Search found 888 matches

"Take it to trial. Insist it wasn't 8am yet by your watch."

Highwaystar, I'm not sure this site is about advising people to purger themselves. The OP said he believed it was 8 or after.

I was taught differently from OPS Copper. Detention or arrest triggers RTC but there is an case law exception for traffic stops that are of a brief duration, ie a speeding ticket. If I was to inspect a vehicle for 2 hours I would have been giving RTC.

Having said that, it's all up to the judge on the day and I can't imagine a judge throwing out ...

Basically you will be selling the car and never driving again until you have a much better paying job as you will be paying this off for a long time and your insurance rates when you do get behind the wheel of a car will be eye-bleedingly high.

I would be waiting to pay this when the office opens. It's unlikely but while the matter is open it can be amended. See the other topic about a re-opened charge. Who knows why he gave you such a massive break but do you want to risk a supervisor looking at this and having the ticket withdrawn and a summons issued for stunting ? Or by pleading not ...

Those stats don't show the effect that RIDE has on people not drinking and driving in the first place.

My insurer said that they ignore one but a second one might result in them declining to insure you.

Not always. My plates peeled badly and I took them to the MTO and they checked a database and said that mine were not within a recognized defective batch and I had to pay to replace them....and they were only 2 years old.

Their name would be on the paper that you were served.
CORRECTION: What I meant to say was "If an officer were to violate my charter rights at say a RIDE checkpoint but did NOT lay a charge, then I would not know who they were."

I am not disagreeing with anybody's comments here.

My question again would be:
Is it an unreasonable request to ask ...

Their name would be on the paper that you were served.

If you had a serious doubt about an officer being who they said they were you could always call dispatch and check. But not for every stop, please !

I think your comments are valid for court but I would have to disagree with simply refusing to speak to a police officer as that will surely remove any chance of a break that might have been offered had you been civil. By all means don't incriminate yourself but politeness goes a long way.

For me, a heart-felt apology would go a long way to ...

Sonic, the bits you were quoting were the dissenting opinion of the minority judges. It was a split decision.

With handwriting it's tough because the argument could be made that's a very scribbled 'a' just not completed. It does look more like a 'c' for sure but it's not a slam-dunk like it would be if it was typed.

http://www.hrcr.org/safrica/privacy/r_ladouceur.html

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Ladouceur

The courts have upheld that motorists can be pulled over at any time to check the driver's documentation.

Speak to MTO. It won't start until they are aware it has. Back in my youth I got a 30 day as a novice driver and didn't drive for a month. Later I got a letter telling me that my licence was suspended and to send it in. Double hit !

LOL.....well that post won't be here long. Kids, stay off drugs.

If the information is that you disobeyed a red light then you would be vehicle B and at fault.

Sounds like you handled it maturely and honestly. Kudos to you.

You may not be able to get insurance at any price, or it will be eye-wateringly expensive.

I can't condone that course of action but it did make me chuckle !

I wouldn't, nor would I care about dealer trim......if I can read the plate and see the sticker then I'm happy.

As for Sonic, what a nonsensical tirade. If you truly believe that cops walk up to a car and start yelling as a matter of course then I really am at a loss for words.

Unfortunately unless you know who's driving the vehicle the police cannot lay a charge. If all you have is a plate the police cannot prove in court that it was the registered owner driving the vehicle. All we could do was contact the RO and issue a caution.

Yes it's a Highway Traffic Act offence so insurance treats it the same as any other ticket. Personally I never had an issue with the clear covers but I did have a huge issue with the tinted ones. If I'm following a car and about to pull it over I like to run the plate first to get a sense of who the driver might be. With tints I could pretty much ...

If the officer is going to testify that he saw your hand go to your ear then reasonable doubt should be fairly easy to get to. He has to be able to testify that he saw a communication device.

Statute of limitations is in regards to charging someone. Your situation is simply one of debt collection.

They wouldn't bring an action against you for an allegation of speeding in 2001 but they can and clearly will try to make good on the outstanding conviction and debt. I wonder if the amount deducted included interest.

Points are automatic from the Ministry. You're either guilty and you get them or you're not and you don't. Whether the crown would entertain a guilty plea to 15 over which has no points is something to look at. Remember that insurance companies don't care about points, just convictions so 15 over and 39 over are the same in their eyes.

Or bad handwriting ?

You're welcome and kudos for approaching this in a mature manner. Good luck with the career.

You are getting the same response from everyone and you disagree; that is your right. However it's not what we think or what you think, it's what the justice thinks and you have to consider that you're getting advice from people experienced with how the courts think and rule. Your choice how you proceed.