common law precedent is the limit and that can be easily broken.

I would like to see the system set up whereby only negligence or wilful acts or omission be treated with punitive damages, but otherwise, a system like B.C. I would not want the government to implement a system whereby the negligence or wilful acts or omission are covered. And of course, you behave badly, the MTO won't give you your license and we've got better control over our systems, our money, and the profits, if any, come back to the taxpayer's purse, not some stuffed shirt living on the Mississauga Roads, Rosedale Valleys and Cluny Drives of the GTA.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:23 am 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:58 pm
Posts: 19
Common Law is NOT of a bygone era. It is what all Supreme Court cases are to this very day. Like I said, everyone needs to get an education and stop trying to put falsehoods into play.

The judges themselves will tell you under what 'Law' they are operating. They will also tell you that traffic court is a court of administration (look up m'administratiom' in the Law dictionaries). If you are going to give advice on a forum, you should make sure it is accurate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:29 am 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:58 pm
Posts: 19
FyreStorm wrote:
Really?

That's a tired old argument that been tried in a many a court with the defendant leaving a few hundred dollars poorer...please save all this Common Law talk for another board, as much as you think it applies, our courts don't recognize and the intent of this board was to discuss traffic issues not obscure legal pretexts from a bygone era.

Maybe we could start a folder fro you to go and fill your boots with talk of contracts and conspiracy...

Our courts have evolved as have our laws...I watched a guy try and spout that stuff one time in court, his second No Insurance charge, the Justice laughed his head off in the hallway later, after fining the guy $10K nonetheless.


Really !

I could tell you of many success stories,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 11:23 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:26 pm
Posts: 2881
Location: Toronto
Since you claimed you could "tell of many success stories," I challenge you to deliver the goods. Case names, with results, from Canada only.

_________________
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:31 pm 
Offline
Jr. Member

Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:14 pm
Posts: 32
I can agree with most of the original post. But I do have to draw the line at ...
5. Don't tint your windows. They come from the factory with a slight tint, that's it. If police can't see in, must mean you are hiding something.

That's patently absurd. In some unusual circumstance, may mean you have something to hide but it might more easily mean absolutely nothing of the kind. The blanket statement that you must have something to hide is downright offensive.

Of course, I am talking about tint that is in compliance with Ontario's law, which does require that the driver (or maybe occupant) be visible. But the tone of the post seems to imply that any tint is an issue and I must say that that is objectionable.

I'll give you one reason: the three hundred odd dollars. What would the other eleven reasons be?

On a different note, if you're so down on tinted windows, what are your thoughts on smoked lights?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Related topics
 Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. License suspended after lost ticket, ways to delay?

appletree123

8

318

Fri Mar 24, 2017 9:10 am

Nanuk View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Ten years ago...

Radar Identified

0

465

Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:19 am

Radar Identified View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Just came back from court by myself....did I dodge a bullet?

mtx

9

918

Fri Jan 24, 2014 5:43 pm

iFly55 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Too easy to get a licence?

hwybear

3

5591

Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:03 pm

Reflections View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. No Parking anytime - does it work both ways?

Jay

2

680

Wed Mar 03, 2010 7:08 pm

Jay View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Support us with a Google Plus One +1 - Top Right of the Page

admin

0

561

Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:07 pm

admin View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. 2009 -2010 Tahoe PPV top speed

johnnycrash

3

1613

Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:47 pm

viper1 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Top 10 driver pet peeves (Toronto Police survey)

Radar Identified

13

668

Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:00 pm

SmokeScreen View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Red light ticket or ticket for stop on pedestrian crossing?

Ticket?...nah

2

890

Thu Dec 16, 2010 10:12 am

Ticket?...nah View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Parking Ticket - Ticket placed on car once in a legal spot

Shakeyhands

7

1754

Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:41 pm

ticketcombat View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Speeding ticket and fail to display two plates ticket

Reconsniper

1

1213

Tue Jan 11, 2011 5:29 pm

hwybear View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Ticket for driving to closely but officer gave me his ticket

vince2000

4

1652

Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:07 pm

Mugwug View the latest post

 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Web Development & Search Engine Optimization
Home | Court Listings | Ontario Traffic Ticket

Copyright 2007 - 2017 © Microtekblue Inc. Web Development & Search Engine Optimization Service. We Support phpBB All Rights Reserved.