On my way to work today I got a 110 dollar ticket + 2 demerit points.

I was driving north on Bathurst and turned left onto a side street into a residential area before hitting the lights at Eglinton and Bathurst. I normally do this to avoid the big line up to turn left onto Eglinton.

I've been doing this for months with no problems but today a cop was waiting as soon as I turned and I got the ticket. I've never seen any sign out there saying not to turn (not saying it's not there but if it is it sure as hell isn't very visible, I'm going to go double check after work today), apparently it's illegal to turn there during rush hour (7 - 9 and 5 - 7)

I'm just wondering if this is worth fighting in court? I don't care about the fine but I'm not sure what 2 demerit points will do to my insurance ...

I've never gotten a ticket before so I'm new at this.

I should also add that the ticket citation says "failure to obey signal"

??

What signal? Is that even the right citation? I'll double check the ticket when I get home, they did quote an HWT # beside it

Yeah, definitely want to know what section you were charged under. I don't know of any "signal" except for the traffic lights at Eglinton and Bathurst. The only other ones I can think of are the pedestrian crossing lights further east on Eglinton. Probably worth fighting, at least from the outset. Sign violations in the city of Toronto where turns are prohibited during certain times of the day are very easy to beat, but let us know what specific section they charged you under and we will try to help you.

Ok I checked the ticket for the exact wording.

At: N/B Bathurst St Into Dowbourne Ave

Did Commit the Offence of: Disobey Ligh (yes the t was missing snicker)

Contary to: H.T.A.

SectionL 182(2)

I checked the section in question it states:

Subsection 182 (2) of the Highway Traffic Act 2 Failing to obey signs prescribed by regulation under subsection 182 (1)

So yes the cop put the right HTA section on the ticket. (I double checked after work and there is indeed a sign that states no turning onto this side street from 7 - 9 and 5 - 7 Mon - Fri. I am unsure if it also says Mon - Fri in French or not, will go back again tomorrow and check (I'm in Toronto).

With that said, this side street has NO lights. How could I have committed the offence of "disobey ligh" as the traffic ticket states if there is no set of lights onto this side street?!

Can I make the argument in court that since this side street where the alleged infraction took place has no lights the ticket is not valid? Disobeying lights is not contrary to HTA sec 182(2). Failure to obey signs prescribed by regulation is. Since the offence the officer put on the ticket doesn't exist under the section he quoted can I make a defence on this?

edit: never mind I was reading his writing wrong. It says under the offence

"Disobey Sign"

I'm screwed

Will fight ticket anyways as my plates are up for renewal on June 24 and this would screw my insurance rates almost immediately. Should I renew for 2 years instead of 1? (I've been told the MTO only reports offences to insurance companies when you go to renew plates) ... if I take this to court assuming I end up with a guilty charge this would probaly occur a few months after I renew. Better than pleading guilty now and having my rates skyrocket in June?

Going to double check tomorrow to see if the sign is also in French. If it isn't will use the Bilingual defence.

Looks like I got lucky. Sign has Mon - Fri at the bottom but no French.

You guys are sure the bilingual defence is foolproof?

I got the exact same ticket at the exact same spot this morning.

I'm wondering how it turned out for you.

Did you fight the charge? Did you win?

Would really appreciate it if you could provide me with some details on what went on.

Thanks.

Bamelin wrote:

You guys are sure the bilingual defence is foolproof?

Foolproof, no. Usable defence, yes, although there is no 100% guarantee that it will work. One case allowed it (R. v. Myers), and it "opened the door," so to speak, but no higher courts have said either "yes" or "no" as to whether or not it can or cannot be used. I've seen it used successfully in a couple of cases like this, so I know it can work.

Couple of other avenues to use include trying to trip up the Crown with a disclosure request. They need to include a certified copy of the by-law that put the sign in place for the package to be complete. (Yeah, kinda stupid, but it works.) If they don't, you can file a motion for a stay. Alternatively, you can also plea-bargain to a municipal by-law infraction, which won't go on your driving record and won't affect your insurance rates.

Also depending on what information is in the officer's notes (should come in the disclosure package), you can formulate a defence that way.

Hi Radar Identified:

what is the municipal bylaw infriction? how to ask for it?

and when request disclosure, I didn't specifically request for the by-law, doI still have the chance?

I am posting my case detail saparately, pls. help me!

just talked to someone, he said if charged by HTA not Municipality By-Law, they do not necessarily need to provide the by-law certified copy.

any comments?

akwon wrote:

I got the exact same ticket at the exact same spot this morning.

I'm wondering how it turned out for you.

Did you fight the charge? Did you win?

Would really appreciate it if you could provide me with some details on what went on.

Thanks.

I showed up for court, they went through the docket and didn't have time to hold my trial. So it got pushed back to Sept/10

So it will be 16 months at that point from when I got the ticket. Should I file for a stay based on lengthy delay?

So it will be 16 months at that point from when I got the ticket. Should I file for a stay based on lengthy delay?

Absolutely. This delay is certainly outside of the reasonable time frame. Ensure you have transcripts ordered and ready for your charter motion.