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 so I have a bizzare situation. Today I received a summons for "being the owner of a motor vehicle bearing Vehicle Identification Number ###, failed to submit the vehicle, equipment or drawn vehicle for inspection or tests as required by an officer" for a vehicle I previously owned. Apparently a violation of HTA 82(9).
The date of offense is June 15, the summons was issued on October 26th and I…
Hi, I need some help for the ticket of lmproper left turn.
When i drove my car from east to west, intending to make a left turn and stop in front of stop line. There was a car in front of me, which has turn on yellow light. The light was turning red and then I thought I cannot leave in the intersection and turned, an incoming car was runing the light and hit me. No one got hurt but both cars had…
Have a ticket in which the radar used was a Genesis VP Directional. I had downloaded the manual for a Genesis VP but I now realize that the unit is not the same so it is the wrong manual. My trial is very soon so I do not have time to ask for disclosure of the manual.
Does anyone have access to an electronic version of the manual for Genesis VP Directional?
I was pulled over today in the city of Oakville for going 75 in a 40 zone. However, I am 100 percent certain that I was going only 50 in the 40 zone. When I was pulled over, I was driving my Dad's car which I felt was the reason I was getting stopped since two teenagers driving a 2013 S Class. He asked does I know why I am being pulled over and I…
I really need help on fighting my 9 tickets i received from one police officer. Here is some background of what happened!
I was caught speeding 66km on a 40km (school zone) on January 29, 2010. I was driving my friend's car and turns out she didnt renew the validation on the vehicle and didnt leave the up to date insurance paper on the car.
Hey question that I think here's probably the best place to get the answer:
I was charged with a careless driving offence in oct, trail in early april, so as of right now my insurance record is 100% clean... except the officer did file an accident report at the scene where I was classified at fault due to it being PI (although very minor). The person I hit did not sue etc, so the insurance company…
Very much unintentionally passed a stopped bus, with sign and flashing lights. Didn't realize I had done it until I was at the end of the bus. I'll save you my sob story, but it was truly accidental. I'm generally very cautious and have a perfect driving record. Never been stopped.
While I realize if a cop had seen me that I would have gotten a ticket, there were none in sight. Though I may very…
I was recently pulled over for running a red and I wasnt able to find my wallet in the car at the time to hand over my license. I had a passport in the vehicle that he used. The wallet was in the vehicle, it just fell through the seats. (Tough to find a black leather wallet in a black/black leather truck at night).
The officer still wrote the tickets for both he signed the one ticket (failure to…
I was passing a vehicle that was going slow for me and there was an oncoming vehicle coming at me. I speed up to get around the person I was passing and the oncoming vehicle turns out to be a cop who turns around and tickets me for going 110km in a 80km zone. How does it work with passing a vehicle? Once I passed the vehicle I went back down to my original speed of just under 100. The officer…
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.
Hi guys, I'm still a little in shock of getting my first traffic ticket...
On Monday afternoon, I was returning from Toronto to Ottawa on HW416, I was driving about 15 over 100 like always. Then a car came very close to me on the left lane and made me nervous, I speed up unintentionally to pass the car and change lane, but while doing that a police car pull out of the median. He was hiding in…
May i ask this question regarding transport trucks limited to 105 km/h. Moving road blocks or safety?
IMO it isnt speed that kills. I find transport trucks infact help keep the road going. With cars that choose to not move to the right and slow down the middle lane the trucks would try to pass in their passing lane therefore the slower traffic would move right.
Received a notice from the police that a motion is being put forward to adjourn upcoming trial date. Notice indicates that an officer has sworn an affidavit that the crucial witness cannot attend date trial is set for (we know there is a social engagement at 7:30 pm for the witness, trial time is 1:30 pm). This further delay is a big problem to my daughter's case. She is moving away to…
This is what happened. I was travelling west on a four lane city street that was very light with traffic. I was making a left hand turn into a wide driveway of a business. There was traffic lights about 100 yards past the driveway and were red for the east-west traffic. I was in the left lane with my signal on and there was no oncoming traffic due to the red light. I was slowed right down…
I was driving my families older car and got pulled over, and the police officer informed me my plate was dirty. He issued me a ticket of $110 for the 13(2) act and obstruct plate as the offense. He informed me that such a plate could be used to avoid red lights as well as 407 tolls, also that buying a new plate can help to lower the ticket if I fight the charge, and that he also took a picture…
I received a red light camera ticket. In the picture, you see an ambulance in front of me with flashing lights. I had moved to alleviate the traffic behind me for the emergency vehicles coming behind it.
Is this a possible defense, if so, does anyone know any good case law to justify this position?
what happens if they charge someone for driving at 151Km/hr in montreal and they put for trial, appear after some months and sadly lost the trial ?
In montreal its $300 fine and 5demerit points ...
I heard Ontario and Qubec share the information. So once the trial is over ( and when the file moved to ontario) will his car gets towed and licence get suspended for 7days (later to 30 days ) ? and he…
I got a notice in the mail that trial is set four weeks from today, so it's time to request disclosure. I have zero chance of getting an 11b since trial is less than two months after the offense date and the officer did not reduce the charge. I really want to try and create delays on the trial, to reduce the chance of the officer showing up on multiple occasions. Is there any known loop-holes…
This weekend my father was involved in an accident with a transit bus in Burlington, ON. After the police showed up he was charged with "Fail to obey stop sign" Sec. 136(1)(a). At this particular intersection there NO stop signs but there are traffic lights. There is construction going on there so one of the light posts is smaller.
Driving conditions were terribly wet and visibility was low.…
So my boyfriend and I recently started dating. I have a vehicle that was insured. Insurance cost too much and I found it was just as easy to walk to work due to how close it was. But I didn't want to get rid of my car just yet, plus I'm still making payments on it as well. When we moved into our appartment together, I had it towed to my parking spot out back.
I was making a left hand legal turn on a green light, a driver came through the lane I was supposed to be going into ran the red and hit me head on as I was turning into my lane. When the officer came he was telling me that I was racing and driving recklessly because apparently there was reports of street racing in the area. I was not charged on the scene for this but I'm scared i am going to be…
I got a ticket for failure to surrender insurance because I did not have my new insurance stubs with me, just a bunch of expired ones. My policy number has not changed, so I asked the officer to just run the policy number so I could prove that I was in fact insured. He said they don't have that ability, handed me the ticket and reminded me that my car could have been impounded.
So I'm in a bit of a pickle and would appreciate if someone could clarify something for me.
I'm less than a month away (test on April 6th) from getting my full G license, and got a speeding ticket recently. The ticket was for 49km/h over the posted limit of 100km/h on the 403 in Oakville/Halton region, but was reduced from the initial ~60km/h over.
