Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Id say while they might offer you a reduced fine, its very unlikely theyd simply withdraw the charge after youve already been given a break.
As you said though, worst case is that they tell you to go to trial.

It's quite likely the officer would bring up the initial reason for the stop at trial, as well as the fact that he gave you a break. Regardless, unless you've actually been charged for speeding (i.e. given a ticket), you can't suddenly be convicted at trial. The only real impact it will likely have is make the Courts less likely to give you any ...

I'm guessing your speeding ticket carried 4 or more demerit points. Unforunatley the resulting 30 day suspension is automatic and I'm not aware of any way to appeal it.

The only way it can be avoided is to be either found not guilty of the offence in Court or work out a plea deal to a lesser offence that doesn't carry as many points.

I'm very certain it's 4 points. Demerit points are listed under regulation 339/94 of the Highway Traffic Act.

Here's a link to what should be the latest version on the government's website:
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_940339_e.htm

There's a table at the bottom listing the various offences and associated demerit points ...

I imagine all Provinces would have laws requiring motor vehicles to have valid permits. The law in Ontario applies to all vehicles, even those with non Ontario plates/registrations.

Did you read my responses? Ive repeatedly stated that both tickets must be dealt with in the same manner.

You can chose whether to go to trial or not, but the decision to offer a plea deal is the Crowns. There is no incentive for them to offer you a deal on one if you're going to trial on the other. The plea deal is designed to save them the time ...

The Crown will get a copy of the officer's notes which will show the two tickets issued to you.

Id strongly suggest legal representation.

http://www.ontariocourtforms.on.ca/engl ... -act-forms

The example for the form 4 appears to be updated with the correct wording for the back of the ticket.

Haven't seen a real one yet.

Just to confirm, this occurred in Quebec?

Best I could find was this page on Quebec Automobile Insurance Corporation website (Quebec's MTO): http://www.saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/driver_licence/sanction/reclaim.php

They have a form you can use to reclaim your vehicle early if it has been impounded for 30 days. Unfortunately the form states the following ...

There are 2 points for seatbelt offences. Success at fighting the charge would be dependent on the officer's actual observations and any admissions your wife may have made. I can't think of any lesser charge that would apply, but the Crown would probably offer you a plea deal to a reduced fine.

Yes, if you pay the fine, you're admitting guilt and a conviction is registered. The police probably didn't mention the suspension either because they're not aware of it or due to the fact they don't actually issue it. The 30 day suspension would be applied by the MTO if your son was convicted in Court or pleads guilty to the offence as is.

Here's ...

It probably was changed in hopes of adding some efficiency to speed up the process. They can now avoid booking trials for people who simply want to work out a deal with the Crown.

I think the change was in the works since prior to the recent 11b rulings. It was added through the most recent Good Government Act.

Typically demerit points make no difference with insurance providers, they look at all convictions regardless of how many points they're worth. The problem in your son's case is that follow too close carries 4 demerit points, which for G2 drivers results in a minimum 30 day suspension upon conviction. The suspension could result in a greater ...

Failing to stop for a red light is whats known as an absolute liability offence, meaning the Courts dont really care about why you committed the offence. The only defence is one of necessity, where youd have to demonstrate some life threatening emergency. Not seeing the light in time really wouldnt qualify in that regard.