Search found 380 matches

Yes, its illegal. The monitor is connected to the phone; it is not part of a stand alone GPS unit. The fact that you are using a phone as the CPU to display information on to the screen illustrates its function. Its irrelevant what apps you decide to put on to the screen; the fact of the matter is that its not a global positioning system navigation ...

Traffic courts do NOT factor safety when they consider whether you were speeding or not. Its an absolute liability offence. The question is simply whether you were speeding or not and whether you have a legally accepted excuse for disobeying the law (e.g. necessity). So, someone is perfectly allowed to drive at the maximum speed limit in the left ...

the one that says "Keep right except to pass" ...

Other than to move over for emergency vehicles, a person can drive in the left lane so long as they are driving the speed limit. Its only an offence if they are driving at " less than the normal speed of traffic " in the left lane. Since no one can go beyond the speed limit, its ok to drive at ...

What section of the HTA do you propose applies if they are going the speed limit in the left lane?

You must be trolling because no one would be this stupid!

Not only are flashing red and blue lights not permitted (s. 62(14.2)), but your dash cam footage would prove the case for the prosecutor, not to mention likely prove your speeding, unnecessary noise (with the siren) and any other aggressive behaviour you might show. At best, you are looking ...

As Bend and Zatota indicated, you will have to let the prosecutor know whether you are pleading guilty or going to trial. If you are pleading guilty, they will call your matter up before the trials. If you say you want to go to trial, they will then call in the officer when they are ready to do your trial. Officers do not all show up in the morning ...

It's unfortunate that you couldn't have the meeting sooner. However, its still possible that on your court date the matter may get resolved. You usually get to chat with the prosecutor before court, so definitely let him know that you tried to reach him weeks before because you were hoping he would accept a guilty plea to 49 over instead. He may ...

Immediately request your disclosure by writing (or emailing) the Crown. Once you receive it, contact them directly via phone or email and tell them that you would like to discuss possible resolution. They may offer you 49 over at that discussion. If so, you can then plead guilty on your next court date. If they don't offer you the 49 over charge ...

Unless you plan to argue that the light was NOT red or that you didn't make a right on the red, then you really have no defence. A disobey sign charge is an absolute liability offence----you either obeyed the sign or you didn't. Whether you saw the sign is irrelevant . So, unless you plan to challenge the act, your best bet is to schedule an Early ...

Were you given a speeding ticket (i.e. Offence Notice) for 49 over or were you issued a summons for 50 over?

As Speedstar implied, there is no set fine for 50 over---so, you must go to court to find out your penalty. 49 over (and below) has an out of court settlement option via set fines.

Are you sure the officer didn't reduce the speed to 49 ...

York Region (like most others in Ontario) now have by-laws setting out the fees that can be charged by tow companies. The price changes depending on whether it needed to be "winched", a second tow truck, or if it went outside city limits. You can review the rates for York Region here .

The one thing that you may be able to negotiate is the daily ...

Bend is correct, guidelines aren't law. They are merely recommendations and can easily be disregarded since they aren't enforceable. There is no legal requirement that prior notice of upcoming speed reductions must be given. The Ontario Traffic Manual is not a regulation, nor is it part of the HTA.

Don't delay any further. You only have 10 days from the date of the incident to provide a written notice of claim against some government bodies (e.g. City). You don't want to restrict your claim to just the province, especially when they may have delegated some responsibilities to others such as the City or county/region. Talk to a lawyer ...

If your license is under suspension (for any reason), then you do not meet the definition of an "accompanying driver" as per section 5(2) of Ontario Regulation 340/90.

You will see that subsection 5(2) (a) says that you must be a "fully licensed driver" which you aren't because (as per the definition in section 1(1) of that same Regulation) you ...

It would be a nightmare to do because the regulations are VERY stringent. The law regarding legal seating capacity is quite specific. You will have to follow several laws including Canada's Motor Vehicle Safety Act and its regulations, especially section 2.2 "Seating Capacity" of its Safety Regulation , and the Motor Vehicle Restraint Systems and ...

