Hello, I am hoping to get advice on how to proceed with my defence regarding a ticket I received for improper use of a high occupancy vehicle lane on an interprovincial bridge between Hull, QC and Ottawa, ON. The ticket was given in Ottawa by the Ottawa Police. What happened: I was staying at my girlfriend's in Hull, QC because it was close to my new job in Ottawa. This area was brand new to me. Needless to say, I was driving South down Maisonneuve Boulevard in Hull that morning to get to work and cross the bridge to Ottawa. After the intersection between Maisonneuve Boulevard and Laurier Street, there is a bridge that crosses into Ottawa and onto Wellington Street. This is an interprovincial bridge. I was in the furthest left lane in Hull on Maisonneuve Boulevard because it seemed to be moving quicker than the right lane but upon crossing the intersection, I noticed an HOV sign that only allows 3 passengers or more, taxis, buses, etc. So I put my blinker on to get into the right lane but no vehicles would let me in, to which point I was being honked at from buses and vehicles behind me. I decided to keep going with my right blinker on by trying to find a spot to squeeze into on the right lane until a police officer who was purposely waiting on the median got out of his vehicle and asked me to stop right then and there so he could give me a ticket. HOV Lanes & Signage After getting the infuriating ticket, I went back after work and noticed that the lane I was driving in on Maisonneuve Boulevard (in Hull, QC) was not a HOV lane. In fact, the HOV lane on Maisonneuve Boulevard is on the furthest right lane. However, after crossing the intersection onto the bridge, the HOV lane switches to the furthest left lane with only an HOV warning the moment you get on the bridge. My defence According to the Ontario website, entering an HOV lane in Ontario must have approximately a 400m notice. Link: http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/ontari ... anes.shtml Second, I assume that an Ottawa by-law comes into play as well. I found the document, and can't find much about HOV lanes in Ottawa other than page 26 that says "drive or permit to be driven any vehicle to be driven, other than a high-occupancy vehicle carrying the minimum number of persons shown on the authorized signs." I also found on page 12, regarding signage, saying: "required to regulate, direct, warn or guide pedestrian and vehicular traffic and parking for the safety and convenience of the public." Link: http://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/docume ... law_en.pdf What I am hoping to argue is that there was not enough signage or proper warning to guide me that the HOV lane immediately cuts from the furthest to the right to the furthest to the left upon crossing the bridge. I requested a disclosure two weeks before my court date (May 2), so I hope that I can request my trial to be adjourned until I receive a disclosure. Any advice on how to proceed with this would also be appreciated! Thank you.
Hello,
I am hoping to get advice on how to proceed with my defence regarding a ticket I received for improper use of a high occupancy vehicle lane on an interprovincial bridge between Hull, QC and Ottawa, ON. The ticket was given in Ottawa by the Ottawa Police.
What happened:
I was staying at my girlfriend's in Hull, QC because it was close to my new job in Ottawa. This area was brand new to me.
Needless to say, I was driving South down Maisonneuve Boulevard in Hull that morning to get to work and cross the bridge to Ottawa. After the intersection between Maisonneuve Boulevard and Laurier Street, there is a bridge that crosses into Ottawa and onto Wellington Street. This is an interprovincial bridge. I was in the furthest left lane in Hull on Maisonneuve Boulevard because it seemed to be moving quicker than the right lane but upon crossing the intersection, I noticed an HOV sign that only allows 3 passengers or more, taxis, buses, etc. So I put my blinker on to get into the right lane but no vehicles would let me in, to which point I was being honked at from buses and vehicles behind me. I decided to keep going with my right blinker on by trying to find a spot to squeeze into on the right lane until a police officer who was purposely waiting on the median got out of his vehicle and asked me to stop right then and there so he could give me a ticket.
HOV Lanes & Signage
After getting the infuriating ticket, I went back after work and noticed that the lane I was driving in on Maisonneuve Boulevard (in Hull, QC) was not a HOV lane.
In fact, the HOV lane on Maisonneuve Boulevard is on the furthest right lane. However, after crossing the intersection onto the bridge, the HOV lane switches to the furthest left lane with only an HOV warning the moment you get on the bridge.
Second, I assume that an Ottawa by-law comes into play as well. I found the document, and can't find much about HOV lanes in Ottawa other than page 26 that says "drive or permit to be driven any vehicle to be driven, other than a high-occupancy vehicle carrying the minimum number of persons shown on the authorized signs." I also found on page 12, regarding signage, saying: "required to regulate, direct, warn or guide pedestrian and vehicular traffic and parking for the safety and convenience of the public." Link: http://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/docume ... law_en.pdf
What I am hoping to argue is that there was not enough signage or proper warning to guide me that the HOV lane immediately cuts from the furthest to the right to the furthest to the left upon crossing the bridge. I requested a disclosure two weeks before my court date (May 2), so I hope that I can request my trial to be adjourned until I receive a disclosure.
