"A matter pertaining to advice subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose as it relates to the potential implementation of a Red Light Camera Program (C2/1/CWC)" Tuesday Jan 12, 2016 Sorry for the LATE notice. BUT email your London Councillor or Mayor in general or all of them. Does not matter if you live in the city, you visit the city right? 1% of the London citizens are probably aware they are about to get 5 yrs of HELL and $325 fines, 40% goes to the Region and 60% the cash starved city. And you all know that red light cameras ticket rolling RIGHT TURNS right? Durham Region said NO by vote of 21-4 in Sep. 2015. Why because increasing yellow lights by 0.5-1sec makes the whole Red Light Camera business case fall apart. http://sire.london.ca/mtgviewer.aspx?me ... ype=AGENDA http://www.london.ca/city-hall/city-cou ... fault.aspx Now is NOT the time for apathy fellow Cdns http://www.autoblog.com/2015/03/25/redf ... o-resigns/)
"A matter pertaining to advice subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose as it relates to the potential implementation of a Red Light Camera Program (C2/1/CWC)"
Tuesday Jan 12, 2016
Sorry for the LATE notice.
BUT email your London Councillor or Mayor in general or all of them. Does not matter if you live in the city, you visit the city right?
1% of the London citizens are probably aware they are about to get 5 yrs of HELL and $325 fines, 40% goes to the Region and 60% the cash starved city.
And you all know that red light cameras ticket rolling RIGHT TURNS right?
Durham Region said NO by vote of 21-4 in Sep. 2015.
Why because increasing yellow lights by 0.5-1sec makes the whole Red Light Camera business case fall apart.
A ''rolling right turn'' is still a ''Fail to stop at red light'' and warrants the $325.00 total payable. Photo enforcement is coming , red light cameras are only the beginning. Might as well get used to it. Take the City of Edmonton for example which is now testing a mobile unmarked photo radar unit and dozens of photo enforcement sites operating throughout the city 24/7 .
A ''rolling right turn'' is still a ''Fail to stop at red light'' and warrants the $325.00 total payable.
Photo enforcement is coming , red light cameras are only the beginning. Might as well get used to it.
Take the City of Edmonton for example which is now testing a mobile unmarked photo radar unit and dozens of photo enforcement sites operating throughout the city 24/7 .
Let's pretend that making a right on a red without stopping wasn't already illegal. These cameras work based off of triggers that correspond to speed. These cameras start picking up action when it recognizes something moving over a certain speed right before the line. I don't know the exact speed, but it's somewhere in between 20-30km. The picture sent to you will even provide you with your speed when you hit the line. Your average joe isn't going to trigger the camera by simply creeping over the line. If you received a red light camera ticket while making a right on red, chances are you made nothing close to an attempt to stop to begin with.
250alp wrote:
And you all know that red light cameras ticket rolling RIGHT TURNS right?
Let's pretend that making a right on a red without stopping wasn't already illegal.
These cameras work based off of triggers that correspond to speed. These cameras start picking up action when it recognizes something moving over a certain speed right before the line. I don't know the exact speed, but it's somewhere in between 20-30km. The picture sent to you will even provide you with your speed when you hit the line. Your average joe isn't going to trigger the camera by simply creeping over the line. If you received a red light camera ticket while making a right on red, chances are you made nothing close to an attempt to stop to begin with.
Reminder the VOTE is Tuesday lunch TOMORROW, time running out. Red Light Cameras have "unintended consequences" and do little to change behavior except increase rear end collisions by 46% by one study alone. Plus USA cities are slowing pulling the plug, why? too many angry voters and red light corruption by the private contractors in it for profit. http://www.autoblog.com/2015/03/25/redf ... o-resigns/ "Regarding the results from the time series analyses of red light running crashes, when considering the strongest evidence only (effects significant at 5% level), there was a 46% decrease in right angle crashes at camera intersections and a 42% increase in rear end crashes. Given that rear end crashes are typically less severe than right angle crashes and the fact that this negative side effect can be rectified using mitigating strategies such as improving signage and education about the functioning of the photo cameras, it appears the photo enforcement safety program has had a positive net effect on traffic safety in the city of Winnipeg." Winnipeg study 2011 pg12 http://www.tirf.ca/publications/PDF_pub ... ort-12.pdf
Reminder the VOTE is Tuesday lunch TOMORROW, time running out.
