Ontario Highway Traffic Act

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 ...