Any advice on how to proceed with this would also be appreciated!
Thank you.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post. Register to view.
Were you charged under section 154.1 of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) or a municipal by-law or the National Capital Commission Traffic and Property Regulations (NCCTPR)?
Were you charged under section 154.1 of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) or a municipal by-law or the National Capital Commission Traffic and Property Regulations (NCCTPR)?
That is the same situation as me. From what I understand on that thread, I should meet with the prosecutor on my court date and ask them to drop the charge because it was the incorrect one. To clarify my situation, it was indeed the Ottawa Police and it was 154.1 (3) of the Highway Traffic Act. Whereas it should have been S.4(1) or an Ottawa by-law ticket (from what I am reading on the other thread). In your opinion, what should I bring to the prosecutor to prove to them that I was given the wrong charge and therefore should be getting it dropped altogether? Does my signage defence even hold up at all or is my best bet to only bring up the wrong charge and not the signage issue too.
That is the same situation as me. From what I understand on that thread, I should meet with the prosecutor on my court date and ask them to drop the charge because it was the incorrect one. To clarify my situation, it was indeed the Ottawa Police and it was 154.1 (3) of the Highway Traffic Act. Whereas it should have been S.4(1) or an Ottawa by-law ticket (from what I am reading on the other thread).
In your opinion, what should I bring to the prosecutor to prove to them that I was given the wrong charge and therefore should be getting it dropped altogether? Does my signage defence even hold up at all or is my best bet to only bring up the wrong charge and not the signage issue too.
You should get the officer to testify as to what he saw. Then ask him or her to describe the signage and road markings. Bring four copies of Regulation 620/05 (the HOV Regulation made under the HTA): one for the officer, one for the JP, one for the prosecutor and one for you to use. Ask the officer if you were on any of the highways specified in the Regulation (obviously you weren't). Ask the officer if the road markings matched what is specified in the Regulation (obviously they don't). You can then easily prove you were charged under the wrong offence. The prosecutor may then try to change the charge to s. 4(1) of the NCCTPR or the appropriate City of Ottawa by-law, but, to the best of my knowledge, you can object to that as that charge is not included in your original charge.
You should get the officer to testify as to what he saw. Then ask him or her to describe the signage and road markings. Bring four copies of Regulation 620/05 (the HOV Regulation made under the HTA): one for the officer, one for the JP, one for the prosecutor and one for you to use. Ask the officer if you were on any of the highways specified in the Regulation (obviously you weren't). Ask the officer if the road markings matched what is specified in the Regulation (obviously they don't). You can then easily prove you were charged under the wrong offence. The prosecutor may then try to change the charge to s. 4(1) of the NCCTPR or the appropriate City of Ottawa by-law, but, to the best of my knowledge, you can object to that as that charge is not included in your original charge.
You should get the officer to testify as to what he saw. Then ask him or her to describe the signage and road markings. Bring four copies of Regulation 620/05 (the HOV Regulation made under the HTA): one for the officer, one for the JP, one for the prosecutor and one for you to use. Ask the officer if you were on any of the highways specified in the Regulation (obviously you weren't). Ask the officer if the road markings matched what is specified in the Regulation (obviously they don't). You can then easily prove you were charged under the wrong offence. The prosecutor may then try to change the charge to s. 4(1) of the NCCTPR or the appropriate City of Ottawa by-law, but, to the best of my knowledge, you can object to that as that charge is not included in your original charge.
I received my disclosure. They are typed out notes of the officer. They say: "Enforcement of the Ottawa bound HOV lane. Signs posted clearly for bus/taxi person or more vehicles. Police truck parked NB on centre median. officer on foot. Vehicle observed in bus lane is a grey Hyundai sedan solo male drive4r in bus lane ID w ONT LD"
Zatota wrote:
You should get the officer to testify as to what he saw. Then ask him or her to describe the signage and road markings. Bring four copies of Regulation 620/05 (the HOV Regulation made under the HTA): one for the officer, one for the JP, one for the prosecutor and one for you to use. Ask the officer if you were on any of the highways specified in the Regulation (obviously you weren't). Ask the officer if the road markings matched what is specified in the Regulation (obviously they don't). You can then easily prove you were charged under the wrong offence. The prosecutor may then try to change the charge to s. 4(1) of the NCCTPR or the appropriate City of Ottawa by-law, but, to the best of my knowledge, you can object to that as that charge is not included in your original charge.