Red Light Cameras have "unintended consequences" and do little to change behavior except increase rear end collisions by 46% by one study alone.
Plus USA cities are slowing pulling the plug, why? too many angry voters and red light corruption by the private contractors in it for profit.
"Regarding the results from the time series analyses of red light running crashes, when considering the strongest evidence only (effects significant at 5% level), there was a 46% decrease in right angle crashes at camera intersections and a 42% increase in rear end crashes. Given that rear end crashes are typically less severe than right angle crashes and the fact that this negative side effect can be rectified using mitigating strategies such as improving signage and education about the functioning of the photo cameras, it appears the photo enforcement safety program has had a positive net effect on traffic safety in the city of Winnipeg."
Tks "jsherk" for sending the email. Soldiers died for a freedom and now we are letting unrepresentative government take away our freedoms with good intentions of course. $325 ticket, give me a break, plus insurance penalties for 3 years? Why not make it $550, make more money.
Tks "jsherk" for sending the email. Soldiers died for a freedom and now we are letting unrepresentative government take away our freedoms with good intentions of course.
$325 ticket, give me a break, plus insurance penalties for 3 years? Why not make it $550, make more money.
Warning - rant ahead. As a former soldier (who lost good friends) I'm getting thoroughly fed up of people using the old line that people died for our freedoms every time they don't like something that government is doing. I'm no fan of red light cameras but their use is nothing to do with taking away a freedom. You don't have the freedom to run red lights now - there's a law against that. A red light camera is just a way of enforcing it. Rant over - carry on.
250alp wrote:
Tks "jsherk" for sending the email. Soldiers died for a freedom and now we are letting unrepresentative government take away our freedoms with good intentions of course.
$325 ticket, give me a break, plus insurance penalties for 3 years? Why not make it $550, make more money.
Warning - rant ahead.
As a former soldier (who lost good friends) I'm getting thoroughly fed up of people using the old line that people died for our freedoms every time they don't like something that government is doing.
I'm no fan of red light cameras but their use is nothing to do with taking away a freedom. You don't have the freedom to run red lights now - there's a law against that. A red light camera is just a way of enforcing it.
Rant over - carry on.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !
Red light camera tickets have no impact on insurance. They are glorified parking tickets. No honest "ticket fighter" will ever take your money to defend such a charge because their time would cost more than the ticket would ever cost you.
250alp wrote:
$325 ticket, give me a break, plus insurance penalties for 3 years?
Red light camera tickets have no impact on insurance. They are glorified parking tickets. No honest "ticket fighter" will ever take your money to defend such a charge because their time would cost more than the ticket would ever cost you.
agreed also Jumping a RED light is far far far more deadly than most offences, as your likly to crash with somone coming the other way I very rarely have any sympathy for anyone jumping a red light Warning - rant ahead. As a former soldier (who lost good friends) I'm getting thoroughly fed up of people using the old line that people died for our freedoms every time they don't like something that government is doing. I'm no fan of red light cameras but their use is nothing to do with taking away a freedom. You don't have the freedom to run red lights now - there's a law against that. A red light camera is just a way of enforcing it. Rant over - carry on.
agreed
also Jumping a RED light is far far far more deadly than most offences, as your likly to crash with somone coming the other way
I very rarely have any sympathy for anyone jumping a red light
argyll wrote:
250alp wrote:
Tks "jsherk" for sending the email. Soldiers died for a freedom and now we are letting unrepresentative government take away our freedoms with good intentions of course.
$325 ticket, give me a break, plus insurance penalties for 3 years? Why not make it $550, make more money.
Warning - rant ahead.
As a former soldier (who lost good friends) I'm getting thoroughly fed up of people using the old line that people died for our freedoms every time they don't like something that government is doing.
I'm no fan of red light cameras but their use is nothing to do with taking away a freedom. You don't have the freedom to run red lights now - there's a law against that. A red light camera is just a way of enforcing it.
Rant over - carry on.
