Search found 1065 matches

I can't answer that for you. It depends how you feel about the ticket, what you can afford to have on your record, what you can afford to spend in terms of time and money in your defence, etc

Section 3(b) of the CAIA says:

(b) surrenders an insurance card for inspection to a police officer, when requested to do so, purporting to show that the motor vehicle is insured under a contract of automobile insurance when the motor vehicle is not so insured,

Since it's only an offence to surrender the card when requested to do so by a police ...

The points are non-negotiable. They are an administrative action by the MTO. No one has any power to reduce them. If you get convicted of an offence you will get whatever points are associated with that offence. Your only chance for less or no points is to plead guilty to a lesser offence (which carries fewer points) or be acquitted on whatever ...

Not as a practice, but it's irrelevant since the charge is not driving without insurance, it's failing to produce the insurance slip when requested to do so.

Also, I would not that if you do get caught presenting an insurance slip as valid when the policy has, in fact been canceled, you can be charged with producing evidence of false insurance ...

The officer's discretion determines.

It is a bad idea to be the second or third car in the intersection waiting for the first car to make their turn because, just as you suggested, they don't always make it through before the light turns red and then they're stuck obstructing the intersection.

However, it is not an offence (red light or otherwise) to be already in the intersection ...

No, because when someone gets a reduced fine it's in exchange for a guilty plea, which means there's no trial and the judge doesn't weigh in on it so these situations never end up being recorded as case law.

A regular traffic ticket, like a speeding ticket or a val tag ticket.

It might, depends on the prosecutor.

No case law on that but I've seen it done numerous times. Did you have the valid out of province licence when you were stopped and charged with driving on a suspended Ontario licence or did you get the out of province licence after that?

Drive no licence is $260 + cost & surcharge for a total of $325

There is some debate around what is considered a fatal errors and it does sometimes depend on the JP. Definitely missing date, missing location, missing or incorrect charge, or missing person would be fatal because without those 4 they can't read the charge in.

Possible fatal errors would be missing/incorrect time, incorrect date, incorrect set ...

Red light tickets (both fail to stop and proceed before green) don't apply if you were already in the intersection when the light turned red.

The 7 days applies to Part 1 offences (PONs aka Tickets).

A part 3 ticket is subject to the 6 month time limit as outlined in the Provincial Offences Act.

Address is not a fatal error, nor is spelling your name wrong. The name can be amended and the address doesn't even have to be.

He could ask them for the reason he being stopped, satisfy them on that could (i.e. provide docs, etc), then if they ask him about searching the vehicle he could ask them if he's still being detained, since it seems the reason he was stopped has been investigated and satisfied.

If he's not being detained then he's free to go. If he is being ...

$228 and $283 are the correct amounts for 38 over on a Part 1

iDrew wrote:They didn't even take my old license card when i showed it to them, so who dose have the power to charge you for not surrendering your license to MTO?

Police officer.

iDrew wrote:I guess the right thing for me to do right now is to wait for the payment receipt to arrive by mail from the collection agency and go to the court house with it.

Correct.

As far as I know, tickets received in the mail are all valid.

See O/Reg. 277/99 for info about red light camera evidence.
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/regu/o-reg-277-99/latest/o-reg-277-99.html

It should be possible to have the charge amended to red light camera for driver - HTA 144 (18.2) as opposed to red light camera for owner - HTA 144 ...

Either or. Your first attendance date will just be for you to get disclosure and set another date. You could ask for it to be a while into the future to give you the opportunity to retain counsel, then go to them with the disclosure in hand.

I want to choose option 3, but really want to know what I can achieve with it.
A resolution most likely.

- The fact he only took my driving license without the insurance slip, does it make him at fault at all, like he didn't do his due diligence by checking my insurance validity?
Not at all.

- On the ticket he only wrote the plate number ...

When your licence expires you are listed as "unlicenced" not suspended.

It is an offence to fail to forward a suspended licence to the MTO, but no one there has the authority to charge you for it.

Sounds to me like there's been a break down in communication between the collection agency and the court. You may need to provide proof to them that ...

Permitting implies knowledge and consent. The police would be required to prove that the owner of the vehicle knew that it had no insurance and allowed someone to drive it. How are they police going to be able to do that except if they obtain a statement from the driver to that effect.

In order to make an 11(b) Charter motion for unreasonable delay, it needs to be about 9 months delay, minimum, (for a POA offence - more for criminal) ascribed to the crown. If you were the cause of the delay, it doesn't count.

It's like a chess game with timers, when the crown's stops, yours start, and vice versa. The judge hearing an 11(b ...

Your friend can not be charged with driving without insurance. Only the owner can be charged with that - either operating or permitting the operation of a vehicle without insurance.

Call the phone # on the back of the ticket and ask somebody there. They can look it up on ICON with the PON # and tell you what the status of it is.

Also, it's not a criminal record, it's just a provincial offence record. I wrote a blog post about provincial offence records recently, related to this question, that you might be interested in ...

Way to be proactive!

I can't say whether they may be ready for you before 2pm, but I don't think it can be held against you if your scheduled time is 2pm and they're ready for you early but you're not there.

Court usually goes until finished, which is about 5 or 5:30 at the latest.

Because there is no guaranteed order that the cases will be called for trial, so somebody's going to be there until the end of the day.

Issues like the officer's attitude are best raised with their supervisors, not with the crown, unless they are relevant to the facts in issue or were so severe as to constitute a breach of some charter right.

It's not a case of failing to stop, even if he was a police officer. For that section to apply the officer has to be "readily identifiable as such". It appears in this case he was not.

Again i would interpret it to mean the passenger compartment and would charge

Can you elaborate on how you interpret this as applying to the passenger compartment only?

Certainly this is where you usually find seats for passengers, but the wording of the section carefully omits any reference to the passenger compartment.

Section 10 (b) states ...