Search found 2111 matches

Fight it. There are at least 3 reasons for that:
You will delay the conviction entering your record by about 1 year, you have a chance to win if the officer is absent in court and also the crown can lower your speed to under 15 km/h over (most likely).

I'd disagree with the last part, you're very unlikely to get any further reduction on a ticket ...

I think you'd have a very hard time arguing that you ignored the first sign because you weren't planning on turning yet. The sign is posted at a perfect position since it warns you right before you merge into the turn lane. If it was an advance notice sign two intersections back you might have an argument, but the sign was still visible regardless ...

I was driving the rental car. So, I told the cop about brand new car and have hard time to control the gas pedal.

Just be aware, speeding is an absolute liability offence, so unfamiliarity with the vehicle or it's controls isn't a valid defence. You basically have to show reasonable doubt that you actually committed the offence; in other words ...

I know in several US states their laws are very specific as to how much tint/reflection you can have and to what point on the windshield. Unfortunately I don't think we have anything that specific here in Ontario; it's typically a judgement call on the part of the officer. If it's likely to prevent a clear view in AND out of the windshield, then ...

If you do receive disclosure then obviously a stay based on lack of disclosure is no longer applicable. That being said the Crown may still fail to provide the disclosure prior to your next Court date in which case you could again proceed with the stay. I don't think enough time has passed to proceed with an 11b motion, so you'll either have to ...

Well someone told me that if there are any mistakes on your ticket they could drop the ticket so I looked on my ticket and found one..heheheh.
The officer misspelled my name on it, my middle name, she put Dorion instead of Dorin, do you think I could use that in court to make them drop the ticket ?
I know its silly but Im just trying to make this ...

You can request a first attendance meeting with the Crown and see if they're willing to offer you a deal. I don't know how much luck you'd have getting the charge dropped outright, but I'm sure they'd offer you a significantly reduced fine. Just take all documentation with you to show that the sticker was renewed and when.

As said above, if you're contemplating any type of civil action, you should speak with a paralegal or lawyer for advice. That being said, if the other driver is at fault, should you not be getting some financial compensation through his or your insurance? At least to cover the cost of replacing your vehicle?

As for Court, you would only have to ...

Failing to stop for a red light is what's known as an absolute liability offence, meaning the only defence is one of necessity. You need to show that you went through the red light to avoid immediate peril and there was no other alternative. Not seeing the light in time and weather conditions won't work as a defence. Also, since you can't state ...

When I click on the link in the first post, it appears that there's another sign posted about 75-100 prior to the intersection advising no turns as well. With two signs posted you might have a hard time arguing you couldn't read them.

1) The process to request disclosure varies from one jurisdiction to the next. Some insist you attend in person, others allow alternate methods. I can't answer for Toronto, hopefully someone else can.
2) I guess it depends what you're asking for. The list of items most ticket fighting sites recommend is ridiculous, and don't apply to 99% of charges ...

There's not really much advice that can be given at this time since you haven't actually been charged with anything. Obviously leaving the scene was a pretty stupid thing to do and you may be facing some serious charges. If the accident was very minor, you wouldn't have even needed to report the matter to the police. You would have had to simply ...

Somewhat oversimplified by Lai, but yes. Case law basically states that the Crown witnesses shouldn't be given any more weight than defence witnesses if both are equally credible. For typical HTA purposes, it basically means the evidence of the police shouldn't be considered any more credible by virtue of their occupation.

The key is credibility ...

As the title of the forum says, this is a 3 demerit point offence. The officer doesn't assign them, they are automatically applied by the Ministry once you're found guilty of the offence. You can only avoid the demerit points by either being found not guilty or if the Crown agrees to a plea deal to a lesser offence that doesn't have demerit points ...

I don't think they were lying to you; just that you have a different understanding of what they mean when they said it can identify your vehicle.