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
I wish red light tickets took pictures of the driver, and not the plate. Yes I know it has no insurance complications, but on 2 instances where my father got a red light ticket on a shared vehicle, no one wants to admit they ran the red. So my dad makes all of my siblings pay for the ticket, which I find is stupid.
I wish red light tickets took pictures of the driver, and not the plate. Yes I know it has no insurance complications, but on 2 instances where my father got a red light ticket on a shared vehicle, no one wants to admit they ran the red. So my dad makes all of my siblings pay for the ticket, which I find is stupid.
I wish red light tickets took pictures of the driver, and not the plate. Yes I know it has no insurance complications, but on 2 instances where my father got a red light ticket on a shared vehicle, no one wants to admit they ran the red. So my dad makes all of my siblings pay for the ticket, which I find is stupid.
I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make here because all this quote does is contradict your whole argument. How closely did you read it? Even if you read the report by The London Road Safety Strategy, which is brought up in the London meetings, no one is denying rear end crashes increase. The point made in both quotes is that while rear end collisions increase, angled collisions decrease. So what they are saying is, would you rather be rear ended by a braking vehicle going the same direction or hit on an angle by a car going a different direction at a higher rate of speed? It's like the argument that seat belts and/or air bags increase chest, neck, arm, and head injuries while the alternative is you're ejected from the windshield and you're dead. I really don't have much of an opinion on red light cameras. I've never received a ticket through one. I can't say i've seen a "cheap" camera ticket given where I would have rolled my eyes. Probably all the rlc tickets i've seen through this forum were more than well deserved. Going through a red light is stupid, no matter how late you are. I can see the argument for someone who doesn't fully complete a stop on a right turn (even though illegal), but the cameras are good at filtering out those who may roll versus those that go now and ask questions later. That being said, you're not exactly making great arguments. They don't give tickets for rolling right turns on red (unless you consider never slowing to below 20-30km rolling), they don't increase insurance rates, and no one is denying (not even the City of London) that rear end collisions increase.
250alp wrote:
"Regarding the results from the time series analyses of red light running crashes, when considering the strongest evidence only (effects significant at 5% level), there was a 46% decrease in right angle crashes at camera intersections and a 42% increase in rear end crashes. Given that rear end crashes are typically less severe than right angle crashes and the fact that this negative side effect can be rectified using mitigating strategies such as improving signage and education about the functioning of the photo cameras, it appears the photo enforcement safety program has had a positive net effect on traffic safety in the city of Winnipeg."
I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make here because all this quote does is contradict your whole argument. How closely did you read it? Even if you read the report by The London Road Safety Strategy, which is brought up in the London meetings, no one is denying rear end crashes increase.
The London Road Safety Strategy wrote:
Studies show that angle collisions, which are usually the most severe type of collision, are reduced by 25% when RLCs are used. The number of rear-end collisions may increase up to 15% as more drivers are stopping at the red signal. Overall there is a net safety improvement and a positive overall safety cost benefit.
The point made in both quotes is that while rear end collisions increase, angled collisions decrease. So what they are saying is, would you rather be rear ended by a braking vehicle going the same direction or hit on an angle by a car going a different direction at a higher rate of speed? It's like the argument that seat belts and/or air bags increase chest, neck, arm, and head injuries while the alternative is you're ejected from the windshield and you're dead.
I really don't have much of an opinion on red light cameras. I've never received a ticket through one. I can't say i've seen a "cheap" camera ticket given where I would have rolled my eyes. Probably all the rlc tickets i've seen through this forum were more than well deserved. Going through a red light is stupid, no matter how late you are. I can see the argument for someone who doesn't fully complete a stop on a right turn (even though illegal), but the cameras are good at filtering out those who may roll versus those that go now and ask questions later.
That being said, you're not exactly making great arguments. They don't give tickets for rolling right turns on red (unless you consider never slowing to below 20-30km rolling), they don't increase insurance rates, and no one is denying (not even the City of London) that rear end collisions increase.
LIVE debate now! London Councillor just asked about RH turn red lights, "YES you will get a $325 ticket unless you make a full stop". I warned you guys, the money is too lucrative. Of course the robotic cameras never make mistakes and they are always calibrated fairly and maintained properly... which is why the State of NJ is shutting them down.
