Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Entrapment is when police induce someone to commit an offence or engage in what the Courts have referred to as "random virtue testing". A mistake of law would be when someone commits a criminal offence, but had no intent to do so based on an honest, mistaken belief.

While legal representation can be expensive, fighting the ticket yourself shouldnt cost anything unless you need to take time off work to attend Court. At the very least, you can request a first attendance meeting with the Crown. If your ticket hasnt already been reduced, the Crown will likely offer you a reduced fine/speed in exchange for a guilty ...

Might be worthwhile to consult with a paralegal. While I'm sure the Crown will offer you a plea deal to a lesser fine, I doubt they'd simply withdraw the charge based on your explanation alone. While I don't think you'd be expected to jam on the brakes with a tailgater, it might be hard to articulate that the risk posed by the tailgater outweighed ...

What are the different answers you've gotten from the MTO? To me it sounds perfectly legal.

The Highway Traffic Act and Insurance Fault Rules aren't always consistent. Quite often the driver making the turn will be charged under the HTA, though the other driver may be found at fault under insurance rules.

I was under the impression that 25% fault will not result in a rate increase, but I could be wrong. 50% fault will result in an ...

Here's the actual fault rules: http://www.ibc.ca/en/car_insurance/documents/brochure/on-fault-determination-rules.pdf

Fault determination varies depending where/how the accident occurred. If your friend was turning at an intersection, she's only 25% at fault. If it was a private road or driveway, 50% at fault. The only way your friend would be ...

Someone more knowledgeable in the Court process might give better advice, but I'm not sure you have a clear win.

In regards to the original ticket, even if the errors did constitute a fatal error, I'm not sure it's still relevant since a summons has since been issued.

As for the summons itself, I'm not sure an incorrect date of issue would ...

Probably a good idea to request disclosure to see what the officers evidence is and stated reason(s) for pulling you over.

Personally I think the simplest defence would be to argue that the officers observations were made at a time when your vehicle was parked. There would need to be some evidence supporting your passengers being unbelted at a ...

Might be a good idea to consult with a paralegal for advice. I can't speak from experience, but I think it might be a somewhat expensive undertaking. I don't see why you'd require two reports if the expert is qualified to conduct such inspections. The problem is that if it goes to trial, you'd be responsible for whatever fees your expert witness ...

Convictions don't disappear in the sense that they're erased, the Ministry keeps track of them indefinitely. Typically though, insurance providers only look at your convictions from the past few years, older convictions are ignored.

You're going to need to provide a little more information since what police are required to do is very dependent on the actual situation/type of charge.

First, what were you actually charged with? What is the charge wording and section number?

Second, what type of form is the charge on? Is it a regular ticket with a fine on it? Or is it ...

Unfortunately the officer is probably right. The Highway Traffic Act requires you ensure any turning movement wont affect other vehicles. This includes ones overtaking you. Assuming the other drivers pass was legal, most of the onus falls on you. You said it occurred in a no passing zone, but what do you mean by this? Was there actual signs posted ...

dinergirl1 wrote:he got one of these tickets before and paid it now he can't get insurance on his own as his driving record shows that he was charged with driving with no insurance..

I'd double check what his record actually says. Driving without insurance is a very serious offence, whereas driving without proof of insurance is not.

It carries 2 demerit points. There is no easy defence, you'll just have to read through the forums and see what strategies other posters have used.

Not sure I understand what your'e asking. Is your argument that the time on your GPS is different from the time on the ticket? A difference of a few minutes is irrelevant in Court. If the time was off by several hours you might have an argument but Court isn't so picky to require the exact minute the offence took place.