So i just received my red light ticket in the mail. It has to be serviced in two days (well less than that if we are counting hours). August 22nd 2013 I have to service the notice. The envelope is date stamped on the 15th of august, 2013, and was in the postal system for about five days. The original offense was noted on July 31 2013, is this grounds for dismissal? Secondly, is it worth going to court, do they still give half the charge for guilty plea? or is it best to just go for first attendance? I have a decent explanation with proof. Thanks in advance.
So i just received my red light ticket in the mail. It has to be serviced in two days (well less than that if we are counting hours).
August 22nd 2013 I have to service the notice. The envelope is date stamped on the 15th of august, 2013, and was in the postal system for about five days. The original offense was noted on July 31 2013, is this grounds for dismissal?
Secondly, is it worth going to court, do they still give half the charge for guilty plea? or is it best to just go for first attendance?
Do you have a defense or an excuse? Excuses aren't going to take you far in a trial. Keep that in mind when preparing a defense. Red light camera tickets aren't going to impact your insurance, which is why many here don't really worry about them. They don't know who is driving so you can have piece of mind that when you pay your ticket, you won't be paying for it again down the road. If I could get something out of a first attendance meeting in this situation, i'd probably just take it and move on.
preludex wrote:
I have a decent explanation with proof.
Do you have a defense or an excuse? Excuses aren't going to take you far in a trial. Keep that in mind when preparing a defense.
Red light camera tickets aren't going to impact your insurance, which is why many here don't really worry about them. They don't know who is driving so you can have piece of mind that when you pay your ticket, you won't be paying for it again down the road. If I could get something out of a first attendance meeting in this situation, i'd probably just take it and move on.
Do you have a defense or an excuse? Excuses aren't going to take you far in a trial. Keep that in mind when preparing a defense. Red light camera tickets aren't going to impact your insurance, which is why many here don't really worry about them. They don't know who is driving so you can have piece of mind that when you pay your ticket, you won't be paying for it again down the road. If I could get something out of a first attendance meeting in this situation, i'd probably just take it and move on. Thanks Bend, It's basically an excuse with an explanation. I have recent service records indicating my cars transmission is done, and the reason I went through the red was both car trouble and weather related. I know this poses more questions, however it was safe for me to pass through the intersection at the time. Is there any chance of a "No Show" in court? not sure if the person verifying the pictures has to also be present in court? Thanks again
bend wrote:
preludex wrote:
I have a decent explanation with proof.
Do you have a defense or an excuse? Excuses aren't going to take you far in a trial. Keep that in mind when preparing a defense.
Red light camera tickets aren't going to impact your insurance, which is why many here don't really worry about them. They don't know who is driving so you can have piece of mind that when you pay your ticket, you won't be paying for it again down the road. If I could get something out of a first attendance meeting in this situation, i'd probably just take it and move on.
Thanks Bend,
It's basically an excuse with an explanation. I have recent service records indicating my cars transmission is done, and the reason I went through the red was both car trouble and weather related. I know this poses more questions, however it was safe for me to pass through the intersection at the time.
Is there any chance of a "No Show" in court? not sure if the person verifying the pictures has to also be present in court?
Arguing you went through the red light because of car trouble will not go over well in Court. Red light offences are what are known as absolute liability offences, which basically means there is no excuse, short of your life being in imminent danger (i.e. mad gunman chasing you). Weather and/or car trouble will not be accepted as valid reasons to break the law, and trying to justify your actions could actually lessen your chances of the Court being lenient. No officer will be present in Court for your matter. They proceed based solely on the certificate that was sent to you. You can make a request for the issuing officer to attend, but you need a valid reason (i.e more the hoping for a no show), and such requests are rarely granted.
Arguing you went through the red light because of car trouble will not go over well in Court. Red light offences are what are known as absolute liability offences, which basically means there is no excuse, short of your life being in imminent danger (i.e. mad gunman chasing you). Weather and/or car trouble will not be accepted as valid reasons to break the law, and trying to justify your actions could actually lessen your chances of the Court being lenient.
No officer will be present in Court for your matter. They proceed based solely on the certificate that was sent to you. You can make a request for the issuing officer to attend, but you need a valid reason (i.e more the hoping for a no show), and such requests are rarely granted.
Thanks Stanton, Wise words, should I go to the first attendance, would it be best to not prove my car situation in asking for a reduced rate? Back to my first statement, since I only had two days to make a decision, to what advantage would this be for me?
Stanton wrote:
Arguing you went through the red light because of car trouble will not go over well in Court. Red light offences are what are known as absolute liability offences, which basically means there is no excuse, short of your life being in imminent danger (i.e. mad gunman chasing you). Weather and/or car trouble will not be accepted as valid reasons to break the law, and trying to justify your actions could actually lessen your chances of the Court being lenient.
No officer will be present in Court for your matter. They proceed based solely on the certificate that was sent to you. You can make a request for the issuing officer to attend, but you need a valid reason (i.e more the hoping for a no show), and such requests are rarely granted.
Thanks Stanton,
Wise words, should I go to the first attendance, would it be best to not prove my car situation in asking for a reduced rate?
Back to my first statement, since I only had two days to make a decision, to what advantage would this be for me?
I got a speeding ticket on the 401 by Cornwall. The officer said I was going 140 initially then dropped it to 130 (for the record I don't believe for a second I was going 140, that's way faster than I would ever intentionally drive). I filled out the info on the back of the notice to request a…
I was recently charged with stunt driving on a 60kmh road. When I was pulled over, the officer told me I was going almost 100kmh (still 40kmh above the limit) but was charging me for stunt driving because I accelerated quickly from an intersection on an empty road (in a straight line). I know…
what to do about a an illegal right turn onto steeles from staines rd
got the ticket around october of last year
put it to trial
so there is a big mess of cars at this intersection and I see a cop outside standing directing traffic with a huge row of cars pulled over to the side, through…
Are any non-domestic vehicles "pursuit-rated" in North America? Also have the Michigan State Police (this is relevant because apparently they have the most accepted selection/testing process) tested any of them to see if they meet their criteria? Just curious...
Ottawa, Canada (AHN) - Beginning Tuesday, or April Fool's Day 2008, fines on Quebec drivers caught overspeeding will be doubled. It is not only the money penalty that will go up, but also demerit points.
The new law, Bill 42, is similar to Ontario's street racing rule. It stipulates fines for…
A friend got a ticket Jan. 9th of this year for doing 110 kph in a 90 kph zone, so 20 over.
What should the set fine and total payable read?
It's confusing to me, as the prescribed fine under HTA s.128 is different than the set fine enumerated by the Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice.
An OPP officer ticketed me claiming I was going 40km/h over the limit (140km/km) on my way home with a few friends on the 401. This is my first ever speeding offense. Although I am sure I was over the limit, I am almost certain that I was not going 40 over, more realistically closer to 30 over. The…
Yesterday night I was charged for stunt driving (excess over 50km/h) and I have a few inquiries. I'm sure you've all heard the same story, but the unmarked cop in an SUV was tailing me for a good 2-3 minutes as I was travelling 120~135 km/h. Then as he came close I decided to boot it up…
I had a speeding ticket in May 2013 which brought me to 9 demerit points out of 15. I received a letter and had to attend an interview. Due to a history of speeding tickets and a previous interview a few years prior, the interviewer decided to put me on zero tolerance for a year. Meaning if I…