Search found 20 matches

When a vehicle is on a dolly/trailer. The trailer ITSELF is considered as a vehicle, the car on it is considered as a load. Trailers in this province does not need to be insured but must be plated. However standard trailer regulation applies. Anything over 1360KG has to have its own braking system. Regardless if it's a tow dolly or a flat-trailer ...

This information could be accessed no doubt by hiring a paralegal firm to fight this ticket. This I wont do as no points are involved and the fine is not exorbitant.

This has made both of us aware of this traffic regulation and will no doubt aid us in making sure the whole car is cleaned off before driving. I think though that I will encourage ...

They're illegal so you threw away your money the moment you paid for it.

I'm sure others will chime in but if you are riding your bike on a crosswalk then you are at fault. The operative work is walk. If you want to cross on a crosswalk then you must be walking your bike.

It's unfortunate that your paralegal didn't know how to handle the fatal error.

My brother-in-law received a ticket in Gatineau while working - He now locks the door but leaves the window open.

Typically the amount of space between the sidewalk and the road can only accommodate a small vehicle. A pickup truck would either block the sidewalk or stick out onto the road in a possible hazardous situation. Instead of approaching it as parking in the boulevard take the position that it's blocking the sidewalk. There should be bylaws preventing ...

From the photo it looks like the Acura had to cross the solid yellow line. Wouldn't he be at fault for failing to drive in a marked lane?

It seems there are more than a few officers who tell people that the offence is only a fine and no demerit points as it happened to my son as well. People are willing to pay the fine without question because of the hassle to go to court but demerit points change that. The officer wants to avoid being questioned on his actions so he states something ...

Remember, the standard required is not one of absolute proof.

What about reasonable doubt?

Legal advice was the best route. I know from past experience that there needs to be a witness to the careless driving. No witness, no statement - how does the officer know you were driving carelessly? He must of assumed you were driving carelessly because your car was wrecked - assumptions have no standings in court.

Did anyone witness your careless driving? Just because your car was wrecked doesn't mean you were careless. I know of one case where this was the situation and the JP through it out.

So if you're doing 151 km/hr, the time thru the zone is 11.92 sec but if you're doing 149 km/hr, the time thru the zone is 12.08 sec - difference of 0.16 sec. Given the distance between the officer in the plane and the subject vehicle it could be argued that the accuracy of the officer's reaction time resulted in too high of a speed recorded. I'm ...

This post started off asking about the margin of error - can we get back to that?
Is there a requirement for the officer to prove that the stop watch was calibrated (same as for a radar unit)? What about the human error component? If the bear in the air starts the stop watch a fraction too late and stops it a fraction too early then the recorded ...

Is there a requirement for the officer to prove that the stop watch was calibrated (same as for a radar unit)? What about the human error component? If the bear in the air starts the stop watch a fraction too late and stops it a fraction too early then the recorded speed is higher than the actual. The difference between 51 over and 49 over might be ...

First officers on scene.thought the charge should be failure to yield......

Sounds like they were right the first time however by-law charges don't carry the fines that HTA violations do so the charges usually get trumped up. They always say that the charge isn't something they want to apply but they have to and they tell you how to fight it ...

There is a by-law that specifically states "No person shall drive a motor vehicle upon a sidewalk or footpath or designated multi-use recreational trail except for the purpose of directly crossing it."
Why would the city cover something that the HTA already addresses?
In addition: "A person driving a motor vehicle across a sidewalk or footpath or ...

Sidewalks are within the lateral property lines of the roadway which the municipality owns however the HTA doesn't define it's use very well. We all know it's illegal to drive your vehicle along a sidewalk but there's no offence for this under the HTA

The word sidewalk shows up twice in the HTA. Once to describe a crosswalk as the sidewalk ...

Charge was withdrawn today. Seems the private driveway and sidewalk are not part of the highway or roadway as the constable thought. Charges under the HTA were incorrect and it should have been the city bylaw but of course city bylaw infractions are not as sexy as HTA violations. If they would stick to the law instead of trying to make a charge fit ...

I was backing up in my driveway and struck a pedestrian on the sidewalk that intersects my driveway. The pedestrian must have stopped walking in my blindspot and then started again just as I began backing up - I never saw her. I received a ticket for fail to yield to pedestrian HTA 140 (1) (a). There were minor injuries to the pedestrian.
My ...