I received my disclosure. They are typed out notes of the officer. They say:
"Enforcement of the Ottawa bound HOV lane. Signs posted clearly for bus/taxi person or more vehicles. Police truck parked NB on centre median. officer on foot. Vehicle observed in bus lane is a grey Hyundai sedan solo male drive4r in bus lane ID w ONT LD"
I still think what I suggested will work. Signs may have been posted, but I'm guessing from what you've said that (a) there were no "HOV lane ahead" type signs on the Quebec side and (b) the signage did not conform to the Regulation (I believe someone who's in a similar situation said the lane is 3+). The officer clearly charged you under the wrong Act.
I still think what I suggested will work. Signs may have been posted, but I'm guessing from what you've said that (a) there were no "HOV lane ahead" type signs on the Quebec side and (b) the signage did not conform to the Regulation (I believe someone who's in a similar situation said the lane is 3+). The officer clearly charged you under the wrong Act.
Ok, thank you. So there is a sign that advises you HOV +3 taxi/bus ahead but it is as soon as you cross the intersection onto the bridge. If you see in my image it says HOV sign furthest left. That arrow is where all of a sudden it tells you it is now an HOV lane ahead. But the HOV lane was actually on the furthest right before the intersection/crossing on the bridge. Do you think that even though there was a "warning sign" right away that it will constitute a fair warning that it is HOV? It seems that the Ontario HOV says it should be 400m notice (again being the wrong charge he gave me anyway). From what I read about the previous person having this issue, it seems that people are saying if six months doesn't pass by time you go to court that the prosecutor can give me a new charge that would be the proper one? Or should they just end up dropping it based on my arguments you mentioned earlier. Thanks again.
Zatota wrote:
I still think what I suggested will work. Signs may have been posted, but I'm guessing from what you've said that (a) there were no "HOV lane ahead" type signs on the Quebec side and (b) the signage did not conform to the Regulation (I believe someone who's in a similar situation said the lane is 3+). The officer clearly charged you under the wrong Act.
Ok, thank you. So there is a sign that advises you HOV +3 taxi/bus ahead but it is as soon as you cross the intersection onto the bridge. If you see in my image it says HOV sign furthest left. That arrow is where all of a sudden it tells you it is now an HOV lane ahead. But the HOV lane was actually on the furthest right before the intersection/crossing on the bridge. Do you think that even though there was a "warning sign" right away that it will constitute a fair warning that it is HOV? It seems that the Ontario HOV says it should be 400m notice (again being the wrong charge he gave me anyway).
From what I read about the previous person having this issue, it seems that people are saying if six months doesn't pass by time you go to court that the prosecutor can give me a new charge that would be the proper one? Or should they just end up dropping it based on my arguments you mentioned earlier. Thanks again.
The 3+ HOV lane that exists on the bridge is municipal and is covered by an Ottawa by-law. The provisions of the HTA do not apply. Had you been charged under the NCCTPR, you'd have been guilty. The officer charged you with the wrong offence. If you're in court within six months of the alleged offence date, the officer (not the prosecutor) could theoretically charge you with the "correct" offence. Whether he would, however, would be entirely up to him.
The 3+ HOV lane that exists on the bridge is municipal and is covered by an Ottawa by-law. The provisions of the HTA do not apply. Had you been charged under the NCCTPR, you'd have been guilty. The officer charged you with the wrong offence.
If you're in court within six months of the alleged offence date, the officer (not the prosecutor) could theoretically charge you with the "correct" offence. Whether he would, however, would be entirely up to him.
My court date was today. After trial, the prosecutor didn't believe it was my first time on this bridge and therefore should have been more aware. The judge later proceeded to give my sentence as guilty. The prosecutor claims that there is a subsection within the HTA that applies to this offence. I do not recall what it was. Notably, the judge mentioned that wrong offence or not that I have confirmed I was on that lane and that is enough to make me guilty. I have taken papers to appeal. Not sure if I should. If anyone can please advise. Thank you.
Zatota wrote:
The 3+ HOV lane that exists on the bridge is municipal and is covered by an Ottawa by-law. The provisions of the HTA do not apply. Had you been charged under the NCCTPR, you'd have been guilty. The officer charged you with the wrong offence.
If you're in court within six months of the alleged offence date, the officer (not the prosecutor) could theoretically charge you with the "correct" offence. Whether he would, however, would be entirely up to him.
