Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Thanks for the update. I also found the screening officers quite pleasant. They didn't have photos in my cases, but both had a "slide show" on a small digital frame of what does and does not constitute legal parking.

As always, request a trial. When you show up, the prosecutor will probably offer you a reduced fine in exchange for a guilty plea. Take the offer. You're not going to beat a red light camera offence. I've tried to fight two of them (one was my daughter's, one was a friend's). I thought I had a pretty decent case of doubt, but lost both times.

If you can testify that you were driving under the limit because of the rain (showing that you're driving responsibly under the circumstances), that you knew stopping would be more difficult than on a dry road and that you were too close to the intersection to have stopped even if the road had been dry, especially if your father can provide the ...

I don't. Sorry. Having the tickets reduced from thirty-something dollars to something in the teens or about twenty was good enough for me. It would have cost much more in terms of time to push for more.

I've dealt with a couple of parking tickets in Markham. The upside to this system is that the meeting with the review with the screening officer comes up much more quickly than waiting for a trial. The downside is screening officers are not likely to cancel a ticket unless there's an obvious error. The screening officer is also far less likely to ...

There's no way the JP could have found you guilty of the offence with which you were charged. It refers to a situation that's completely different from the one covered by Section 154.1. Even if you say you were driving in the lane, you did not violate s. 154.1 and cannot be found guilty of violating it. Unless the prosecutor amended the charge, you ...

It was just after midnight - no standing zone only in effect Mon-Fri 7:30 AM to 9:30 AM (can you please confirm through the pic?) Your picture shows two signs: No Stopping 7:30 to 9:30 am Monday to Friday and No Parking (all times). Those signs mean that a driver cannot stop at all during weekday morning rush hour, but cannot park at any time ...

Nanuk wrote:I am skeptical of photo radars effectiveness , yes I know they publish statistics however I still question the accuracy of those . I am not impartial but I would rather see the money spent for photo radar put into municipal police service traffic enforcement, hire an extra officer just for traffic !

Well said!

I have seen prosecutors in the GTA routinely drop Failure to Surrender Insurance Card charges when the defendant brings the correct card to the court. But that's no guarantee that all prosecutors in all courts would do so. I remember the good old days when we could bring the card to a police station and have the charge withdrawn.

The 3+ HOV lane that exists on the bridge is municipal and is covered by an Ottawa by-law. The provisions of the HTA do not apply. Had you been charged under the NCCTPR, you'd have been guilty. The officer charged you with the wrong offence.

If you're in court within six months of the alleged offence date, the officer (not the prosecutor) could ...

I still think what I suggested will work. Signs may have been posted, but I'm guessing from what you've said that (a) there were no "HOV lane ahead" type signs on the Quebec side and (b) the signage did not conform to the Regulation (I believe someone who's in a similar situation said the lane is 3+). The officer clearly charged you under the wrong ...

If I were in your position, I'd certainly plead not guilty to both and get my disclosure before making any decisions. The blocked sign on the right won't help you, as there is a clearly visible sign on the left. Not only that, but a sign that's blocked by a moving obstruction (e.g., a truck) is not thought of as blocked. I know that stinks, but it ...

The second circled sign is clearly visible. It will be difficult to say you didn't see a No Left Turn Sign. HOWEVER...why didn't the officer pull over the person who turned ahead of you? Did the officer feel he had turned right? The driver does appear to go past the intersection, pull a U-turn and turn more-or-less right. It would be a tough sell ...

Thanks, jsherk.

If the officer tries to talk about pacing, maintaining constant visual contact, etc., I'll go after him on that. Did he look only in his rearview mirror and never ahead? It was morning rush hour; I was hardly the only person driving a car of my description. Between glances in the rearview, cars could easily have changed positions ...

Unfortunately, you're assuming that the court will act rationally and reasonably. There are people here with considerably more experience than I have, but even I've seen some eyebrow-raising decisions.

Your post is quite timely, though. When I was pulled over for speeding last November, the officer was in front of me the whole way. Unless he used ...