LIVE debate now!
London Councillor just asked about RH turn red lights, "YES you will get a $325 ticket unless you make a full stop".
I warned you guys, the money is too lucrative.
Of course the robotic cameras never make mistakes and they are always calibrated fairly and maintained properly... which is why the State of NJ is shutting them down.
Apparently it passed, LONDONER's get out your wallet and get ready for money to leave the economy. The represented motorists is fair game for paying for broke governments. 5yrs from now? when the whole program fails you can revisit this post. Like one of the fine Councillors said on LIVE streaming 'takes money away from the local economy for dubious results that longer yellow light times will solve and then the business case falls apart'... I believe it was Councillor Michael van Holst, good man and here is an article he worked on with LFP. http://www.lfpress.com/2015/12/27/red-f ... ht-cameras
Apparently it passed, LONDONER's get out your wallet and get ready for money to leave the economy. The represented motorists is fair game for paying for broke governments.
5yrs from now? when the whole program fails you can revisit this post.
Like one of the fine Councillors said on LIVE streaming 'takes money away from the local economy for dubious results that longer yellow light times will solve and then the business case falls apart'...
I believe it was Councillor Michael van Holst, good man and here is an article he worked on with LFP.
"46% increase in rear end collisions at Red Light Traffic Cameras." Why do they happen? Because instead of a yellow amber light meaning "proceed with caution", citizens of London will be scared to death of this draconian fine and will be slamming on the brakes. I will and you will, admit it. It gets better, now you or your family member or friend is at fault for hitting the person stopped at a yellow traffic light and your insurance will go up plus the heavy demerit penalty. Bottom line London Councillors choose to ignore the lessons learned from USA cities that are pulling the plugs on red light cameras due to: poor business case, corruption, increasing yellow light times by 0.5 sec or more and angry voters. http://abc7ny.com/traffic/new-jersey-dr ... nt/416041/
"46% increase in rear end collisions at Red Light Traffic Cameras."
Why do they happen?
Because instead of a yellow amber light meaning "proceed with caution", citizens of London will be scared to death of this draconian fine and will be slamming on the brakes.
I will and you will, admit it.
It gets better, now you or your family member or friend is at fault for hitting the person stopped at a yellow traffic light and your insurance will go up plus the heavy demerit penalty.
Bottom line London Councillors choose to ignore the lessons learned from USA cities that are pulling the plugs on red light cameras due to: poor business case, corruption, increasing yellow light times by 0.5 sec or more and angry voters.
Perhaps those who are driving will now actually leave enough space in front of them to come to a safe stop if the person in front has to "slam on their brakes" It's no different than if that person had to do the same if a child ran onto the road.
Perhaps those who are driving will now actually leave enough space in front of them to come to a safe stop if the person in front has to "slam on their brakes"
It's no different than if that person had to do the same if a child ran onto the road.
Not sure whose side you are on? More government control or more trust to the people? Advanced societies don't need a policeman on every corner. Advanced societies people police themselves and don't hand over their destiny to Politicians who don't have a clue what they are voting on. Some of us see photo radar, red light cameras, average speed calculators as money scams with questionable safety benefits when you actually look at the DATA vs the headlines. ONTARIO pulled the plug on the photo radar experiment in 1995, 20+ years ago after making $19,000,000 in 11 months and what happened on our freeways NOTHING. ON still has the safest highways in N.American, perhaps that is because only 2% of fatalities happen on 400 series highways in the first place. -SAE paper 960439. Starting to think the purpose of this bulletin board is support more government intervention to drive business for Paralegals and Lawyers? Who funds this site?
Not sure whose side you are on? More government control or more trust to the people? Advanced societies don't need a policeman on every corner. Advanced societies people police themselves and don't hand over their destiny to Politicians who don't have a clue what they are voting on.
Some of us see photo radar, red light cameras, average speed calculators as money scams with questionable safety benefits when you actually look at the DATA vs the headlines.
ONTARIO pulled the plug on the photo radar experiment in 1995, 20+ years ago after making $19,000,000 in 11 months and what happened on our freeways NOTHING.
