My son got charged with "Drive motor vehicle validation improperly affixed". We have a sticker attached to the ownership, and had one on the plate. I followed the same procedure every ownership purchase for the last 32 years of owning a car. The Peel Police charged him with that and nothing else. Does anyone have any options for me to consider? Or should I just #2 and speak with the Prosecutor? We propose we had it on my car, but it was removed. To support our theory, last week my son was pulled over in the same car (which was his first time ever) because he looked "spooked" to a Police Officer. The car had ownership and insurance, but the insurance slip had expired by a month. The new one was in the centre dash but he didn't know that. He got charged for only that. We expect that to get tossed. If he didn't have the sticker on the plate then, he would have gotten a ticket by this picky perticular Officer.
My son got charged with "Drive motor vehicle validation improperly affixed". We have a sticker attached to the ownership, and had one on the plate. I followed the same procedure every ownership purchase for the last 32 years of owning a car. The Peel Police charged him with that and nothing else. Does anyone have any options for me to consider? Or should I just #2 and speak with the Prosecutor?
We propose we had it on my car, but it was removed. To support our theory, last week my son was pulled over in the same car (which was his first time ever) because he looked "spooked" to a Police Officer. The car had ownership and insurance, but the insurance slip had expired by a month. The new one was in the centre dash but he didn't know that. He got charged for only that. We expect that to get tossed. If he didn't have the sticker on the plate then, he would have gotten a ticket by this picky perticular Officer.
Haven't seen jsherk around in a while, so I'm gonna take a chapter from his book. I suggest you plead NOT GUILTY and request a trial with the officer present. Once you get your court date, request disclosure and review the officers evidence. That's the only way you can properly defend yourself. After reviewing the disclosure, you can call the prosecutors office and request an early resolution meeting. On a side note - was the sticker placed on both the back of the ownership as well as the TOP RIGHT corner of the license plate? Those are the two places they need to be. If not, it is a charge. The charge was for "affixed improperly" which means that the sticker was there, but not in the right spot. If it was in the right spots, this case should be a slam dunk.
Haven't seen jsherk around in a while, so I'm gonna take a chapter from his book.
I suggest you plead NOT GUILTY and request a trial with the officer present. Once you get your court date, request disclosure and review the officers evidence. That's the only way you can properly defend yourself. After reviewing the disclosure, you can call the prosecutors office and request an early resolution meeting.
On a side note - was the sticker placed on both the back of the ownership as well as the TOP RIGHT corner of the license plate? Those are the two places they need to be. If not, it is a charge. The charge was for "affixed improperly" which means that the sticker was there, but not in the right spot. If it was in the right spots, this case should be a slam dunk.
That is very true, wonder what's keeping him away :? I hope the officer was not simply looking for cash grab situation, because if the ticket was issued for "incorrect placement" that is what it is IMO. And yes, we all no the cash does not go to him, he is following orders...
UnluckyDuck wrote:
Haven't seen jsherk around in a while...
That is very true, wonder what's keeping him away
I hope the officer was not simply looking for cash grab situation, because if the ticket was issued for "incorrect placement" that is what it is IMO.
And yes, we all no the cash does not go to him, he is following orders...
They don't. You only need a sticker on your plate. Although it's probably best to just put it on both to avoid any hassle.
UnluckyDuck wrote:
On a side note - was the sticker placed on both the back of the ownership as well as the TOP RIGHT corner of the license plate? Those are the two places they need to be. If not, it is a charge.
They don't. You only need a sticker on your plate. Although it's probably best to just put it on both to avoid any hassle.
Based on some new wording in the HTA, the sticker no longer needs to be placed on the back of the ownership, only the plate. There is some case law (non-binding) that supports this. Based on the OP's post it sounds like there was no sticker on the plate which would still be illegal. Not sure how being stopped a week earlier is a defence.
UnluckyDuck wrote:
On a side note - was the sticker placed on both the back of the ownership as well as the TOP RIGHT corner of the license plate? Those are the two places they need to be. If not, it is a charge. The charge was for "affixed improperly" which means that the sticker was there, but not in the right spot. If it was in the right spots, this case should be a slam dunk.
