Search found 1065 matches

So you got convicted of violating one of the conditions of your licence...I'm guessing you are either required to wear glasses or have a novice licence. If it's a novice condition it can be considered fairly serious for your record and insurance premiums. Novice violations can also generate a driver's licence suspension by the MTO, depending on ...

The radar can be tested at the beginning and at the end of a shift. That is sufficient.

With respect to the ticket, if it is for 15 over then you can still deal with it as such. The only time it can be amended up is if a trial commences. In order for that to happen you have to plead "not guilty" when you are arraigned. You can just let the ...

The fact that the envelope was not sealed is irrelevant. With respect to the officers notes, does your inability to read all of them impair your ability to make a defence? If so, request a typed copy, if not, don't bother. With respect to "more" disclosure, what are you looking for specifically and why? There is plenty of case law on the fact that ...

I'm not sure if you question is purely academic or not, but if you are concerned that this might happen, don't be. It doesn't work that way. If you are being tried on a specific charge you can suddenly start to be tried on a different charge when you're already in the trial. If they want they can drop a charge altogether and lay a new charge ...

There is no mention, inthe template of radar/lidar manual, should I add this? Is there anything else missing from the template, that I should ask for?

Only ask for things that are relevant to your defence. Don't waste your time, or the court's, by using disclosure requests as a fishing expedition. Do you have a specific reason for wanting the ...

The specs about handlebars isn't in the HTA, it's in O/Reg 596
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/e ... .htm#s10s1

Like I said, if you apply for disclosure you will have a better idea of what evidence they intend to present as to the "improperness" of you muffler.

No, Section 75 is the muffler section. The charge of Improper Muffler would be appropriate for all muffler issues. Schedule 1 is not a charge section, it is just a list of requirements and prohibitions. Also, I would suggest that the section provided here does not apply if the exhaust is vented out to the side of the vehicle like you see on some ...

I would request disclosure and review it before you speak with the prosecutor. From what you're describing, it sounds like there are no grounds for the charge. Where it exits is irrelevant. One thing I would ask though: is your muffler really loud? How was the officer's attention drawn to your vehicle?

Minor discrepancies like number of occupants or whether you were asked if you were aware of the speed limit are not really relevant to your defence, since they are not facts in issue to the charge of speeding. You could poke at them during your cross examination but the officer will likely give evidence consistent with what was in his notes and ...

It would be helpful if you posted the section number under which you were charged.

I think this really depends on your particular insurance company and your particular policy. My personal opinion is that everything causes an insurance increase, even getting no tickets. Last year my policy went up. When I called them and asked why they said, "General rate increase." Whatever...

Good point, that's entirely possible too.

Here's some info on case citation format

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_citation#Canada

Thoughts:
He really went on about how he lowered it and how fast I was going. I really didn't think I was going 93, I suppose everyone says that tho. It almost felt like he was stretching the truth a little bit though. I feel they lower it so people with just pay and not argue.
Of course he went on about lowering it. He wants you to pay it so he ...

Make of the pipes is irrelevant. There's no ticket for having custom pipes.

The details you provided are not consistent. You said you didn't respond to the ticket. If that was the case you should have been convicted in abstentia shortly after the charge was laid under Section 9.1 of the POA. But, you also said that you have a court date now...how did that come about?

The court will take into account the fact that you chose to plead guilty at the first available opportunity in their consideration of the fine, if you do that. You will be asked to justify to the JP why he or she should lower your fine, however. It's not just automatic because you don't want to pay the full amount so consider how you can articulate ...

Interesting case, thank you!

This sounds like a law that could really be bad if not enforced with appropriate discretion.

Does it apply on private property like driveways?

He is correct that you could have got a careless ticket for it, especially if you were 10 car lengths back. That should have given you plenty of time to stop.

The problem with laying Follow to Close in rear end collisions (and the reason we were instructed not to do it in my jurisdiction) is because it's very difficult to prove the elements of ...

My understanding is that golf carts cannot travel on roads in Ontario as they do not meet the required safety specifications and, therefore, are not considered a 'vehicle'.

You are right in that it is not supposed to travel on the roads in Ontario because it does not meet the minimum safety standards, however if someone chooses to do so, it ...

1. Are golf carts considered a 'vehicle' under the Highway traffic act? I know carts can't drive across roads or on roads but if you try to bring one from the USA into Canada they are considered a 'vehicle'.

Yes, they are a vehicle under the HTA when on roads in Ontario. If you are asking about regulations regarding buying one and bringing it ...

I don't disagree with you that this is a weak case for careless, however I think that the officer had grounds to lay the charge. Remember, he doesn't have to consider possible defences or the reasonable prospect of conviction.

I think there can be a very liberal approach to what constitutes careless driving (at least in terms of laying the charge ...

Thanks Simon , I didn't know this. [/b]

I searched the OIPRD website at

https://www.oiprd.on.ca/CMS/Home.aspx

No problem!

But I haven't been able to find the Independent Police Review Act, 2007 anywhere. It's not listed at the e-laws.gov.on.ca website.

Do you know where it has been published, if at all?

The Independent Police Review Act ...

Decatur Genesis II Select Directional and Decatur Genesis VP Directional

Those are both great. I used the VP Directional and I liked it a lot. It was a nice upgrade from the MuniQuip KGP radars we had before that. It does indeed show whether you're reading a vehicle going towards or away from you, but not all do that so I think it might still be ...

He gave a speed of 75 km so I thought it might be an estimate while using a radar, but laser makes a lot more sense.

Hwybear, which radar do you use?

hwybear wrote: HUH? police have moving radar

I know that, I meant he couldn't be using a stationary radar, a.k.a. a "radar gun".

He probably could have lowered it more, but I don't think he wanted to. The bosses usually don't question you on tickets because they don't know how fast the person was actually going or how far it was reduced. I think he gave you what he thought you deserved.

The points are non negotiable, they go with the speed, so the only thing you can do to ...