Search found 107 matches

the officer believed was an unsafe pass

Aside from his belief, any other evidence? Another vehicle that had to slow to avoid a collision? Someone had to swerve off the road? Unless there's more to this I don't get it.

That's not a fair charge. Take it to court and request a trial. My only question is how far was the curve when you passed? Not that it matters because even if it was less than 50m it's not the correct charge.

Haha, well you never know but highly unlikely in my opinion.

Most people have little tolerance for that amount of speed though. I know if you're doing 55 or sixty over and have a good record you may be able to plea to a 49 over or to the stunt but no suspension. 94 over may not see much mercy.

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/news/winds ... peed-limit

WOW! Anyone care to speculate on the punishment if convicted??

Greatest Canadian wrote:If you get a ticket and settle out of court by paying the ticket without proceeding to trial, no points can be added to your driving record.

Read my Dermit Point Scam thread.

Say what????

Where (City) was the ticket issued and under what section?

Hi All,
I was putzing around on the net the other day and some guy said he got a ticket for improper tires 70(3)(a). Reason was the car was too low. I looked at the Act and Reg 625 that describes tires but didn't see anything. Is he full of it or did I miss something?
Thanks!
J.

Ok here's the deal. Suspension will be thirty days after conviction or he pays the fine. Ministry will send a letter. Also he will need to go to the Ministry to get his licence reinstated after both suspensions and pay their fees. Otherwise he will be unlicenced. Don't start driving using his old licence after the 3 days. Damn near impossible to ...

He had a beer at some point during work hours

If he had "a" beer and registered a warn, I'm the Pope..........

http://www.windsorstar.com/Windsor+police+catch+Cobalt+driver+doing/5632932/story.html

WINDSOR, Ont. -- Police suspended a mans licence, impounded his car and charged him with stunt driving Saturday after clocking him doing 95 km/h over the speed limit on E.C. Row Expressway.

A traffic enforcement officer was parked with a radar gun in the ...

Likely just used dougall and Darcey as a reference. It doesn't mean that's specifically where the offence took place.

I'll play devils advocate. By your rationale if the road is empty and the weather is good you can go faster than the posted speed limit? Looking at googlemaps there are some houses on the west side of the street. Maybe the home owners don't want people going 80km/h past their house while their kids play in the driveway. Further north there are a ...

I can't think of any reason why it would be illegal. If the limit is 50 then its 50 regardless of being near the 401 or other circumstances. Your chances of getting it dismissed is slim to none IMHO. Looking at googlemaps though it looks like the 92/60 is the same street (different name) but further north. Not that it matters in this case but just ...

Was the 92/60 going northbound on the same road. Prosecutors typically won't be too excited to make a deal with a previous ticket for a similar offence in less than a year.

Forget the demerit points because your potential for jail time is more pressing at the moment.

No, not at all. I am not in court for failing to pay fines and having my license suspended. At all. Period.



Correct. You are in court for driving while your licence is suspended

I'm not sure why this is even moving forward to court?


Because it's illegal to drive with a suspended licence despite your reasoning.

Not true. You really ...

No it doesn't. You should have just paid your fines. You know you got the tickets and you know you didn't pay them so its no one else's fault.

Actually, your reasoning is not sound. It is quite customary for the crown to ask for a certified copy of the suspension letter, and they are doing so in my case.

If they are asking for a certified copy ...

No it doesn't. You should have just paid your fines. You know you got the tickets and you know you didn't pay them so its no one else's fault.

Does it really matter? LIDAR doesn't need any form of a mount to be accurate.

Something i can ask about during cross examination, might be able to raise some doubt about accuracy.

Was 65 your actual speed or was it reduced at the scene?

i believe it was reduced at the scene.

We'll have to wait and see what disclosure there is, see for sure ...

Just curious but do they ever use monopods or is it always a tripod.
Maybe when the officer waved me over they had the legs folded together but it looked like a monopod to me. This might make a difference when aiming the device, steady tripod versus a shakey monopod.

Thanks.

Does it really matter? LIDAR doesn't need any form of a mount to be ...

and its not a Judge but a JP

My advice is pay the tickets you were issued and count your blessings. The alternative could have been a stunt driving charge which is far worse than what you got. JMHO.

Hi,
Anyone know whats involved if someone's wife wants to have the ownership of her vehicle put in the husband's name only? Does tax have to be paid or can it be given as a gift? Is that even necessary?
Thanks!
J.

You want to choose option 3, not 2. Pleading guilty with explanation is still guilty. Option 3 will typically generate a first attendance with the prosecutor at which point you can try and plea for 15 over.

Nothing on the internet will help you. Its all hearsay. Now unless you're an expert in the field and have specialized training you can't really testify either. Even still you can say what you want and put forth a good argument but the truth is with the amount of variables involved in vehicle braking inculding but not limited to condition of the ...

Helper wrote:
Issues I have:
- 500,000 volt hydro transmission lines, directly above and across the highway where I was targeted
- extreme daily heat of 32 degress and a humidex of 44 degrees
- target was coming down an incline, police cruiser was coming up
- traffic behind target and ahead of cruiser.

None of those points matter, but you can try

I hate the turds that put the those fart cans on their compact cars. The four inch exhaust isn't going to make your Pontiac Sunfire any faster. MC's don't bother me too much though.

Radar Identified wrote:I think to answer cruzmisl's original question... I believe that if you have insurance on your old vehicle, it's valid on a new purchase for 14 days. But check with an insurance company first...

Thanks!

As long as you don't use them on a highway and they don't interfere with the normal operation of the vehicle you can install them.

Hi,
I have a question regarding insurance coverage. Lets say an individual buys a used car from a private seller on a weekend. The new owner puts the plates from his old car which are valid (perfectly legal for 6 days) but doesn't call the insurance company because they are closed. Is the newly purchased car insured since the old car was properly ...