Based on some new wording in the HTA, the sticker no longer needs to be placed on the back of the ownership, only the plate. There is some case law (non-binding) that supports this. Based on the OP's post it sounds like there was no sticker on the plate which would still be illegal. Not sure how being stopped a week earlier is a defence.
I think what he is trying to say is, the sticker might have fallen off the plate at some point between the two stops, If the sticker was not there the driver would have received a ticket for this violation at the same time as the insurance infraction, the fact that he was not charged is proof it was there. (just trying to decipher OP wording)
Stanton wrote:
Based on some new wording in the HTA, the sticker no longer needs to be placed on the back of the ownership, only the plate. There is some case law (non-binding) that supports this. Based on the OP's post it sounds like there was no sticker on the plate which would still be illegal. Not sure how being stopped a week earlier is a defence.
I think what he is trying to say is, the sticker might have fallen off the plate at some point between the two stops, If the sticker was not there the driver would have received a ticket for this violation at the same time as the insurance infraction, the fact that he was not charged is proof it was there. (just trying to decipher OP wording)
Quite often that charge is laid because the driver talked himself into it, or, the driver was getting a break on something else so the cop laid that charge which is no points. If the validation sticker is missing, it would still come up as valid when the cop ran the plate during the stop. If the plates came up as being valid, but the sticker was missing, then it is likely someone stole the sticker to glue onto their plate to make it look like they have valid plates. The number on the sticker on the back of the ownership is the same number in the middle of the validation sticker on the plate and can be entered on to cpic as lost or stolen. You will need to go get a replacement.
Quite often that charge is laid because the driver talked himself into it, or, the driver was getting a break on something else so the cop laid that charge which is no points. If the validation sticker is missing, it would still come up as valid when the cop ran the plate during the stop. If the plates came up as being valid, but the sticker was missing, then it is likely someone stole the sticker to glue onto their plate to make it look like they have valid plates. The number on the sticker on the back of the ownership is the same number in the middle of the validation sticker on the plate and can be entered on to cpic as lost or stolen. You will need to go get a replacement.
did this change, I recently got my sticker, and on the instructions is clearly states where to put the stickers, on top/right number plate and on the back of the ownership They don't. You only need a sticker on your plate. Although it's probably best to just put it on both to avoid any hassle.
did this change,
I recently got my sticker, and on the instructions is clearly states where to put the stickers, on top/right number plate and on the back of the ownership
bend wrote:
UnluckyDuck wrote:
On a side note - was the sticker placed on both the back of the ownership as well as the TOP RIGHT corner of the license plate? Those are the two places they need to be. If not, it is a charge.
They don't. You only need a sticker on your plate. Although it's probably best to just put it on both to avoid any hassle.
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
That's incorrect, the law actually changed a few years ago. You were actually required to affix the sticker to your permit until July of 2012. The regulation for vehicle permits used to read (emphasis added by me): "A permit for a motor vehicle shall be validated by means of evidence of validation provided by the Ministry and affixed in the appropriate space provided on the permit" It now reads: "Evidence of validation not intended for the number plate may be affixed in the appropriate space provided on the permit for the vehicle"
waddya_know wrote:
Nothing changed. It has simply been decided that failure to put the sticker on the registration does not put you in a law-breaking situation.
That's incorrect, the law actually changed a few years ago. You were actually required to affix the sticker to your permit until July of 2012.
The regulation for vehicle permits used to read (emphasis added by me):
"A permit for a motor vehicle shall be validated by means of evidence of validation provided by the Ministry and affixed in the appropriate space provided on the permit"
It now reads:
"Evidence of validation not intended for the number plate may be affixed in the appropriate space provided on the permit for the vehicle"
Last edited by Stanton on Fri Mar 11, 2016 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thank you for the explanation, this is great peace of info. This actually explains the purpose of having that little sticker that you "should" attach to the back of ownership, it simply helps to show that you did have a validation on your plate but some how (stolen or fell off) is gone missing. Now, I have a question, HTA says you can not drive a car unless the permit is validated. If I have validated the permit but it was stolen and I was stopped and the officer runs my plate and verifies it was validated, do I still get a ticket because the sticker is not attached for one reason or another?
screeech wrote:
Quite often that charge is laid because the driver talked himself into it, or, the driver was getting a break on something else so the cop laid that charge which is no points. If the validation sticker is missing, it would still come up as valid when the cop ran the plate during the stop. If the plates came up as being valid, but the sticker was missing, then it is likely someone stole the sticker to glue onto their plate to make it look like they have valid plates. The number on the sticker on the back of the ownership is the same number in the middle of the validation sticker on the plate and can be entered on to cpic as lost or stolen. You will need to go get a replacement.
