Ontario Highway Traffic Act

I haven't read it all yet but this is not a strict liability offence in any sense. The court is looking for excuses to keep this pathetic law alive.

Absolute liability generally applied to regulatory offences, such as speeding. R. v Sault Ste. Marie recognized the need for and existence of an intermediate category of strict liability offences for ...

Read this.

http://www.ticketcombat.com/step1/step1.php

I believe she was lying, but he was still speeding and received no ticket.

But think how poorply run the province is. They bring in cops from Peterborough. They spent 4 1/2 hours in salary just in return travel time for two officers. Then there was gas costs. Pathetic.

Had he not been speeding it would've cost taxpayers even more in salary just ...

I had an incident once where I was photo copying my licence. I forgot my licence in a copy machine. I was stopped by the cops hours later and couldn't produce my licence. I did however produced a photo copy. The cop said it was unacceptable, but did not charge me as he believed my story, which was true.

This was dealing with a licence and not ...

Have your insurance company put all that info to you in writing.

Do not settle with this driver. He still caused the accident. I'm reviewing the info you posted again and will post a letter, when I'm done, that you should write him.

I'm convinced your son was on the sidewalk at least 25 to 30 feet prior to the beginning of his driveway. This ...

You don't have to convince me, you'll have to convince a judge.
You have written statement from others against your son. It doesn't mean they're right, but a judge will accept it.

Usually there is a 3 or 6 foot space between the road and sidewalk. If the car turned into his driveway your son would've ran right into the side of him. Everything you ...

It's rather odd that the owner or driver never got an estimate on the damage for over a year.

The stuff you posted does not show your son on the sidewalk.

Are you saying it's wrong?

Are you saying your son wa on the sidewalk at least one driveway before reaching the drviers driveway where he was hit?

The driver is not the owner of the car. The driver might not be insured to drive the car. We do not know this yet, though. They might not have notifyied their insurance company as required by law.

At worse, in my view, you will have to pay their deductible if they have their insrance pay for the damages. They will still have to prove your son was ...

This may or may not appy. I haven't read it yet.

Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... 0m41_e.htm


Suing an Uninsured or Unidentified Motorist

http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/English/insur ... torist.asp

http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/english/insurance/auto/mvacf/

Everything you posted changes everything, in my view. You son wasn't riding o the sidewalk, he was riding on the road. When the car turned he steered to the siewalk, but he was riding on the road.

When he left the scene, the driver had the right to attempt to arrest him without a warrant.

You need to contact your insurance compnay and see if ...

The accident happened on the road; not the sidewalk. I was assuming he took to the sidewalk a driveway or two before the drivers driveway.

This means your son can be charged with failing to remain. However, he can still cannot be convicted of failing to report. If you got a retrial you're facing the greater penalites of failing to remain.

As ...

You've been claiming for a week or more that the accident happened on the sidewalk. Now it happened on the road.

The god news is the boy witness claims the bikers were only 4 metres or 12 feet behind the car before it turned.

Has the driver sued you or yor son?

His story makes zero sense. He claims ALL cyclist ride down the hill at a great speed and blow the stop sign. As if.

He claims your son was riding at a great deal of speed after going down the hill yet your son wasn't even thrown off his bike after being hit. He states your son was able to scrap the car and still managed to turn to the right and ...

He admits he only used his mirror. Big no, no. You must turn our head and look.

Now, he claims the accident happened on the road. You said your son took to the sidewalk prior to the accident and was hit while on the sidewalk.

Which is it?

Has he sued you or has he sued your son?