Search found 107 matches

The odds that anyone is going to take this anywhere are extremely small. You probably have a better chance of winning 649 than being charged as a driver. In the extremely unlikely chance that you are questioned about the incident, be aware and educated about your rights.

But to respond to the original poster, I don't see much of a way out of this one.

To the best and brightest: I don't see post-stop testing of the speed measuring device in the disclosure, does this matter?

I think "in the same direction" refers to the traffic being passed.

I don't claim to be an expert on this, but the accepted wisdom is that, if you get a court date you just don't show up. The Justice of the Peace should review the ticket, determine that it is not "regular on its face" and quash it.

If the Justice doesn't notice the irregularities, you may wind up convicted. In that case you should receive a notice ...

You can be charged within 6 months, but if it's been a month and nothing yet, you probably won't be charged with anything.

I'm hoping that some members with court experience will chime in. I'm a retired driving instructor but don't claim any expertise at all in court. From my perspective, though, based on what you've said, you should have a good chance at winning, as I don't see any evidence that your turn was improper. I would suspect that, under cross-examination ...

Based on what you've said above, I would agree that you should fight it. When a large vehicle needs to move out of the prescribed lanes to make a turn, the onus is on that driver to ensure his turn can be completed in safety. It would seem that he did his "due diligence" by looking (but you weren't there at the time). There is some confusion if he ...

Just wondering - it may not be relevant - do the officer's notes indicate that you intended to proceed straight but then entered the right-turn-only lane?

Is there anything in the disclosure package that would indicate why you were charged? Can you post the notes here?

bend wrote: Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:59 pm Because your average driver doesn't know all that much about demerit points.
...
The only people who should care about points are Novice Drivers (G1/G2), and people who, quite frankly, shouldn't be on the road to begin with.

Perfect post. +1000

I hate the be the bearer of bad news, but generally speaking while turning left you are 100% responsible for ensuring that the turn can be made in safety regardless of the circumstances, e.g. the colour of the light.

Better minds than mine may comment on the specific case of the other driver proceeding straight from a right-turn-only lane, but at ...

andrewWW wrote:... I'm disappointed that my broker didn't reveal this information to me. ...

Time to start shopping for a new broker. You shouldn't have had to figure this out on your own.

So a City NEVER needs to post a speed limit if it is a 50 zone? Unbelievable.

It's not really unbelievable, it actually makes a lot of sense in terms of cost savings, etc.

Not at all trying to be snarky or trolling here... just wondering, as a former driving instructor, how it come to pass that you didn't know this fact. Where I worked, the 50 ...

I was confused too, but as I now understand it, the key word in the regulations is "prescribed". 128 (1) allows a prescribed speed only via (d):

(d) the rate of speed prescribed for motor vehicles on a highway in accordance with subsection (2), (5), (6), (6.1) or (7);

128 (1) a,b,c are "normative", as it were, vs. "prescriptive".

It would be ...

Read carefully what Observer35 said, he's correct. At the very most, the distance being wrong in the notes will have a tiny bearing on the officer's credibility, which you may or may not be able to exploit on cross examination.

If you allow yourself to get hung up on this one discrepancy, you're going down the rabbit hole. If he had you in line of ...

It's also spelled out for you in the Excluded Driver Endorsement which she signed. The form (Form OPCF 28A) is standard for all providers.

"I may be charged with permitting the automobile to be driven without insurance;" followed by the insured signature.

I believe that he was not driving the excluded vehicle, rather a totally uninsured one ...

As somebody once said, there's your story, his story, and the truth...

You need to request your trial date and request the disclosure package to get the officer's version of events. That process is dealt with here ad nauseum so I won't repeat it.

This reminds me of another question regarding private driveways: if you are waiting to turn right but there is a long line, and also a business like a gas station at the corner with entrances on both roads, it is lawful to "skip the line" and go through the parking lot? I don't see why it wouldn't be (aka lawful but rude) but some people seem to ...

I wonder if the outcome would have been different if the fellow wasn't a lawyer.

Zatota wrote:A few years ago ... I was pulled over by a state trooper in West Virginia for driving somewhere around 80 mph...

Off topic, but anyone driving through West Virginia should be aware that 80 mph or higher is considered reckless there, and comes with a minimum 5 day jail term....

I can't give you any specific advice, but indulge me in playing devil's advocate here:

You were passing the cement truck on the right. You inadvertently moved to the left just as your back wheel lined up with the truck's front bumper. And the rest is history....

That's what you're going to be fighting.

Hopefully some others may weigh in with ...

You'll have trouble beating this, but I can speak from experience in saying that my wife plead poor and got the fine cut pretty much in half via the early resolution meeting route.

Whenaxis wrote:

whaddyaknow wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but didn't the O.P. say he's 22? In that case he's not a young driver???

He said he is under 22.

Ah, yes! "21 and under" does in fact mean the same as "under 22". Knew I was missing something!

Maybe I'm missing something, but didn't the O.P. say he's 22? In that case he's not a young driver???

I've noticed that if I click on the link for a specific page of a multi-page topic from the active topics summary, I get a 404 error. Is that happening to anyone else?

This didn't happen to be in Burlington, did it? I saw a very similar situation there, I think it was on Wednesday.

Congratulations on getting the right outcome, something that you should never have had to deal with in the first place. How much time do you think got wasted on this debacle?

I don't know how it works in Manitoba, maybe somebody else here has some experience. I'm confused between the "broker" (who in Ontario would just sell you insurance), vs. the "license" which in Ontario is dealt with through the government. Perhaps you could explain more?

No offense if you started passing him before the red lights and stop sign were reactivated. He turned on the amber hazards to let you know he was not leaving.

Was this by any chance at one of the Power Centre malls? They tend to have weird signage.

What I've seen is that there's a 4-way intersection in the mall, but the traffic entering the parking lot, i.e. coming in from the "highway" has no stop sign. Is that the case you're describing?

It's good to see that the system, however flawed, does work most of the time. Thanks for reporting back.