Ontario Highway Traffic Act

You may be able to argue that an appropriate charge is 148(5) Fail to turn out to left to avoid collision. Only $110. I would imagine Crown going for that to avoid a trial on the Careless.

The Provincial Offences Act details the procedures.

I'm not quite sure what side of this discussion you are arguing. It appears that the officer did exactly as he should have.

If you are driving it that short amount then I don't think you have a problem

Just be up front with the insurance broker. They should be on your side. At least you'll know what the true facts are and can sleep easy knowing that you won't have a claim denied. I had a unique situation a while back that I won't go into similar to yours and laid it out to the broker and asked for an email from her with her position so that I ...

You are correct. It IS perfectly legal to ask them to do it. They won't, but you can ask. These occurrences are a record of what, who, when and where officers interacted with the community.

If an officer were to pull me over me over for the same offence and then witnessed a violent assault at the side of the road, I guess he can ignore it because he is legally issuing me a PON??

...

You say a JP will think it is nonsensical to allow cars with HTA violations to pass through a police checkpoint. Will the JP not think it is ...

The matter will revolve around whether the officer had to brake because of your mother's turning across her path. All of the other information that occurred in the parking lot is irrelevant to the charge.

If by front lights you mean the emergency lights on the roof (or visors/grill) then the action required is very clear - pull over to the side ...

No. The record is of the entire incident and you are listed on it just the same as you would be if you had called in to complain about a loud party on your block. The occurrence would indicate that the charges had been withdrawn though.

While you make feel that this was unfair, the law supports the officer's actions. There is nothing to say that an officer must ask if you had been drinking, often a random conversation can be used through which the officer could detect signs of impairment such as slurred speech, glassy eyes, odour of liquor etc.

Your argument that they should have ...

It should be pretty simple. Have a chat with the prosecutor before court starts, explain that it's the wrong charge and I can't see him going ahead with it. He should simply apply to the court to have the charge withdrawn.

Then why is he 'patrolling' the roads ?

You chose to come on this site and then became defensive when people posted relevant answers. Jeez.

I thought any fail to report/remain was reportable regardless of damage.

I think a defence based on the law is stupid and wasteful will not be well-received ! It'll be entertaining though, wish I could be there to see it.

That is why you drive at a speed that allows you to react to situations ahead without having to slam on the brakes. You may have to for a kid that runs out onto the road but you were aware that you were approaching a traffic light and that it had the potential to turn on you, therefore it was your responsibility to be able to stop in time.