I think it would be extremely foolish NOT to report the accident. After all, a crime may have been committed. Many people think that only the HTA offence of "Fail to Remain or Stop" applies, but there's also a criminal offence called "Failure to stop after accident" (section 320(16) of the Criminal Code) that can often apply.

Regardless, if there ...

If you request an ER, they can reduce the fine to $200 plus costs (which is the minimum fine). That makes the total price payable $240. Unless there is something aggravating such as speeding or pedestrians in the picture, the prosecutor should be willing to reduce it to the minimum $200. That's as low as they can go now given the applicability of ...

You certainly can ask to go to trial, request disclosure and attend your trial date to see if the officer shows up. To be safe that the price doesn't go up, just be ready to pay your ticket that day at the cashier counter BEFORE they call your trial matter up. Its cheaper to pay at the counter since its the fine on the ticket that applies (i.e. set ...

It really IS up to you on how much time you want to invest in this thing. Prosecutors are NOT going to reduce your ticket any further. You already received a reduction to lower your fine and points and they will just tell you that they will be AMENDING UP back to the original speed if you go to trial. You can opt for Option 2 to hear the prosecutor ...

As Bend stated, your scenario won't satisfy the defence of necessity. After all, if it truly was an emergency, all you had to do was pull over and call 911 so that they could go pick up your mom. We have emergency vehicles for that purpose with specially trained staff. Your involvement would not be considered essential to justify breaking the law ...

As of yet, you can't request a trial online, however, you can request a meeting with the Prosecutor (Early Resolution meeting), so that's an indirect way of getting a trial. As you can imagine, many changes are coming as a result of the new world we now live in. The government wants to reduce the number of people physically needed in the court ...

I agree with FyreStorm that its probably best to attend your first appearance, get your disclosure and see what the offer, if any, is. Then, if the deal is not one of the ones I mentioned, or you simply wish to take it to trial, hire a paralegal.

Its unlikely that the prosecution will simply agree to reduce the charge to a speeding offence. 64 over has a total price of $724. So, if speeding is not offered, then you might wish to suggest a Part I careless driving charge instead since that only carries a minimum fine of $400 (total price of $490). Either is better than the minimum $2000 fine ...

All limitation periods have been suspended until September 11, 2020. So, you have until then to decide what to do with your ticket and respond. You can choose the option for trial and then request disclosure from the Prosecution office. That way, you'll be able to see what the officer is saying such as how far from the intersection he/she was ...

There's nothing preventing you from challenging the officer's testimony and going to trial. Its always beneficial for people like you to take matters to court when the odds are significantly against them. That's how the law gets better clarified. Since its your money, time and driving record on the line and only a few extra hundred dollars of YOUR ...

While the dash cam footage may disprove that you were the first vehicle and even challenge the officer's recollection, such evidence would have been more beneficial if the officer had used a radar device. However, in your case, they used a Laser. Undoubtedly, the officer will likely testify that they made sure the laser beam directly hit your ...

I think you'll be in for quite the lesson if you go to trial. Remember, the officer does not have to write down everything in her notes; the notes aren't evidence; they are only used to refresh her memory. She just has to have an independent recollection of events and can't simply read off her notes. In your case, the officer will likely say she ...

The officer paced your vehicle; she did not use a radar or laser device to get your speed. Her notes don't give a lot of detail as to how long she actually paced your vehicle (i.e. time/distance) but she says she was going 80 in a 50. Pacing is perfectly acceptable by the courts. While it is possible that you could cross-examine her on specific ...

Its unlikely they will withdraw the charge. If that were going to happen, they would have done so at your early resolution meeting and avoided wasting a trial time. So,it likely will go to trial. However, it is possible that you could win at trial if you can establish a due diligence defence (as Stanton described above). But its going to be hard ...

The Ontario government extended the state of emergency until June 30, 2020. They haven't updated their websites, including their e-laws site, but you can read the Legislature's standing order here to rely on. That means the limitation periods are also extended. In these crazy times, its really hard to keep up with all the changes, especially when ...