I have a situation where I was traveling in a lane the size of which two vehicles could comfortably fit side by side and the lane is paved to curbed (no shoulders). I was to the right side of the lane and the second vehicle (a commercial carrier) came up on the left and attempted to pass. I began to give way but at the point where are vehicles were parrallel (nose-to-nose) the other driver attempted to turn right into a driveway without indicating and plowed into the side of my vehicle. My vehicle was clearly in the blindspot of the carrier. In my eyes, given the actions of the driver it did not appear they knew where they were going and were not aware of their surroundings when they made that turn. There were no 3rd party witnesses and our stories are differing as to how we ended up parrallel and whether the other party indicated, but the stories match where the other driver made a right turn into me. I'm being binged 50% at fault because insurance is stating that the vehicles shouldn't have been beside each other in a designated "single-lane" and that the entire story doesn't match. Because we have no 3rd party witnesses to explain how the vehicles ended up parrallel I'm stuck to defend myself with the traffic act but I'm unable to find a definition for "Single-lane" or driving parrllel or passing where a lane is big enough for two or more vehicles. Yet all over the city there are lanes like this!!!! My argument is that there is no clearly defined rule in the act for the lane we were driving on, and because of that, both drivers should have used discretion due to lane size. Attempting to make a right turn from the leftmost side of the lane (where there was more than enough space for another vehicle) should have prompted the other driver to make a check in their blindspot before attempting the turn which is where I would say the infraction occurred. Being in the blindspot at the time of impact and driving in an unchanging direction should not make me at fault. The point of impact shows my establishment in the lane. Is there anything in the act to help me?
I have a situation where I was traveling in a lane the size of which two vehicles could comfortably fit side by side and the lane is paved to curbed (no shoulders). I was to the right side of the lane and the second vehicle (a commercial carrier) came up on the left and attempted to pass. I began to give way but at the point where are vehicles were parrallel (nose-to-nose) the other driver attempted to turn right into a driveway without indicating and plowed into the side of my vehicle. My vehicle was clearly in the blindspot of the carrier. In my eyes, given the actions of the driver it did not appear they knew where they were going and were not aware of their surroundings when they made that turn.
There were no 3rd party witnesses and our stories are differing as to how we ended up parrallel and whether the other party indicated, but the stories match where the other driver made a right turn into me.
I'm being binged 50% at fault because insurance is stating that the vehicles shouldn't have been beside each other in a designated "single-lane" and that the entire story doesn't match. Because we have no 3rd party witnesses to explain how the vehicles ended up parrallel I'm stuck to defend myself with the traffic act but I'm unable to find a definition for "Single-lane" or driving parrllel or passing where a lane is big enough for two or more vehicles. Yet all over the city there are lanes like this!!!!
My argument is that there is no clearly defined rule in the act for the lane we were driving on, and because of that, both drivers should have used discretion due to lane size. Attempting to make a right turn from the leftmost side of the lane (where there was more than enough space for another vehicle) should have prompted the other driver to make a check in their blindspot before attempting the turn which is where I would say the infraction occurred. Being in the blindspot at the time of impact and driving in an unchanging direction should not make me at fault. The point of impact shows my establishment in the lane.
Hi my name is nick, I was hoping you can answer my question since i couldn't find an answer on google. I recently took my class 5 road test in Edmonton Alberta (the equivalent of g2 in Ontario), after the test the lady told me that on the one lane road i should have first signalled to the left even thew it was one lane, then stay on the left side of the one lane road and if i was to turn right i would have to signal to the right and move to the right side of the lane right before the stop or yield sign. She took off 50 points ( more than she should have) and i ended up failing my test because 75 points is the maximum you can get and i got 30 points taken off for not pulling my park brake and not cancelling my signal light on time two times. I looked through the drivers handbook and there is no such rule, i even googled it and i couldn't find anywhere that says you are supposed to treat a line big enough for two as two lanes. Do you know of a rule like that.
Hi my name is nick,
I was hoping you can answer my question since i couldn't find an answer on google. I recently took my class 5 road test in Edmonton Alberta (the equivalent of g2 in Ontario), after the test the lady told me that on the one lane road i should have first signalled to the left even thew it was one lane, then stay on the left side of the one lane road and if i was to turn right i would have to signal to the right and move to the right side of the lane right before the stop or yield sign. She took off 50 points ( more than she should have) and i ended up failing my test because 75 points is the maximum you can get and i got 30 points taken off for not pulling my park brake and not cancelling my signal light on time two times. I looked through the drivers handbook and there is no such rule, i even googled it and i couldn't find anywhere that says you are supposed to treat a line big enough for two as two lanes. Do you know of a rule like that.
The rules are different everywhere. The reason you turn from the of the lane you intend to turn is in the very likely event someone is behind you they can pass you. Can you imagine if you were waiting to make a left from the right side of the lane and your rear signal was out and someone decides to pass you because they are not mind readers? Examiners can tell the difference between making a error because you were nervous and one because you dont have a clue. Bottom line you failed because the examiner thought you weren't ready.
The rules are different everywhere. The reason you turn from the of the lane you intend to turn is in the very likely event someone is behind you they can pass you. Can you imagine if you were waiting to make a left from the right side of the lane and your rear signal was out and someone decides to pass you because they are not mind readers? Examiners can tell the difference between making a error because you were nervous and one because you dont have a clue. Bottom line you failed because the examiner thought you weren't ready.
Hi everyone. I'm asking for a friend who has a question of interpretation.
He was ticketed for using a hand-held device. He contends that he was acting within the exemption provided under Subsection 14 (1) of O. Reg. 366/09, which reads as follows (emphasis added):
Hey guys i just wanted to know what speeds you see others do on the roads on a regular basis. As we all know no body drives 100 km. It seems they only hit that speed twice once on the way up and once on the way down.
it seems the De Facto limit on the 401 is about 120-130. But lately i dont know if…
On June 10, 2017, I was pulled over by an OPP on the 403 heading WB and told I registered 136km/hr. I kept chit chat to a minimum and took my ticket and went on with my day. I later requested my disclosure and did not receive it until a week before my Oct. 27 court date, and so I had my date…
Anyone know any more information? Apparently kathleen wynne mentioned trying to introduce legislation after more than 20 years of no speed cameras. My guess is that it wont happen, since they've tried before many times to bring it back after it was abolished.
The other day I was given a ticket for speeding 119 in a 90, on highway 17 near Marathon, ON (Speeding ticket capital of the universe, BTW). The officer claims to have "clocked" me using the vehicle mounted radar at 121 KMH and dropped it (presumably to lower fine and demerits).
I posted this in the 3 Demerit Section and haven't received any
responses.
I received a failure to stop at an amber light ticket on April 17, 2009. At my First Attendance Meeting I asked to read the police officer's notes and remember thinking how ridiculous they were and the difficulty…
I was on the right side of the road going straight when a pedestrian waved down the taxi driver in the lane next to me. He pulled over to the right without any notice or signalling and hit me with the side of his car.
There were many witnesses but I immediately had a concussion and did not think of…
My mother was driving EB on a 4 lane street (2 lanes EB, 2 lanes WB).
She was in the left hand lane and started a left hand turn so as to enter a side street, crossing WB traffic. There was NO intersection. She hit a cyclist who was heading WB. Police where called but none showed up. My…
If the speed limit is 50, and you do 100+, not only do you get 6 points. Your car gets impounded for a week, and your license suspended for 7 days, along with a hefty fine of at least $2000. The penalty is actually the same as for racing. The law came in effect on October 1, 2007. Remember -…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural…
