Search found 556 matches

New York can only suspend your right to drive in New York state. It has no jurisdiction over your license status in Ontario. As long as the advice you got about it not appearing on your abstract is correct then I wouldn't worry about having a tight payment timeline unless you plan on driving in New York state in the very near future.

Just hand it over to your insurance company and let them worry about the lawsuit. Take comfort in the fact that if the person isn't really hurt and if they do get any money, it is nothing in comparison to the amount of BS your insurer will make them go through.

Decatur wrote:The owner of the car can't be charged for this infraction.

Even better

Without a positive ID the only way to secure a conviction is to charge the owner of the car for the infraction this carries no demerit points and is not on your driver abstract. There needs to be a witness that wrote down your plate number, called the police and is willing to testify.

This is not a speeding charge so the actual speed is of no consequence when dealing with the fine amount, demerit points or if it is viewed as major/minor by your insurer. The nice thing about this one is that after 6 months you can go to trial without worrying about the prosecutor asking the court to amending the speed to a higher one with a ...

If you are entering from a private road or driveway you are supposed to make sure the way is clear. (Unsafe turn)
The person changing lanes is also supposed to make sure the way is clear. (Unsafe lane change)

You turned right onto a road in front of a stopped bus and someone passed the bus and changed into the right lane that you were turning ...

Personally I would advise that you always file for a trial and request disclosure and review the case against you. Even if he feels responsible for the accident if it goes to trial the prosecutor might not be able to prove the case against him for careless if the other driver doesn't show up. If you go this route it is advisable that he hire ...

To my eyes the accident looks like it happened when some part of the vehicle was in the crosswalk so one could argue that the regulation assigns 100 fault to the suv because technically they were still in the intersection. If it happened another 10 feet down the road then I'd call it a sideswipe with fault going to the car.

This forum is specifically for Ontario. If you were in Ontario you would not be at fault if you made a left at a green arrow and the other driver essentially ran a red right, but you are in BC so the fault determination rules may be different.

That would be a fatal error. Research how to force a fatal error.

If you go to early resolution you can expect them to drop 2 out of the 3 charges in exchange for 1 guilty plea. You basically show that you have remedied the deficiencies. Some prosecutors might even withdraw all charges if they are willing to listen and your story is good enough but I wouldn't hold your breath.

Going straight to trial you may be ...

You can go to court to see if the officer present on the day of your trial and if he is then simply leave before your trial starts and you will be convicted of whatever is on the ticket. If the officer is a no show there's a good chance the ticket will be withdrawn or the trial rescheduled. If the trial goes ahead the charge will likely be amended ...

I'd most worried about the possibility of being injured and not having coverage, getting a few tickets pales in comparison to loss of life and limb.

If you are completely on private property, most of the HTA does not apply, some does though (like reporting an accident). If you plan on going to a mall, odds are that mall security will trespass you from the property. No property owner in their right mind would want an unlicenced, uninsured motorist driving on their property.

I don't think it would matter because it would be next to impossible to use due diligence in any credible way when were are talking just the driver.

In R v. Gupta? It was applied to where the driver was charged for minors not wearing seat belts that somehow became unbuckled in transit.

You should review disclosure and the evidence against you before making any decisions on how to plead. Odds are a reduced charge is going to be the outcome of this but it just may be that the case against you is weak.

For those who don't know both Absolute Liability and Strict Liability do not require "mens rea" (intent) to be proven in order to support a conviction but with Strict Liability offences you may use the defense due diligence.

If an HTA offence is regarded as one or the other depends largely on precedents that take into account the wording of the ...

The HTA states any vehicle (personal or commercial) can be pulled over to ensure the driver is licensed, the vehicle is insured and mechanically fit.

Any officer can issue a ticket anywhere in Ontario. That being said the court house (identified by ICON #) on the Provincial Offence Notice should be the one for the area where the offence took place.

At this point you can request the trial at your local courthouse, but your notice of trial sent to you will be for the court in Napanee. Make sure ...

You basically go to court, keep your mouth shut, let the trial begin and watch them try to prove the essential elements of the offence and when they fail introduce a motion of non-suit. A motion of non-suit is essentially asking the JP to rule that the prosecutor has not and cannot prove the case with the evidence they presented. Before adopting ...

Your defense if it gets to trial is that you are absolutely certain that you were wearing your seatbelt and you always wear your seatbelt even when delivering pizza. If you are convicted you can ask for a reduced fine and time to pay. The key is to be a better witness than the officer so that your testimony in given at least as much weight as his ...

I hate to break this to you but if she was turning left into a side street then it is an intersection.

The officer can lay a charge based on what the cyclist or other witness said to them without taking a statement from your mom but it isn't great procedure. In order for your mom to be convicted at trial the witnesses who spoke to the officer will ...

The other driver is under no obligation not to report the accident or make a claim.

Most signs need to be visible for 60 meters to support a conviction but in the case of speeding there are default speed limits in Ontario for highways 80 and urban areas 50. In the absence of a visible sign you are to follow the default speed limit.

Ontario has fault determination rules. http://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/900668

(3) If the incident occurs when automobile "B" is entering a road from a private road or a driveway and automobile "A" is passing the private road or driveway and, if there are no traffic signals or signs, the driver of automobile "A" is not at fault and the driver ...

If the officer had an eyewitness finger you as the driver and can lay a charge on you as the driver, if they cannot determine who the driver was they can charge the vehicle owner (but this does not appear on their driver record). You are correct that police can lie in order to get confessions, but if he said he wasn't going to charge you he ...

The officers evidence is going to be him paraphrasing his notes. If it goes to trial I'll bet at trial the officer will testify he saw the shine of the buckle next to your shoulder and you will swear six ways from Sunday that you had it on and have no idea what the officer is talking about because you ALWAYS wear your seatbelt. The JP will have to ...

File for trial and request disclosure when you get a court date. You can always plead guilty to a reduced charge/fine. In the absence of other evidence it will be your word against the officers, if you can offer credible and honest testimony that you were indeed wearing your seatbelt you could win.

epcjay wrote:Just lie and said your not sure why you go the ticket and that the sticker was on there.

As long as your receipt has a time stamp BEFORE the ticket, they'll cancel it

Please refrain from giving people advice to lie. If this ends up in court the penalty for perjury is far greater than the face value of the ticket.