Search found 888 matches

I'm not sure how ticket busters (or whatever they are called) will fight the fail to produce. You were asked for it and didn't have it - not much to defend there. I think your plan is sound - it is what I would do. You may not get a break on either ticket because you already got such a break at the roadside but turn up early, neatly dressed and be ...

Without question. It sounds like your family has money but even when you get your licence back your insurance will be nose-bleedingly expensive for a long time. Think 5 figures possibly.

Don't make duplicate threads for the same questions, it just gets confusing. You have a very real-life answer to this question in your other thread. I'd be taking whatever the crown throws at me.

"Right turn at intersection
(2) Where a driver or operator of a vehicle intends to turn to the right into an intersecting highway, he or she shall, where the highway on which he or she is driving has marked lanes for traffic, approach the intersection within the right-hand lane or, where it has no such marked lanes, by keeping immediately to the ...

You were going almost 100 kms/hr over the speed limit. To bring that down to any sort of break for you they'd have to shave off 50 kms/hr from your recorded speed. I would be very surprised if you get any break at all and, as has been mentioned on these boards, speeding is one of the hardest tickets to beat.

I'm sorry for not having sympathy for ...

Sorry to the OP - looking back I believe I was thinking of another thread on my last post. He was never ambiguous about identification at court. I thank him for not just telling me I was a moron !

Words fail me. Inexperienced driver and at that speed. You are INCREDIBLY lucky you didn't get a Criminal Code Dangerous Driving charge. I will be stunned if the crown offers any negotiation at all and as you have retained counsel what exactly are you hoping to get from an anonymous Internet forum above and beyond their advice.

If you are not a ...

It be surprised if the JP misses that and doesn't just quash the ticket. I had a very keen auxiliary officer complete the keystone info on a ticket that I then subsequently lawfully served without noticing he had put July instead of June for the offence date. The ticket being filed before the written offence was duly quashed. I wrote my own damn ...

They are not being unlawful until asked to move and refusing.

Bringing someone else to court pretending to be you won't work as we ID the driver through the valid photo ID drivers licence provided at the scene. Courts don't expect us to be able to pick people out of a full court room 9 months after a traffic stop.

You can pay the ticket right up to and including the day of trial. I've seen people speak to the prosecutor on the day of trial, realise the officer is there and run off to pay it

Just to clarify what argyll is saying: Insurance companies DO care about convictions. In many cases, Careless Driving is enough to get your insurance company to drop your coverage. However... in the case where a collision happens (such as this case), the insurance companies are more concerned about the at-fault determination rather than whether ...

I doubt anyone is going to come on here and provide you with information that is going to let you conduct a risk assessment on an illegal activity. The police officers on here have seen all too frequently the effects of not wearing seat belts.

Please don't do it - there must be other options.

Because the insurance companies don't care about convictions, only the collision and at-fault determinations.

No but your licence should have the condition on it that you need vision aids while driving.

If he had to chase you he will have written where the offence occurred, not where he pulled you over.

Any update ?

Thanks for that reply. I am hoping combined with officer saying a@@hole as I leave will help make up their minds to drop it.


I doubt that makes any difference to be honest. Unprofessional but no concern as regards to law. That's what sewers a lot of people who defend themselves - they focus on things that they think are 'wrong' but that have no ...

Might be worth bringing these points up with the prosecutor at your meeting. You could try to have them think that you'd get it on record that the officer was making untrue notes. No officer or prosecutor wants that because it could affect testimony in future potentially more important cases. You might get lucky.

As for the other stuff I doubt ...

If it's anything like criminal court then a change of venue can only be made for a guilty plea. Why would the witnesses have to travel a huge distance instead of the accused is likely one of the reasons.

It appears as if you're not understanding. You don't just go to the meeting with the document tickets and the red light set for trial. If you do the prosecutor will not offer you anything and go to trial on all 3 of which you will undoubtedly be found guilty of at least two.

You need to have a meeting on all three tickets and hope the prosecutor ...

Good luck with the police application (that's with sarcasm)

Almost certainly the communication would have included a licence plate

Emergency vehicles have the responsibility to make sure the way ahead is safe when going through red or amber. They cannot just forge ahead and expect everyone to stop for them.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with the consensus. Vehicles clear intersections by turning because they have entered it waiting to turn. It makes no sense to me to have vehicles turn in front of you and then move through the intersection well after the light is red as did the vehicle that is struck.

Actually it's quite refreshing seeing someone take responsibility for his (in)action

I've worked in 2 jurisdictions where we gave warning tickets like these but they never carried the provision that they would be converted into real tickets upon a further infraction.

We discussed this in our office and came to the conclusion that none of the charges applied to a faded plate. If someone had scraped the blue off then that would be defacing but if the government can't come up with a paint that works then that's not the driver's fault.

Well I'm glad your post wasn't pompous or self-righteous. Holy *EDIT*, as a fellow Brit I would like to publically distance myself from your arrogance.

If you're willing to plead to 49 over why bother giving money away when you can do that yourself. Call the prosecutor, offer to plead, you may have to attend once. Done deal