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.
Hi, I am new to the forum. I have been trying to get information off of here and www.ticketcombat.com for my case.
I was given a ticket for going 122km/h in a posted 100km/h zone at Hwy 401 east at Thickson Rd in Whitby ON on April 10th, 2009.
I find this absolutely absurd, since I was in the left most lane of the 401 approximately(within 5km/h) following the speed of traffic in my lane. The guy in…
Hey this is my first ticket so as much information that people can provide will be appreciated. I was making the drive home going around 90kph(in a 80) behind what I knew was an undercover police car. The cop abruptly pulled to the side and pulled back in behind me to pull me over. Now I reduced my speed to below 80 when the cop pulled to the side but he claimed he had me clocked at 109kph and…
On Wednesday I attended court at 1530 Markham Road, courtroom E2, in order to fight my speeding ticket. My original plan was to plead not guilty, and to watch all the people who went before me, the process, the Prosecutor and the Justice Of The Peace so I could strategize and form the best plan for my defence at trial. I had done some research online and sort of knew I wanted to defend myself,…
About 5 months ago I was driving along a two-way road approaching an intersection. The road had a left/ straight turning lane and a right turning lane. There was an 18 wheel gravel truck occupying the left lane at a red light. I pulled behind the truck intending to drive straight. After not moving for about 1 second, I check my rear view mirror, signaled and changed lanes to the right…
I am currently working for an auto parts delivery company and they contracted me to work as a courier.
As I left my base to make my first delivery which was less than 300 meters away from the shop, I had my seat belt off because i was under the impression, according to Section 106 Exception #6 subsection (c) of the highway traffic act, that I would be exempted from the seat belt law. The rule…
Got a ticket yesterday for "Insecure Load" contrary to HTA Sec 111(2). $160. I was pulling a utility trailer in which I had loaded a steel and wood cabinet. Total length of cabinet is 57.5". 14.75" (1/4 of the cabinet) was sticking out over the side of the trailer at about a 45 degree angle, the rest (3/4) was inside the trailer. The trailer has sides 24" high. I didn't have a tie-down or bungee…
I've been researching for months for defence strategy and basic trial information regarding my speeding ticket. However, the information is so conflicting that I have no confidence whatsoever that I know what I'm doing.
I didn't get this info from a friend of a friend, it came from this website, court officials, case laws, and a consultation with a traffic ticket fighting company.
So I was driving east bound pulling an empty tandem trailer on a gravel highway. Eventually I caught up to a truck pulling a fifth wheel. The speed limit was 70km/h and I don't quite remember but I'm almost 100% that the guy in front of me was driving at 60km/h. After being behind him for a few kilometers and getting two cracks in my windshield from rocks off his tires, I decided to pass him. I…
I have been driving for over 10 years without any tickets and accidents what so ever. Unfortunately my luck ran out this past Friday; when the officer pulled me over doing 80 in a 50 zone in Mississauga, Ontario. Officer was very friendly and polite not to mention nice enough to reduce the charge to 15KM.
On the speeding ticket it now says doing 65km in a 50 zone. Never having a speeding…
hi everyone im just wondering if its right for a cop to have my car impounded and give me a traffic ticket for improper plates when my car didnt leave my property, yes i knew the plates werent to my car but on private property it dont matter aslong as it dosent go onto public property. am i right with this that i shouldnt have gotten the ticket or my car impounded?????????????
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…
Hi guys, I got pulled over last night and was ticketed with HTA 172, I was going 157 on a 100 on 400N and was wondering what I should do. I was using cruise control but the guy in the lane to my left was driving into my lane irresponsibly to I sped up to get ahead of him and just my luck that's when an OPP cruiser pulled up behind me flashing his lights. My court date is at the end of the month…
If anyone can answer this I would greatly appreciate it.
Friday morning I checked my mail and received a letter from the MTO stating that under section 47(1) of the HTA the Registrar of Motor Vehicles has decided to suspend my driving privilege for medical reasons. This was due to a report submitted by a physician in compliance with section 203 of the HTA. Enclosed with that letter were forms to…
Ok so looking for some advice in regards to my wife's speeding ticket 120k in 100 (I was in vehicle so witnessed most - but was resting at initial clock.)
whats the likelihood of positive outcome of an 11b (or an officer no show, which I suspect doesn't really happen as much as web/Ads would have you believe) of 8months.
Wife REALLY doesn't want to go, and of course I'm the one doing all of the…
I know I shouldn't have driving but I slept at my buddies' place and I thought I was ok to drive in the morning.. needless to say I still drove and got pulled over.
Background details:
I was pulled over in the morning last week, apparently going 120 km/hr on 90km Northbound DVP. Two cop cars tailed me for a bit, saw them in my rearview mirror while on the left lane, slowed down to…
I got two tickets on Feb 20 2011. One for red light, and the other for Stop sign. I knew I had a good chance at getting off on the red light, because the officer couldn't actually see the light facing me. He was at an opposite angle, further up the street.
I set a court date for both tickets. On April 22 I moved to a new place. I went to the Service Ontario location and renewed my licence…
Winnipeg's police officers have been told to issue more traffic tickets, in part to increase revenue.
And a union representing cops says the move could hurt their efforts to curb the city's gang violence.
Police Chief Keith McCaskill said last night he -- and he alone, without input from Mayor Sam Katz -- recently made the call to patrolling officers and to those in specialized units to step up…
I'm wondering if anyone could enlighten me on what to do about the following scenario:
I was pulled over by a YRP constable because I only had one front head light working. Upon being pulled over, I also realized my insurance card was expired by one month and my car permit was not on me at all. (It doesn't matter now but my valid insurance card was sitting at home in an envelope…
I have a wicked prosecutor in my area, he is an evil man and will lie and cheat, whatever is necessary for him to win. I got a yellow light infraction ticket and the cop was a no show. I requested the charge dismissed and it went like this:
Me: I request the charge be dismissed because the officer is not here
Prosecutor: No, we are going to adjourn the trial so the officer can attend
Accident happened at a regular intersection with turning lanes and lights. I was turning left. The light turned yellow, and the car approaching sped up to make the light. I thought he was stopping, so i made the turn. At the time of the collision the light was red.
I understand that it is my fault. I'm just wondering what my best course of action is.
alright well to get started ive developed a passion for longboarding
for those of you who dont already know a longboard is a big skateboard too heavy for tricks and stuff but boy can they ever go fast
my hobbies include going up the escarpment here in hamilton and stoney creek and riding down the roads leading to the lower part of the city. just wondering here. what would happen if i was going down…
My court date is nearing at old city hall at appeals court.
iwhats going to happen and what do i do?
do I present my certificate of offence and point out to the judge the fine was incorrect, I did not appear and am now appealing on the grounds the Justice of the peace erred and failed to quash the ticket on the basis of the certificate not being properly examined and is not complete and regular on…
.