My court date was today. After trial, the prosecutor didn't believe it was my first time on this bridge and therefore should have been more aware. The judge later proceeded to give my sentence as guilty. The prosecutor claims that there is a subsection within the HTA that applies to this offence. I do not recall what it was. Notably, the judge mentioned that wrong offence or not that I have confirmed I was on that lane and that is enough to make me guilty.
I have taken papers to appeal. Not sure if I should. If anyone can please advise. Thank you.
Did they change the charge then to a different section of the HTA or to a bylaw offence or to the NCCTPR? If you want to appeal, you need to pay for 3 copies of the transcript in advance. So now you have to decide if your time and money is worth appealing it. Personally I encourage the appeal on principle alone, but that of course does not mean you will win! And since we were not there, we do not really know what was said or what went down.
Did they change the charge then to a different section of the HTA or to a bylaw offence or to the NCCTPR?
If you want to appeal, you need to pay for 3 copies of the transcript in advance. So now you have to decide if your time and money is worth appealing it. Personally I encourage the appeal on principle alone, but that of course does not mean you will win! And since we were not there, we do not really know what was said or what went down.
There's no way the JP could have found you guilty of the offence with which you were charged. It refers to a situation that's completely different from the one covered by Section 154.1. Even if you say you were driving in the lane, you did not violate s. 154.1 and cannot be found guilty of violating it. Unless the prosecutor amended the charge, you could not have been found guilty. In this case, the JP would have made an error in law and you should be able to win on appeal (my non-professional opinion, of course). If the prosecutor did amend the charge, the question becomes whether the new charge is included in the original. There have been discussions here as to what "included" means, including some excellent examples. I'm hardly an expert on this subject, so, perhaps, someone else can chime in.
There's no way the JP could have found you guilty of the offence with which you were charged. It refers to a situation that's completely different from the one covered by Section 154.1. Even if you say you were driving in the lane, you did not violate s. 154.1 and cannot be found guilty of violating it. Unless the prosecutor amended the charge, you could not have been found guilty. In this case, the JP would have made an error in law and you should be able to win on appeal (my non-professional opinion, of course).
If the prosecutor did amend the charge, the question becomes whether the new charge is included in the original. There have been discussions here as to what "included" means, including some excellent examples. I'm hardly an expert on this subject, so, perhaps, someone else can chime in.
So heres my case, does it have any validity? Im argueing that the officer did not have a justified view of where and if my car stopped or not, which it did.
This is the officers view of the stop sign i "disobeyed"
Another possible viewpoint, just so i can say that he cant see regardless
As you can see he cannot see the line where i must stop
As close are possible (which he wasnt) to the intersection,…
I need some help to settle a "Right of Way" argument. I know this question has probably been asked a thousand times before, but after doing a search, I was unable to find a posting on the forum, or the specific section in the OHTA relating to it.
Scenario:
Two cars approach an intersection where the east and westbound directions are controlled by stop signs, and the north and southbound…
I was pulled over for doing 123 in an 80 zone on highway 7 near Peterborough. The officer reduced it to 109 in an 80. It was HIGHLY unlikely that I was going 109, let alone 123, so for the merit of it I am taking this to court. Court case mid January.
Please could you help me to decipher the officer's notes. Are there any errors in the notes or on the ticket that you can see?
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…
Was pulled over earlier today for going 95km/h in posted 60km/h, 2nd offense (same cop that pulled me over the first time >.<) ticket of $265. going down dougall toward cabana where it goes from the 80 to 60 zone (yes was over slightly coming in and kept speed)
Just wondering what the best way to handle this? (location: windsor ontario)
I am a bartender and last saturday night while I was working someone backed into my car (2000 Acura Integra) in the prking lot. One of the cooks in the kitchen ran to tell me my car alarm is going off. Immediately I ran outside to discover my driver side mirror smashed on the ground and my driver door dented. There was nobody around to claim responsibility. I had already begun to suspect one…
Scenario regarding speeding charge - if a charge is not reduced at all at roadside, i.e. the charge, for example is "speeding 75 km/h in a 60 km/h zone contrary to s. 128," should that not mean the prosecution needs to prove that you are guilty of what you are being charged with, and not, simply, of speeding generally? I understand that if they prove a charge of even 61 km/h in a 60 km/h, they…
In a nutshell, in York Region, ran a stale yellow, cop was on a 407 off ramp and tickets me for red light. 2 week old pink slip, I forgot I put the new behind the expired one so I got a ticket for that as well.