Thank you for the explanation, this is great peace of info.
This actually explains the purpose of having that little sticker that you "should" attach to the back of ownership, it simply helps to show that you did have a validation on your plate but some how (stolen or fell off) is gone missing.
Now, I have a question, HTA says you can not drive a car unless the permit is validated. If I have validated the permit but it was stolen and I was stopped and the officer runs my plate and verifies it was validated, do I still get a ticket because the sticker is not attached for one reason or another?
Yes. If the permit was valid but the sticker was missing you could still be charged under the same section as the OP (in fact it's basically the same situation as the OP alleges). Now if it was legitimately stolen and you were unaware, you'd have to convince the officer or the Courts of that. You'd have to demonstrate some evidence of due diligence in periodically checking your plate for the sticker and/or replacing it ASAP upon learning it's missing. For instance, if it is stolen and you report it to the police, it's not carte blanche to drive around for several months without replacing it. Unfortunately many people fabricate stories about why their sticker or missing (or even better why they have one when they shouldn't) so police won't always take you at your word without some fact checking or supporting evidence. FYI the MTO does record the serial number on your plate sticker. So while I don't disagree it's a good idea to affix the second copy to your permit, police can still verify that you have the correct sticker on your car even without it.
Observer135 wrote:
Thank you for the explanation, this is great peace of info.
This actually explains the purpose of having that little sticker that you "should" attach to the back of ownership, it simply helps to show that you did have a validation on your plate but some how (stolen or fell off) is gone missing.
Now, I have a question, HTA says you can not drive a car unless the permit is validated. If I have validated the permit but it was stolen and I was stopped and the officer runs my plate and verifies it was validated, do I still get a ticket because the sticker is not attached for one reason or another?
Yes. If the permit was valid but the sticker was missing you could still be charged under the same section as the OP (in fact it's basically the same situation as the OP alleges). Now if it was legitimately stolen and you were unaware, you'd have to convince the officer or the Courts of that. You'd have to demonstrate some evidence of due diligence in periodically checking your plate for the sticker and/or replacing it ASAP upon learning it's missing. For instance, if it is stolen and you report it to the police, it's not carte blanche to drive around for several months without replacing it. Unfortunately many people fabricate stories about why their sticker or missing (or even better why they have one when they shouldn't) so police won't always take you at your word without some fact checking or supporting evidence.
FYI the MTO does record the serial number on your plate sticker. So while I don't disagree it's a good idea to affix the second copy to your permit, police can still verify that you have the correct sticker on your car even without it.
You see, this where I find this a bit a bitter pill to swallow. I never check my plates to make sure the sticker did not come off or some one did not steal it, never... The only time I ever look at it is when I get the new one and clean the old one so I can make sure the new one is on there securely. So if anything happened to it, it could go months un-noticed. At the same time, I know what you mean, police get all kinds of song and dance excuses and have heard it all. So there is no simple way of determining who is be hones and truthful and who is blowing smoke. I think HTA should be revised to include some sort of guidance in this regard to provide better tools to the officers in making a determination when an offence should be issues if an when it has been verified the validation was purchased. I seen to recall for similar type of offences police had the discretion of giving 48 hours grace period to the driver to bring proof to the police station and he/she would cancel the ticket, if not, the ticket would stand and driver would have deal with it in court. I don't think this is happening any more, no idea why, but if you ask me, it was a great way to weed out innocent people from having to go to court and tie up the system.
You see, this where I find this a bit a bitter pill to swallow.
I never check my plates to make sure the sticker did not come off or some one did not steal it, never...
The only time I ever look at it is when I get the new one and clean the old one so I can make sure the new one is on there securely.
So if anything happened to it, it could go months un-noticed.
At the same time, I know what you mean, police get all kinds of song and dance excuses and have heard it all.
