Ontario Highway Traffic Act

If you just pay your ticket, you:
* pay $294 + $65= $359 total; and
* receive 4 demerits

If you fight the ticket and they amend it back up to 50 and you're found or plead guilty, you:
*pay $487.50 + 115= $602.50 total;
*receive 6 points; and
* are eligible for a driving suspension directly from the court.

You already received a big break ...

Decatur wrote:Just make sure you read over the sections of the regulation pertaining to exemptions for commercial use of hand held devices to make sure you fit all of the points for the exemption.

Especially section 12(2)(1) of the Regulation where it says "Drivers of motor vehicles clearly identified as courier delivery vehicles."

I now figured out what you're doing: you're attempting to import the definition of "sign" in section 144(9) to section 182(2). However, this is contrary to the principles of statuory interpretation. They are independent provisions and offences. Section 182(2) is not restricted by the same "intersection" limitation you are trying to argue. It was a ...

Are you trying to argue that as a whole the HTA doesn't apply to those exiting from a private road/driveway on to a "highway"? Or are you arguing that signs that are not on "intersections" are not enforceable? Or are you arguing that without specific provisions dealing with existing from private roads, no rules apply? Its getting quite hard to ...

From your picture, I couldn't see the 'no-left' sign on the utility pole referred to by Stanton. However, Google maps cleared that up . Stanton is correct. Your left turn would be in violation of THAT sign since that sign conforms to the rules of the HTA, which applies to all motor vehicles entering the 'highway' (i.e. public road) from the parking ...

As previously mentioned, providing the exact test times in the notes is not always essential. Courts have accepted when an officer testifies that they always test the device at the end of their shift and would only make a note of things if the test failed. Bottom line: unless the officer referred to some documentary evidence that you didn't receive ...

Providing exact test times is not essential for speeding offences. Recent court decisions (by judges, not JPs) have been very clear on this. If the officer testifies that they tested the device BEFORE and AFTER your reading and were qualified to operate the device, then that is sufficient. Its not an 'element' of the offence to have to provide test ...

Stanton is correct. You simply attend the MTO, pay your $150 and should get re-instated (if there's no other reason for a suspension (i.e. unpaid fines, etc.)). After all, thus far, you have only been suspended 'administratively' (i.e. by the MTO) , whereas once convicted (if that occurs) you'll be 'prohibited' from driving as per a criminal order ...

Unfortunately, the FSCO's Dispute Resolution service is limited to Accident Benefit claims. Therefore, court is your only option since your claim would be related to the physical damage (fault determination). If the total damages are under $25K, then you could proceed via small claims court (and might be able to do so without a paralegal or lawyer ...

Unfortunately, you'll likely have to sue in order to challenge your insurer's fault determination. It all depends upon the provisions of your insurance policy on whether you can pursue alternative dispute resolution such as arbitration. However, in Ontario, auto insurance policies follow the standard OAP 1 policy. You can view OAP 1 here . You'll ...

An incorrect birth date is not a fatal error. Your best option is therefore to set it down for trial and then on the trial date either hope the officer doesn't attend (whereby it should get withdrawn) or take a reduced fine offer by the prosecutor. That offence is a black-and-white one (there's no grey area). Your sticker was either expired or it ...

If I were you, I would NOT use that video evidence in court--it doesn't help you. On the contrary, I'm amazed that you weren't charged with careless driving. The video is clear that you were driving much faster than the speed limit of 40km and you were either not paying attention or didn't care about safety. Keep in mind that if an officer ...

Unfortunately, small claims court is the only way to obtain recovery. You would have to sue both the City and the tow company. You'd also have to subpoena the by-law officer (who made the comments that it was an error) and the tow truck driver (as a witness) (and pay each a $6 witness fee!) to establish your case. So, in addition to paying your $75 ...

It all depends on the JP. If they apply correct evidence law than the answer is NO. You would need to bring in the Google employee who took the images to authenticate them, confirm it hasn't been doctored, and whether the location is an accurate reflection of the location at the relevant time. Without proper authentication, the image is prejudicial ...

The Globe and Mail recently had an article related to some of your concerns. You can view it here .

Bottom line:
* According to the MTO, bicycle infractions are not applied to the driving record (as long as the ticket says you were on a bicycle).
* no demerits apply if the "vehicle" was a bicycle. However, this information must be clearly outlined ...