Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Where do we start then? Definitions?

The offence notice shows 13(2) and the fine amount is $110. Unfortunately I had already clean my plates so I wont have any prove. By "insurance implications are nil", you mean only if I fight the ticket or not fight the ticket?

Normally if you win the fight, your ticket is null and void, so no insurance implications whatever the ticket you ...

But they just made the school shorter by a year lol... 13 years in primary school? Give kids a break! Just make "Driving" a required credit, just like civics, except they will likely benefit more from a driving course...

hwybear wrote:Still think a few of us on here should rewrite the HTA sections to make sense and submit it to the government for changes. Write it so that even our new drivers at 16yrs old can understand it.

How do you propose we do that? Sub-by-sub or from clean sheet?

Bear, I thought we have discussed in one of the threads a while back that "Black" is equal to "absense of colour"....

Oh yeah, I saw te commercials of those on the TV a few times. Useless things for me, I don't need glasses (knock on wood). But I doubt that these self-tinting shades come in this shape:

Lol I've heard of a case in Germany a couple of years ago, when, in heavy fog, 2 drivers were driving 20 km/h each, in opposite directions, on the same road, with their heads stuck out to see the midroad line. Both had major concussions, but not a scratch on their cars...

hwybear wrote:

racer wrote: You did mention LEO was wearing shades (no pun intended), was there a need for them?

So this person is now the officer's optometrist?

Nope, as in "would you need shades on that day" was what I meant lol.

Sounds like you were charged with 13(2).

Number plates, further violations

No other numbers to be exposed

13

Number plate to be kept clean

(2) Every number plate shall be kept free from dirt and obstruction and shall be affixed so that the entire number plate, including the numbers, is plainly visible at all times, and the view of the ...

Look up news reports from the Hamilton Spectator, see how many accidents there are. If there are a lot we know that you are not the only one who got confused on that intersection.

Heck, you can almost see The Spec's building from that 403 exit off-ramp, just look to the right, it's North-East of 403-Main access ramps. Should be easy for the ...

The cop probably wants to close off the accident report, and charging someone with "Follow too closely" nicely sets all papers in order.
However, based on what you have told us you should have been charged with 154.(1)(a) (below), which carries 3 demerit point penalty, and would still set officer's papers straight...

154.(1) Where a highway has ...

That is borderline inappropriate for the forum! Keep it for others to kaugh at though...

Still, I wouldn't want to get 2 points because someone who doesn't pay any attention rear-ends someone in front of me lol. Not showing up will not get the ticket dropped to the lady that dgs himself rear-ended.

That wouldn't hurt you pleading your case in any case. I actually haven't even gone on that exit more than a half dozen times myself, as I lived up on the mountain, so I'd usually take the 403 all the way up to Linc. or Stone Church, those are much nicer/safer exits, but get you nowhere near downtown... Look up news reports from the Hamilton ...

BTW, bear, what would be the sub for "Improper brakes"? 64(9) is rather different about the fines...

"Defective Brakes" 64(7) = $85
or
"Improper Braking System" 64(1) = $85

Thx bear, R.S.O. 1990 64(9) says fine from $400 to $20000, but for commercial vehicles under 16(1). It says nothing of non-commercial vehicles... My guess is that 64(7) is ...