So there is no simple way of determining who is be hones and truthful and who is blowing smoke. I think HTA should be revised to include some sort of guidance in this regard to provide better tools to the officers in making a determination when an offence should be issues if an when it has been verified the validation was purchased.
I seen to recall for similar type of offences police had the discretion of giving 48 hours grace period to the driver to bring proof to the police station and he/she would cancel the ticket, if not, the ticket would stand and driver would have deal with it in court. I don't think this is happening any more, no idea why, but if you ask me, it was a great way to weed out innocent people from having to go to court and tie up the system.
ooh let me go re-read mine That's incorrect, the law actually changed a few years ago. You were actually required to affix the sticker to your permit until July of 2012. The regulation for vehicle permits used to read (emphasis added by me): "A permit for a motor vehicle shall be validated by means of evidence of validation provided by the Ministry and affixed in the appropriate space provided on the permit" It now reads: "Evidence of validation not intended for the number plate may be affixed in the appropriate space provided on the permit for the vehicle"
ooh let me go re-read mine
Stanton wrote:
waddya_know wrote:
Nothing changed. It has simply been decided that failure to put the sticker on the registration does not put you in a law-breaking situation.
That's incorrect, the law actually changed a few years ago. You were actually required to affix the sticker to your permit until July of 2012.
The regulation for vehicle permits used to read (emphasis added by me):
"A permit for a motor vehicle shall be validated by means of evidence of validation provided by the Ministry and affixed in the appropriate space provided on the permit"
It now reads:
"Evidence of validation not intended for the number plate may be affixed in the appropriate space provided on the permit for the vehicle"
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
The vehicle validation sheet you get from ServiceOntario with the two stickers remains the same. It'll still give you instructions to place the one sticker on the back of the permit, and then instructions for the plate sticker on personal/commercial vehicles.
bobajob wrote:
ooh let me go re-read mine
The vehicle validation sheet you get from ServiceOntario with the two stickers remains the same. It'll still give you instructions to place the one sticker on the back of the permit, and then instructions for the plate sticker on personal/commercial vehicles.
oh I get it, the regulation changed i.e. the law, not what they put on the instructions The vehicle validation sheet you get from ServiceOntario with the two stickers remains the same. It'll still give you instructions to place the one sticker on the back of the permit, and then instructions for the plate sticker on personal/commercial vehicles.
oh I get it, the regulation changed i.e. the law, not what they put on the instructions
bend wrote:
bobajob wrote:
ooh let me go re-read mine
The vehicle validation sheet you get from ServiceOntario with the two stickers remains the same. It'll still give you instructions to place the one sticker on the back of the permit, and then instructions for the plate sticker on personal/commercial vehicles.
--------------------------------------------------------------
* NO you cant touch your phone
* Speeding is speeding
* Challenge every ticket
* Impaired driving, you should be locked up UNDER the jail
There was never any actual law or regulation providing a grace period, it was something officers would simply do (and still do). Unfortunately it's a bit more complicated now due to e-ticketing. It's a very good system in that it simplifies the ticket submission process and speeds up disclosure, but tickets are now automatically filed to the Courts. The officer no longer has a means of holding onto the ticket for a few days prior to submitting it. Realistically though for this offence, I can't see many officers giving you a grace period anyways. Either they believe your sticker was stolen, etc. or they don't. In my experience it was always pretty easy to tell if the sticker had been ripped off a plate or not.
Observer135 wrote:
I seen to recall for similar type of offences police had the discretion of giving 48 hours grace period to the driver to bring proof to the police station and he/she would cancel the ticket, if not, the ticket would stand and driver would have deal with it in court. I don't think this is happening any more, no idea why, but if you ask me, it was a great way to weed out innocent people from having to go to court and tie up the system.
There was never any actual law or regulation providing a grace period, it was something officers would simply do (and still do). Unfortunately it's a bit more complicated now due to e-ticketing. It's a very good system in that it simplifies the ticket submission process and speeds up disclosure, but tickets are now automatically filed to the Courts. The officer no longer has a means of holding onto the ticket for a few days prior to submitting it. Realistically though for this offence, I can't see many officers giving you a grace period anyways. Either they believe your sticker was stolen, etc. or they don't. In my experience it was always pretty easy to tell if the sticker had been ripped off a plate or not.