ON still has the safest highways in N.American, perhaps that is because only 2% of fatalities happen on 400 series highways in the first place. -SAE paper 960439.
Starting to think the purpose of this bulletin board is support more government intervention to drive business for Paralegals and Lawyers?
Uh yeah, anyone disagreeing with you must be shilling for the man. Clearly some just don't see red light cameras as the Orwellian threat to free society that you do.
250alp wrote:
Starting to think the purpose of this bulletin board is support more government intervention to drive business for Paralegals and Lawyers?
Who funds this site?
Uh yeah, anyone disagreeing with you must be shilling for the man.
Clearly some just don't see red light cameras as the Orwellian threat to free society that you do.
Whether we agree with something or not, it doesn't change whether a comment is factual accurate. - Red light camera tickets don't increase insurance rates. - Red light cameras don't ticket every driver who rolls a right on red. If you're so passionate about the issue, perhaps you should look at a RLC ticket and see how that idea is impossible without taking a picture of every car that uses the right turn lane. - "Soldiers died for a freedom and now we are letting unrepresentative government take away our freedoms ". Soldiers didn't die for your freedom to drive through a red light because you're not free to drive in the first place. I don't agree with everything in the HTA, but driving is not a right whether I like it or not. Besides, using soldiers as a pawn for some argument is tacky. - Trying to use the argument that poor innocent family members are now slamming into the rear of other vehicles, also tacky and already illegal. People (tailgators) who slam into the rear of another vehicle aren't the victims, which is why they can be charged. Hazards on the road appear all the time whether it's another vehicle, slow traffic, basketball, child, garbage can, piece of lumber, whatever. Those people are allowed to brake as need be without you injuring or possibly killing them in the process. There is already a law to prevent your dilemma, yet your solution seems to be to add even more safeguards (e.g. extending yellow lights), which condtradicts the whole nanny state mentality you're trying so hard to fight. If you were an individual who opposes the use of RLC in your area, I commend you. There should always be a discussion from both sides of the fence on these issue. However, you've made some pretty big statements here.
250alp wrote:
Not sure whose side you are on? More government control or more trust to the people? Advanced societies don't need a policeman on every corner. Advanced societies people police themselves and don't hand over their destiny to Politicians who don't have a clue what they are voting on.
Some of us see photo radar, red light cameras, average speed calculators as money scams with questionable safety benefits when you actually look at the DATA vs the headlines.
ONTARIO pulled the plug on the photo radar experiment in 1995, 20+ years ago after making $19,000,000 in 11 months and what happened on our freeways NOTHING.
ON still has the safest highways in N.American, perhaps that is because only 2% of fatalities happen on 400 series highways in the first place. -SAE paper 960439.
Starting to think the purpose of this bulletin board is support more government intervention to drive business for Paralegals and Lawyers?
Who funds this site?
Whether we agree with something or not, it doesn't change whether a comment is factual accurate.
- Red light camera tickets don't increase insurance rates.
- Red light cameras don't ticket every driver who rolls a right on red. If you're so passionate about the issue, perhaps you should look at a RLC ticket and see how that idea is impossible without taking a picture of every car that uses the right turn lane.
- "Soldiers died for a freedom and now we are letting unrepresentative government take away our freedoms ". Soldiers didn't die for your freedom to drive through a red light because you're not free to drive in the first place. I don't agree with everything in the HTA, but driving is not a right whether I like it or not. Besides, using soldiers as a pawn for some argument is tacky.
- Trying to use the argument that poor innocent family members are now slamming into the rear of other vehicles, also tacky and already illegal. People (tailgators) who slam into the rear of another vehicle aren't the victims, which is why they can be charged. Hazards on the road appear all the time whether it's another vehicle, slow traffic, basketball, child, garbage can, piece of lumber, whatever. Those people are allowed to brake as need be without you injuring or possibly killing them in the process. There is already a law to prevent your dilemma, yet your solution seems to be to add even more safeguards (e.g. extending yellow lights), which condtradicts the whole nanny state mentality you're trying so hard to fight.