It sounds more likely that the truck lost a tire then some of its load. Many commercial trucks use retreaded tires, where a new tread is wrapped around an older worn tire. There are lots of environmental and economic benefits to this, but the new treads are somewhat more prone to breaking apart. Hitting tire debris at highway speeds is pretty nasty ...

The fact that you committed the offence doesn't mean you'll necessarily be charged. For the charge to be laid, the bus driver would have to obtain and record your licence plate and vehicle description. If the matter is reported, it will likely be a few days before the ticket is mailed.

Also, in some of his notes, he states/admits "loss of sight briefly". Would I then have a valid argument, that he could be mistaking my vehicle with another that looks like mine? There are still many cars like mine on the road......

It would depend on the level of traffic, location and total time/distance the officer lost sight of your vehicle ...

Reductions are quite common. Most jurisdictions offer a first attendance meeting with the Crown, where they will hopefully let you plead guilty to a reduced speeding fine. You will still need to select option 3 to dispute the charge and then determine if/how first attendance meetings are scheduled in Orillia.

The only way to delay a conviction is to contest the charge. You would have to request a trial and hope that there's enough of a backlog that your Court date isn't booked before February. In some busy jurisdictions like Toronto, a nine month wait for a trial is pretty common, but I have no idea what kind of time frame you're looking at in Niagara.

If you're hesitant to seek legal representation, try meeting with the Crown first to see if they'll offer you any kind of deal. You're looking at some very serious fines, but if you can show the Courts you've taken care of everything hopefully they may offer some leniency. Hopefully the Crown would agree to a plea deal where they'll drop one charge ...

Are you sure you were charged under the Highway Traffic Act? Some municipalities have bylaws that mirror the highway traffic act, with offences like speeding, disobeying lights and insecure loads. It's typically bylaw officers that enforce them, but they will do things like run radar at the City dump and charge people with various offences similar ...

The general advice on these forums with a careless charge is to seek legal representation. While it is a difficult charge to prove, the consequences (particularly in terms of insurance) are quite serious on conviction. In your case I'd say you're certainly at fault in the collision, and there's a reasonable prospect of conviction if you provided ...

I'm nickel and dime-ing here, but if you were to go by what my GPS said, I was not even travelling below 120km/hr..
I think you might mean above , or else that is some evidence you don't want to bring up in Court. :)

I appreciate that nobody likes a left lane bandit, but passing a marked police cruiser at 20 over probably wasn't the best idea ...

Request disclosure to see what the officer's actual observations are. If he was as far away as you believe, there may be a good case to argue reasonable doubt since it would be difficult to clearly observe the offence at night from any great distance.

Technically you could still be charged by summons with speeding up to 6 months from the date of ...

Sitting on the floor between two seats isn't a seating position, so the regulation doesn't apply.

If your friend can't afford the fine, then he needs to go to Court. He can either plead guilty with an explanation and request a reduced fine from the JP, or attempt to work out a plea deal with the Crown for a reduced fine. He could also ask to pay ...

Decatur wrote:Shirt colour and number of passengers? Very thin. They also have to real bearing on the original offence.

Agreed. The Crown/JP will shut down pointless questions pretty quick. Shirt color may be relevant in a seatbelt offence (i.e. belt same color as shirt defence), but has no relevance to speeding. Stick to the facts in issue.

If you're vehicle is truly insured, then you will simply need to show proof of this at Court for the charge to be dismissed. That's a good thing since driving with no insurance carries huge fines. As for the second and third charge, after living in Ontario for so long you're supposed to have an Ontario licence (and not use your US one) and also ...

It's an absolute liability offence, so your speed/distance are irrelevant to the Courts. Once it's red, it's red. Unless the ticket has some fatal error, usually your best option is to try and plead out to a reduced fine.

Canadian Legal Information Institute is a good source: http://www.canlii.org/en/
2. (1) Subject to section 3, the headlamps on a motor vehicle shall be capable of projecting at least two beams, so controlled that only one beam can be selected for use by the driver of the motor vehicle at any one time according to the requirements of traffic. R.R ...