I realize there was never such a thing as a grace period as far as the law is concerned, the officer was doing this just to be nice (that's my view anyway), it was up to the officer to make the decision, I had no idea they still do this, I have not heard of it in so long I thought it was no longer an option. Would you mind elaborating on the e-ticket part of your comment? Are you saying that as soon as the ticket is issued a copy is transmitted directly to the court? I'm curious how the mechanics of e-ticket works especially when it comes to officer's notes, it seems the notes are made on the terminal in the cruiser and no notebook is in use anymore.
Stanton wrote:
There was never any actual law or regulation providing a grace period, it was something officers would simply do (and still do). Unfortunately it's a bit more complicated now due to e-ticketing. It's a very good system in that it simplifies the ticket submission process and speeds up disclosure, but tickets are now automatically filed to the Courts. The officer no longer has a means of holding onto the ticket for a few days prior to submitting it. Realistically though for this offence, I can't see many officers giving you a grace period anyways. Either they believe your sticker was stolen, etc. or they don't. In my experience it was always pretty easy to tell if the sticker had been ripped off a plate or not.
I realize there was never such a thing as a grace period as far as the law is concerned, the officer was doing this just to be nice (that's my view anyway), it was up to the officer to make the decision, I had no idea they still do this, I have not heard of it in so long I thought it was no longer an option.
Would you mind elaborating on the e-ticket part of your comment? Are you saying that as soon as the ticket is issued a copy is transmitted directly to the court?
I'm curious how the mechanics of e-ticket works especially when it comes to officer's notes, it seems the notes are made on the terminal in the cruiser and no notebook is in use anymore.
My knowledge of e-tickets is limited and Im not sure how standardized the system is across the Province. My general understanding is that while its not instantaneous, e-tickets are automatically sent to the Court offices each weekday. For e-notes, officers would enter them after having issued a ticket. The notes are associated to a specific ticket and once submitted they become "locked" and can no longer be changed. Officers can add additional supplementary notes if needed, but each set of notes would be time stamped.
My knowledge of e-tickets is limited and Im not sure how standardized the system is across the Province. My general understanding is that while its not instantaneous, e-tickets are automatically sent to the Court offices each weekday. For e-notes, officers would enter them after having issued a ticket. The notes are associated to a specific ticket and once submitted they become "locked" and can no longer be changed. Officers can add additional supplementary notes if needed, but each set of notes would be time stamped.
I have a problem and not sure what the hell to do about it. Few days ago I was stopped on a street going westbound against blinding afternoon sun following the flow of traffic. I drive a taxi for living in Toronto and have ACZ driver's license. I have a perfect record both for professional as well regular demerit points. I haven't been pulled over as a matter of fact in some 15 years for…
I have recently gone to court for a speeding ticket issued by an OPP officer. As it stood, the officer forgot to sign the ticket. So at my trial, before I made a plea, I pointed this out to the justice of the peace and asked that the ticket be quashed. I was asked to produce my copy of the ticket, which I gave and the JOP then agreed with me and dismissed the case. Before he did so, the…
I got pulled over (along with about 10 other cars) for going through a road closed sign. I had just pulled out of a parking lot pretty much right beside the road closed sign, and with about 4 cars behind me there wasn't much I could do but go through, so I think I have a good chance of fighting it. However, on my ticket under the Signature of issuing Provincial Offences Officer, it's left…
So here's my situation, any advice would be appreciated.
On June 26, 2013 I received a ticket for 25 over in a 60 zone
In early October I received my notice of trial (Feb 25, 2014)
In early January I sent in my request for disclosure
In late January I received a letter to pick up my disclosure, however when I picked up my disclosure it wasn't typed (I had requested it to be) and I needed…
Is there a legal requirement to report an accident to the insurer?