If you were an individual who opposes the use of RLC in your area, I commend you. There should always be a discussion from both sides of the fence on these issue. However, you've made some pretty big statements here.
I'm not sure why the implementation of red light cameras would necessarily preclude a change in timing of the amber lights as well. I think red light cameras can help increase motorist safety but obviously shouldn't be the only consideration. I'm not aware of any Municipalities in Ontario that have changed the timing of the lights post traffic camera installation. I'd also point out that in locally from what I've read, red light cameras seem to be beneficial in the long run. There tends to be a spike in rear end collisions for the first few years but afterwards a drop in overall collisions. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2011/10 ... _show.html
I'm not sure why the implementation of red light cameras would necessarily preclude a change in timing of the amber lights as well. I think red light cameras can help increase motorist safety but obviously shouldn't be the only consideration. I'm not aware of any Municipalities in Ontario that have changed the timing of the lights post traffic camera installation. I'd also point out that in locally from what I've read, red light cameras seem to be beneficial in the long run. There tends to be a spike in rear end collisions for the first few years but afterwards a drop in overall collisions. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2011/10 ... _show.html
I was stopped for allegedly doing 122 in a 90. I requested disclosure and like most received the minimum. The notes are just a photo copy with no explanations or typing. Only received parts of the manual that pertain to testing. Appears the officer was using a "Laser Atlanta Speed Laser", but no model or serial number is referenced in the notes. Testing is noted in two times written at the…
Hey guys, wanted to know if anyone has had a similar situation, and if you have any advice:
I was travelling E/B on Dundas St and had a green light to turn S/B on Spadina Ave. There's a no right on red sign, I observed it. I initiated my maneuver, slowly pulling my car into position to make the turn. This intersection is super busy, and there was a group of pedestrians who were painfully slowly…
This is the first traffic ticket that i have ever had, and i was wondering if someone could shoot me some of their advice as to how i could go about the case?
It was a red light, i approached the intersection and stopped, noticed two pedestrians on the right of me, and one officer on left and right of my vehicle, on the cross walks. They were pay duty for construction happening. I was waiting for…
I thank you in advance for the opportunity to share my concern here with you and also ask for help . I have a portfolio for 21 years, 16 years in class A / Z and with my Abastract / CVOR record both clean. I was stopped by an OPP on HWY 6 towards Tobermory, On just because I was above the allowed highway limit. According to the policeman, he told me that I reached 130km / h in an…
I can't find the category for this post so I'm posting it here.
Two questions...
1. Are golf carts considered a 'vehicle' under the Highway traffic act? I know carts can't drive across roads or on roads but if you try to bring one from the USA into Canada they are considered a 'vehicle'.
2. If you are on private property are you allowed to carry 'opened' alcohol in your golf cart? I know golf…
I was going southbound on 427 and exited at Queensway (Toronto). I needed to make a right turn and it is no right turn on red. So I stop on red light. There were 3 cars in front of me. I get the green arrow pointing right. So the cars turn right and when I was turning the green arrows just turned off. There was no amber. It just turned off. So I get pulled over…
Back on august 28th around 7 40 in the morning I got pulled over by a cop in a car that was not legally registered for the road yet, Stupid as it was i was literally just taking it for a drive on my street because it was sitting for so long My street is a residential street so i didn't think i cop would be turning on it anytime soon. But of course i got unlucky. He got me gave me 3 tickets. By…
I got ticket for failing to stop at stop sign in Toronto. i heard that the police officer must see the stop line, if there is one, from where he was sitting. That is exactly my case, Is it a strong case? If so do i need a picture to show that there is a stop line and a picture to show that he could not see the stop line from where he was sitting?
I got pulled over for disobey the "No Heavy truck" sign, on the ticket it say Highway traffic act Section 182(2), but I think I didn't disobey the "No Heavy Truck" sign, because my truck was loaded with delivery items(which at the time it was under 5 tonnes), I didn't request for disclosure, the cop that pulled me over didn't even check my truck to see if it is over 5 tonnes.
I picked up a brand new (old stock) Fuzzbuster a while ago at auction (wopping $5!!) and I want to mount it on the dash of my old GTO as a cool accessory when I show it at car shows. But I'm not sure if it's legal or not.