Had the first court date adjourned because I did not receive disclosure. I used the Ticketcombat template and faxed it over, they told me I never left a phone number. No surprise there, I…
Was stopped in an OPP speed trap on eastbound QEW near Hamilton at 1:30 AM last week (Apr 25th). Officer said I was doing 131 km/h based on radar gun but I thought I was around 120 km/h (I let off the gas and looked at my speedo when I saw the 2 cars on the shoulder). It was a dark stretch and it was not busy but there were a few other cars on the highway. I asked to see the reading but they said…
1) Discovery info includes 3 pages of Genesis radar manual. Officer's notes show he used "Atlantic Laser" to measure speed. Didn't show model # (only s/n). The Genesis was used earlier on in the day, but not for my case. Can I grill him on this or is it simply a clerk's error in sending me the wrong manual?
I got a ticket for an expired licence sticker. The next day I went to the Ministry office to renew my sticker. I thought that I HAD to pay any outstanding tickets BEFORE I was eligible to renew my sticker. The lady at the desk informed me that I had an outstanding balance and 407 bill that I had a to pay and I told her that I was aware of that. I thought everything was cleared.
Last week I was driving though downtown and because of the slippery / wet conditions could not stop when the light was turning yellow to red and slid in to the intersection. I was hit by another car (near the headlamp). None of us were injured, there was significat damge to the cars. The air bags did not deploy.
I was given a ticket that reads : Red Light - fail to stop - H.T.A sect 144 (18) Fine…
I was just wondering if there was any text in the HTA that suggests that when driving on a highway with three lanes going in each direction, drivers should generally always be in the rightmost lane unless they are passing.
At first, I thought 154(b) was what I was looking for, but now I'm not so sure?
"Officials in West Vancouver, Canada apparently aren't satisfied with the driver-slowing properties of traditional speed bumps. Yesterday, the town unveiled a new way to entice motorists to ease off the gas pedal in the vicinity of the ÃÂcole Pauline Johnson Elementary School: A 2-D image of a child playing, creating the illusion that…
Does anybody know how you can check the status of your Demerit Points and how many you have collected over the last two years?
I just received a ticket as I was travelling through Barrie and am debating whether or not to fight it. My decision will be based on whether or not an infraction I received a year ago came with Demerit Points.
I have a question I would like to ask concerning turning right on a red light.
I was approaching on the right turn only lane to the traffic light which turned from amber to red. As soon as the red light came on, there were advance green left turn arrow for the intersection I was for the cars that were traveling right to left and left to right of me. Since there was a lot of traffic from where I…
So I got pulled over for speeding and following too close, on HWY 11 north of Barrie. The airplane caught me! I will fight this as I have fought ALL my tickets and won EVERY ONE of them (one per year... man I need to drive slower). So any thoughts out there on how to fight this one? Does the Crown have to bring the 2 officers in the plane, plus the one in the cruises to court? If 1 in 3 doesn't…
I am new to this forum and before making this post I did some digging and was unable to find anything on this method of officer note taking.
A little back ground of my case:
charged with 25km/h over the posted limit.
After numerous disclosure requests, finally received a detailed disclosure including several pages of the lidar manual and typed officer notes describing the events of my…
My wife was just pulled over for running a yellow light and instead was ticketed for an expired drivers licence. The license expired on her birthdate 4 months ago and she didn;t recieve a renewal. $325 !!!!!!
Hope someone can help. She was ticketed under HTA 32 (1) with the offense shown as
"Drive Motor Vehicle no license"
Can anyone tell me if this is worth the effort to get a reduction in the…
So I got pulled over for supposedly for running a stop sign. The problem is that I did a complete stop, waited a split second and started again. And yes I did stop behind the white line.
He took my information and went back to his car to write me up a ticket, came back and gave me my fine and explained to me the process. He gave me a reduced fine (65$ and ne points).
Someone has an accident in a car worth very little on highway 401 but the car is not drivable (but not in terrible shape), there is a police report filed right away in which no other cars were involved, however the car did strike a guardrail. Is it possible to handle this without involving insurance? Or is a forgone conclusion insurance will be notified by the police?
I made a minor mistake on my disclosure request - I put a "Request Date" of September 10, 2014 instead of 2015. The rest of the form is correct including offense date, fax date, trial date.
Will this affect my disclosure? Do I need to clear it up?
Also, I noticed the Ticket Combat disclosure form has a lot more information than what was posted in on this site. Is it OK to send a second…
Improper Use of HOV Lane on Interprovincial Bridge
