Search found 888 matches

No, they'll just set a new date.

This one says no U-turn in front of the bridge.

I don't believe the HTA specifies a distance.

Normally no U-turn signs are posted by specific intersections aren't they ?

Keep us posted will you....too many people take advice and then never let us know how it turns out.

That's pretty bad handwriting. Doesn't seem like a lot of notes either.

There you go. Twelve bucks and fifteen minutes and you'll have your answer.

I would suggest that this is similar to the discussion we had about the left turn into the inside lane of a 2 lane road v the red light turner.

I think the car having the green light will always trump the car proceeding through a red.

Careless is a pretty standard charge that I s laid after a collision. It can normally be negotiated to something less heinous. As it is, if you end up with even 3 minor convictions you are going to notice it on your insurance renewal.

How old is the 3 points you already have ?

Your niece suggested arguing speeding out of necessity and she's a qualified paralegal ? I would suggest she doesn't like you very much. If you were being chased by someone with a gun or rushing to get someone to hospital who is bleeding out then perhaps but to get past a big rig when it's raining ??? I'm stunned.

The rate of speed that is locked ...

I suspect your Ontario licence is already suspended based on the letter that was provided initially. I don't think you have anything to lose.......although I'm anything but an MTO licence suspension expert !

I thought a medical suspension was only in effect while the medical condition existed. Wouldn't your doctor be able to provide something that would have it rescinded ?

Upload a copy of what you have anyway. Maybe we can decipher them.

No help at all. You had to know that Yardmaster was a 50 zone and therefore the road remains a 50 until you see a sign that says otherwise.

It would appear that the registration ticket is simply an error on the part of the officer so that can be taken out of the equation.

Assuming a reasonable driving history I'd be very surprised in the Crown didn't offer you a reduction in the speed to avoid a trial. The truth is they schedule far more trials on any given day than there is time for ...

No that doesn't seem like an extreme amount of time. Often officers have many to complete plus new investigations coming in. But you should keep a track of the timelines and how often it wasn't available.

Found this:

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/dandv/ ... .4.1.shtml

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic4541.html

Personally I'd contact the MTO and get a definite answer rather than rely on anyone here.

If you were travelling more than 40 kms/hr over the limit there is no way they are going to drop that. The best you can reasonably hope for is a reduction to 29 kms/hr over.

Yes. The 'brief' stands for Crown Brief and is where the investigating officer briefs the crown on the incident. We prepare three copies keeping one in the police file and sending two to the Crown's office - one for them and one to be given by way of disclosure.

The Crown Brief must contain all the relevant facts of the case to support the charge ...

No, it's how the officer tells the prosecutor what happened.

If they have a green light then they can proceed. Basically the have the right to be on that stretch of roadway regardless of lane. If you have a red light then you have the requirement to make sure the road is clear before proceeding.

Former copper or not, my answers bear no more weight than anyone else's and are just opinions with no legal ...

Good for you. It seemed like a pretty poor charge.

Post your disclosure, then people can chime in.

So who hit who ? Which part of each vehicle was in the collision ?

No, if they have a green light and you have a red then the fault would be yours. The idiot behind you needs to lay off the horn.

Exactly that. You don't pay for disclosure, it's required. But the police give it to the Crown and the Crown discloses it - not the court and not the police. You got a rookie court clerk it would seem.

I've charged for this and got convictions every time. You cannot have people in the back of a pickup.

Yes, you should be lucky. The correct ticket would have been Fail to Surrender Permit, which you did........the actual ticket is No Valid Permit which is not correct as there was a permit, just not with you.

I don't know how you would do that. The lights don't keep records of their timings and I think I saw you write that they sometimes have a green and sometimes don't for the opposing turn lane.

I think your problem will lie in the fact that the other driver, regardless of whether they ran a red or not, would have been on the roadway into which your ...

I think you'd be hard pushed to argue that you were not aware what this sign meant.