Here's my thoughts:
- It is early 70's technology (x-band) so it won't detect modern police radar. That's assuming no police force uses the old x-band frequency.
This morning I came downstairs to see my car with a ticket on it for $150 for parking in a fire route. The underground parking is under construction and we cannot park there so the tenates have to park either in visitors or adjacent streets. I have been parking in the same spot for a week and nothing was said to me until I found the ticket Sunday morning. I looked at every other car parked where…
Just bought my 1st GPS. Pretty decent little outfit. Have used it on a couple of short trips and got me to the destintation properly.
I have taken it to work recently and it is not as accurate as I first had hoped. The calculation of my vehicle speed is off by 2km/hr (GPS reads high). When stationary in many locations, it does not place me exactly where I am parked. On 2 different times it…
HI! So my husband was driving home at 2 am and blew out his back passenger tire which caused him to hit a parked car, he did quite a bit of damage to the car , there was no one around , and he did not have any paper to leave a note, also because it was a very old 1980 car and my husband assumed the damage was less than 1000,00 dollars and he left and did not report it until the next day. A week…
Issued in a news release by Toronto Police Traffic Services Sergeant Tim Burrows, these were the top 10 peeves of drivers in an on-line survey by the Toronto Police:
10. Slow drivers
9. Slower-moving drivers who pull into your lane when you're going faster
I received a speeding ticket this past weekend, and although the officer was nice and gave my 6yo a coupon for a free slushy, I want to fight the ticket.
The officer wrote the offence as "95km/h in a posted E0 km/h zone" the "E" being what looks like a written backwards 3. Now I know and you can probably guess he intended to write an 8 but that is not what is there it is an incomplete 8 and…
Quick run down of my situation: My liscence was suspended in early September for a DUI. Got caught driving last weekend on the 401. Officer claimed I was pulled over because she figured I was speeding and I looked suspicious because I was looking around in the car too much. She searched the entire car looking for weed - none was found. I was charged with driving while under suspension.
I wasn't quiet sure where this should go, so I am going to try here.
I am 25 years old, and I have had my G2 license since March 2010. I haven't upgraded to my full G only out of not really having the time nor cash to do it as of yet. In early February of this year I was pulled over by an OPP at a RIDE program and blew a 0.031 BAC. I was unaware at the time that I was supposed to have a BAC…
I was involved in an accident last month. I was proceeding along a street with cars parked adjacent to the curb. Approaching an intersection I saw a large truck and trailer parked against the curb (no brake lights, or turn signals) so I presumed he was parked there. I approached the intersection, following the same path as all the other traffic, just to the right of the centre line. When I…
I have received 2 pieces of paper on the door of my home within the last week. Looks like I am being summons to witness for an accident where the other driver was at fault last year. (He hit me and was charged at the scene).
I'm just wondering if anyone knows how many attempts they will make to serve me, or if they will keep trying until they do ?
I was charged 2 days ago with RED LIGHT - FAIL TO STOP and set fined $150 and I guess 3 points. I was driving turning left on the intersection with a traffic light, and when I jst about to turn left the light turned to orange and I didn't have enough time to stop. Once I turned I saw the light turned to red and 2seconds later I saw a police beacon flashing through my rear-view mirror. It…
Highway 21 is often closed in the winter. I and a lot of other people need to cross Highway 21 to get to work. Several people have told me that if a highway is closed, it's not only illegal to drive along the highway, but to cross it on any intersecting road, because while you cross it you're technically driving on a closed road.
Hi all, I was ticketed for this offense while on a bicycle where I "turned left" at a red light without first coming to a complete stop at the red light. It was a T-intersection where I was facing the straight through lanes (4 lanes, two in each direction) and a side street came in from the right only (2 lanes, one in each direction), and no vehicles or pedestrians were entering from the right at…
In early March I was driving in the Yonge & Churchil area. An officer said I failed to stop at a stop sign and ticketed me 110+3 demerits. While getting my license etc. I have multiple photocopy of my car ownership in my car, and that I thought I handed him the copy with the validation sticker on the back as required but gave him one of the blank copies by accident. He came back with…
