Search found 2654 matches

The only thing you can request is an explanation of the officer's short form, and the notes to be typed if they are obviously not legible. The only other type of evidence that you would really get is photographic or video, if it exists, and you asked for it.

What else did you ask for? Other than what I just listed above, nothing else that I can ...

What happened: The camera system sensed your vehicle approaching the stop line at greater than 20 km/h, and then 1.6 seconds later, your vehicle had fully entered the intersection against the red light. That's why there is a 1.6 second difference.

What you can do is file a disclosure request (see the "Courts and Procedures" section of this ...

Have the police charged you with anything?

If not, in the mean time, you'll just have to wait. If the vehicle's owner contacts you and you settle it outside of insurance and there are no charges, then you're likely okay. If, however, he's already gone through insurance... or decides to, and/or you get charged for failing to remain, yes ...

You might be able to plead the charge down to "fail to turn left to avoid collision," which is 2 demerit points instead of 4. As the officer did not witness the collision, they will need the witnesses to attend the trial.

Also, everything that Stanton said is correct.

In that case, either Careless Driving or Lane Change - Not in Safety would be the correct charge, IMO. "Follow Too Closely" isn't supported by what the OP said either way.

Just a couple of explanations...

Option 1 - Guilty plea with payment out of court. You'll get the total payable, demerit points, and likely a good insurance increase.
Option 2 - Plead guilty with an explanation. You will appear before a Justice of the Peace, and explain why you were going 81 in a 50. You may get a reduced fine, but that's entirely ...

Make another disclosure request. Make sure you emphasize, in the request, that it is your second request, and also note the date that you submitted your first one. Makes for a more convincing stay argument if the matter comes up.

If the officer shows up, it would be best to take a plea-bargain, like a municipal by-law offence. Your lack of familiarity with the area is not a sufficient defence and the JP won't buy it... unless you get a really sympathetic JP who has a hate-on for the Prosecutor (don't be on that). You could argue the sign was obscured and it was too late to ...

Did she note that she did not lose sight of you when you were riding? The content of her notes is kinda important. Also... did they give you the parts of the radar manual relating to the testing and use of the device? Seems like you didn't.

If she shows up, you could either plead it down, or, if you think her credibility is in doubt and you can ...

Fault Determination Rules place 100% fault on drivers reversing, but also 100% fault on drivers who disobey a traffic signal. Theoretically it should be 50/50 - but again, that is for insurance only.

For the court case, what was the driver charged with? They will also need the girl who allegedly ran the red light to testify in order to get a ...

You got rear-ended and YOU got charged with Follow Too Closely?? :shock:

I'm assuming that the company you work for hired a paralegal or lawyer who deals with traffic charges. The main question is, what did you say to the police when they arrived? That will be critical. Otherwise, "follow too closely" would be very difficult for them to prove if ...

Proper set fine & total payable: $75 and $95, respectively. The amounts are correct.

Agree with Stanton. In the event that you get charged, I'd recommend hiring a paralegal or lawyer who deals with traffic issues.

I think that you should be able to plead this down to 15 km/h over. You could try calling their office to see if they want to resolve it in advance.

Option 3 is the option you are looking for. Usually when they set a trial date, they'll also offer "First Attendance" or "Early Resolution." They may not, but if they do not, you can still call the Prosecutor's office seeking to plea-bargain. I would think that, if your driving record is good, they would probably offer you "disobey stop sign." You ...

WOW Squishy it's been a long time... welcome back!

Correct, a motion to dismiss would occur at trial.

In this case you should ask for the officer's notes.

"Turn not in safety" does not have to result in a collision, nor does it have to be against a traffic signal. If the oncoming car in front of the officer had to brake to avoid a collision or a near-miss, that's good enough... however, you should get the officer's notes to see exactly why you ...

The Attorneys-General can be served via fax, so there is no need to make the trip to Toronto or Ottawa. However, the Prosecutor's Office at the court where your trial is being held must be served. So that must be filed with them. Likewise, the court where the trial will take place must also be served directly. You would serve the Prosecutor's ...

But ABS doesn't work on ice

Where did you hear that? That is completely incorrect. ABS is designed SPECIFICALLY to help you steer and stop in slippery and icy conditions. Even if you absolutely stood on your brakes, you would have remained in control of your vehicle unless you steered wildly. Ask any advanced driving instructor and they will ...

+1

The insurance that was in effect at the time of the crash is what will count. You can't retroactively change your insurance. Also, I would caution you that if you haven't already reported the crash to your insurer, and then you report it after changing your coverage, that is insurance fraud.

Also to add, the "errors" on the ticket are not sufficient to void it. Sorry to disappoint.

Speeding is an "absolute liability offence." Even if you are certain that you were not speeding, that is not really going to help you in court. The standard of proof is very small for speeding. They'll need to enter into evidence that:

- The officer ...

Agree with Stanton. I'd take the plea deal.

Yep, "not visible" will not work for that sign.

Generally the Prosecutors will offer you a plea bargain at Markham Road. They usually want to avoid a trial almost as much as you do.

It has nothing to do with by-laws. It is the Highway Traffic Act.

As Stanton said - if you passed the bus going the other way with its lights flashing, you did commit an offence - a big one. $2000 fine + 6 demerit points. Road "A" is only unaffected for traffic that is not proceeding toward the bus.

Depends on the rearward visibility and the speed of the ambulance. If you can present a reasonable argument that you saw the ambulance approaching very quickly, the visibility was poor so you only saw it at the last second, then you began slowing down to clear the way and were in the process of attempting to stop, it may work. I can't guarantee ...

Blaming it on the weather will not help you. In fact, if the Prosecutor is semi-intelligent, he/she will totally smoke you in court. Consider this for a moment. You said:

- The roads were wet and icy
- You were driving the speed limit
- You braked too late on a wet and icy road

What this sounds like to a Justice of the Peace: "The roads were wet ...

Careless Driving is always worth hiring a paralegal for, in my opinion. There is the possibility that they may reduce it to a lesser charge, however your two prior speeding tickets make this less likely if the Prosecutor thinks he/she has a strong case. The best way to fight this particular charge, as you know, is to start by selecting Option 3 ...

Was going to answer... but Simon beat me to it. Indeed, section 9.1 of the Provincial Offences Act deals with these matters. There's also the London v. Young case that is worthwhile to read over for Part I "fatal errors."

Three demerit points, fine, no possibility of jail or licence suspension (that is assuming that you do not have a whole pile of convictions) would be the outcome. Probable insurance hike as well.

So the officer was charging you for failing to pull over and stop for the ambulance. I guess if you can articulate that you were UNABLE to stop but ...