Search found 1065 matches

Is the information on the face of the ticket correct? What information on the letter is in error? The date and time of your court appearance or the date and time of the alleged offence (which should reflect the ticket)?

I think that 141(2) about making a right turn is quite clear - It states that the driver must turn from the right lane into the right lane of the intersecting highway.

However 141(6) for making a left turn is less clear. It only states that the driver must turn from the left lane to "right of the centre line". If we envision an intersection of two ...

The obligation placed on both drivers under Section 142 (1) is to "before turning to the left or right at any intersection or into a private road or driveway or from one lane for traffic to another lane for traffic or to leave the roadway shall first see that the movement can be made in safety".

This technically applies to both parties in your ...

There is nothing in the legislation that says how many vehicles you can pass. All it says is that a movement can not be made unless it can be done so safely. If your movement caused a collision the officer is probably taking that as evidence of the fact that it was unsafe, hence the ticket.

That being said, I'm not sure if that's the right ticket ...

sayashi wrote:as i know not sure if this is true or not but there is no working radar while moving in the officer's car if someone can point out if this is true or not please do so

Sure there is, it's called moving radar It's mounted in the front and/or rear dash and records the speed of other vehicles while the cruiser is in motion.

Interesting, I was not aware of this, thanks.

Yes, up to 6 months after the fact.

Biron wrote:If you go to court but plead guilty, you will be convicted of 15 k/h over, the fine will go up to $47.00 plus court cost and victim surcharge for a total payable of $60.00.

15 over = $37.50 + $10 victim surcharge + $5 court cost = $52.50

A month is not that long a time.

Well said!

They can be charged with failing to remain.

No problem

I would be happy to give my opinion, I just needed some time to read the consultation paper.

The paper is huge and covers a lot of issues so I'll keep my comments general.

First of all, I think that the idea of reforming and modernizing the POA is an excellent idea. In a lot of ways it is outdated and this leads to a lot of inefficiency in both ...

Not sure about the narrative on the second car but with respect to the officer being released from court by the prosecutor after a plea arrangement, that's not unheard of. Usually they want the officer to stick around in case the defendant changes their mind at the last minute and pleads not guilty. If the officer's not there then the crown is not ...

Fail to Display Two Plates is the proper charge for the situation you described where a person has a rear plate but no front plate.

First you have to understand that the it's not the officer's decision what happens after the ticket ends up in court. If he's ok with it, it doesn't help you at all. He's not in a position to help you, even if he wants to.

Once you've been given the ticket you can plead guilty with an explanation or set a trail date. In either case, the most you ...

Sounds like they sent a notice of trial out but you didn't receive it. You could appeal on those grounds if you wish.

I am kind of surprised to hear that since a conviction under a rewritten ticket like that would be quashed with prejudice on appeal. But you are correct, most people who are getting the ticket have no idea what is going on. This is why I'm a big fan of educating people and why I take the time to share my knowledge and experience on this forum ...

What did you send it in for? With payment or to fight the ticket?

If you're unclear about what evidence the officer has about your alleged violation you might want to request disclosure to read his notes. Then you will be in a better position to make an informed decision about what to do next.

What often happens in radar disclosure is that the officer photocopies his notes of the incident, which probably include the test before, but he tests the radar at the end of his shift (or later in his shift) so he doesn't photocopy all of his notes between your ticket and that time.

You could make a disclosure request for this and if you don't ...

I would suggest you check out the library at your nearest law school. They will have the case he referenced. If that is the prosecutor's position, then you are going to have to find your own case law to support your position and argue it before a JP, that you have received inadequate disclosure which has prevented you from making a full defence to ...

That would make the ticket irregular on its face and it could be quashed. You could speak to the prosecutor about it and if they are reasonable they will probably withdraw it, rather than making you go before a JP to argue that it should be quashed.

No demerit points for a conviction under 32 (9)

I understand where you're coming from. It sounds like this case is their word against yours. In all cases, the burden of proof is on the state and they present their evidence in it's totality (even if that's just one statement from a witness) and then you present yours (even if that's just your own statement). Then the Justice gets to decide who is ...

1. Is it really true that a citizen can DEMAND that charges be laid?
They can demand whatever they want, but an officer is under no obligation to charge if a citizen tells them to.

2. How do I go about defending myself?
Request disclosure and then assess what evidence the officer and/or witnesses are going to be presenting. Then you will have ...

Right, it could lead to a driver's licence review, which could lead to a suspension.

If you were convicted under 32(9) your record will just say
"Name of Court location you were convicted in HTA 32(9) Drive in contravention of conditions" or something close to that. It doesn't specify what the contravention was and it doesn't tell any of the other ...

Let me clarify. A conviction of violating novice licence conditions under 32 (9) or O/Reg. 340/94 could lead to a licence suspension. If it does, your driving record would indicate the conviction for the specific charge and then that your licence was suspended a short time later for "novice violations".

If you are charged with a seatbelt offence ...

I am not a novice, why would it show as "novice licence suspension".
Because the suspension would be for violation of novice conditions

i notice that G2 licence restriction is "Each person in the vehicle must have a working seatbelt". Does that fall under 32(9) as well??
Yes

Now what if someone actually does not wear glasses which was a ...

Sounds like you got a pretty good deal.

I don't believe a novice suspension is considered an "administrative licence suspension", but the classification isn't really important. It does show up on your driving record as a "novice licence suspension".