Scenario
- 2 vehicle accident
- each vehicle has less than $1000 damage
- each vehicle has damage roughly equal to insurance deductible
- a police Accident Report was completed
In this scenario the drivers decided to repair their own damages. But are they legally bound to report the accident and damages to the insurer? ...and out of…
I will be representing my wife at her speeding trial next week. Mostly everything is pretty much run of the mill but since she wasn't speeding we will be having her take the stand. Since this opens up the opportunity for the prosecutor to cross examine, I am just wondering if anyone here knows what kind of questions we should expect from the prosecutor in order to best prepare.
i got pulled over by a cop this morning in my kids's school zone for failure to stop at a stop sign. i am thinking of fighting this ticket, but i noticed that on the ticket itself it only says "disobey stop sign - fail to stop" and there is no mention of the demerit points. a co-worker mentioned to me that a ticket should state how many demerit points i am being docked. i know the Highway Traffic…
Alright, so this happened back awhile ago on June and I haven't appeared in Court. However, I would like some inputs and advice before I get into this battle.
Back in June I got a Speeding Ticket claiming I was going 100km/h on Blackcreek going south towards Lawrence. The Speed Limit there is 70km/h.
At this point of time, it was roughly traffic hour around 4-5PM. Coming off of the Highway, and…
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…
My son was returning from school and was just entering the driveway when another vehicle hit the rear end. Police writes a ticket "fail to yield from private drive" 139(i). He is going to fight this ticket and made an application for disclosure. The trial is next week and he still hasn't received the disclosure.
He checked with the court last month and they said that they will call when disclosure…
i was travelling on the 401 (posted speed 100km/h) in the far left lane, when i caught up to a vehicle going ~110km/h. I patiently waited for the vehicle to move over a lane, but they did not. The vehicle behind me moved to the center lane to pass, but because he was a safe distance behind me, i moved into the middle lane ahead of him to pass the slower moving car. When I accelerated, i…
So I was returning from my honeymoon in Montreal, and was cruising down the 401 just inside the Ontario/Quebec border. I was passing one of the Onroute stations and saw an OPP cruiser. I checked my speed and I was doing 120. A few kilometers up the road the cruiser pulled me over and told me I was clocked doing 132 by the aircraft. I was a little surprised to see the ticket was for the full…
I made a right turn during prohibited hours (7am-6pm) in Toronto. I was ticketed by a COP who was specially watching for that trap.
After I've received the ticket HTA144(9), I discovered one of the seven digits of my license plate was incorrectly written on my ticket. I was thinking about to make a First Attendance at the court office to see the prosecutor for a reduced charge...any advice or…
Have been busy and haven't had much time to follow up on this...
Went to court having not received disclosure (and was not organized enough to apply for a stay), so the trial was adjourned. They photocopied the officer's ticket and notes and provided a log sheet from the plane. I've sent another request for the rest of the disclosure items.
So here's my question -- can an officer amend the ticket…
I am not sure if my case is really a case of " mis-use parking permit" and need some advises on whether i should fight the ticket. Here is what happened:
During the labor day long weekend, I took my parents to diner at a local shopping mall. (my father's hip was broken in 2016 and he's been on wheelchair since, the permit is in his name and I been using the permit to help him for doctor's…
I have a court date coming up where I need to subpoena one of the officers that was present when I got my ticket. The issuing officer didn't include the fact that the second one was present at the time in his report (disclosure) but did give me the second officers name and badge number after the judge told him to do it.
What I'm looking for help with is the process of me getting to…
I got pulled over on a 4 lane section fo Highway 7... Thank god I didn't get a stay at home ticket as well or my car impounded.
Officer clocked me at 156 km/h he decided not to impound my car and give me a 149 km/h since it was my first offence and he said I was polite and respectful. I would give this officer a 5/5 review if I could, very polite and respectful.
Long story short, I was driving from Toronto to Ottawa and around Napanee with my friend in two separated cars, the officer was parked on uturn. He followed us turn his light on and got between us and pulled us over, he told me that i was running at 152 km/h without showing me his LISAR. they suspended my and my friends license and impounded the two cars for 7 days. This was a Friday in January…
I'm unsure on what to do here. I was under the impression that I could request a stay on the day of trial because disclosure was not given to me in an adequate time. I requested disclosure 2x by fax, 5 months ago.
I read on ticketcombat that I had to file a motion 15 days prior to the trial to request a stay of proceedings.
Does anyone else get blinded by fog lights on rural roads? I don't seem to have a problem with them on lighted streets, but the badly aimed fog lights or ones with a poor cutoff really get to me when driving the Escort. I just came back from a 20-minute drive, and every single pickup truck had fog lights on, and forced me to focus on the bottom right of the road. My windshield is clean and…
