Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Radar Identified wrote:You could file a complaint, not really sure if it will go anywhere though. But the big thing is, you came away with a much lower fine and your insurance company would look more favourably on 20 over versus 42 over. So, IMO it was worth it.

Agreed 100%.
I don't take it personally but he was a bit of a d--- and it was blatant.

Well, 20 over is better than 42. Not bad.

And yes you are right, the trucks are governed at 105.

Correct. My truck driver friend came with me and was sitting 4 feet away during this discussion, but the officer wasn't hearing anything. He was all about the scare tactics and calling me an idiot.

Not sure if it's worth bringing to the attention ...

So I went to court and it was exactly what I expected except the officer was a bit belligerent.

Step 1 - spoke with the prosecutor and he offered me a reduction to 20 over in a construction zone. $180 and 3 points. Gave me time to think about it while I waited.

Step 2 - I spoke with the officer that showed up. Only 1 showed up but they told me ...

One more question: All the photocopies of the notebook (with the lidar testing notes) are attached to a photocopy of a business card.
It has a different officer's name on it - says he is a provincial constable. The name doesn't match the ticket writing officer or the traffic log sergeant.
"Traffic Management Unit" and "DRE/SFST Instructor".

Does ...

I am expecting both officers to be present and am preparing accordingly.
My only thing is that I don't think he accurately identified my vehicle to the second officer. I want the second officer to prove that he pulled over the correct vehicle. It may be a stretch, but I just don't see how there could be no reasonable doubt on a 700m stretch of ...

Typically a 15 over ticket is treated no differently then a 40 over ticket.

This is debatable. Many insurance companies do only look at the number of infractions, but 15 over is listed as a minor offence and 40 over is a major offence - even though they don't see the points they can still see this and it can definitely affect rates.
That said ...

I was really hoping someone here had some advice for me.
My primary concern is twofold:

1. My vehicle doesn't say "Subaru" on it. I believe this information was relayed back to the lidar officer after I was already pulled over
2. The distance from the time the lidar caught a car to the time I was pulled over by a separate officer is approximately ...

I was really hoping someone here had some advice for me.
My primary concern is twofold:

1. My vehicle doesn't say "Subaru" on it. I believe this information was relayed back to the lidar officer after I was already pulled over
2. The distance from the time the lidar caught a car to the time I was pulled over by a separate officer is approximately ...

Did you go to court and get off a stunt driving charge because the officer didn't show?

Has she acknowledge receipt of the email in any way?

I can't guarantee how everything works, but emails are legally binding in Canada now for contracts, agreements, etc.

Request disclosure and see what they have..

Information dumped below. Here are my questions:

- How accurate does the vehicle description have to be? The only identifiable information in this entire disclosure is "BLK SUBARU 4DR". I drive a 5DR Subaru (I know, I know).
- Should there not be more information in the officer's notebook? There's no notes at all about the offence except the ...

If all you want is the construction zone enhancement taken away, you might be able to plea bargain for that at an early resolution meeting with the prosecutor. I think your plan of doing the initial filing for trial and requesting disclosure your self is a good one. You can then look over the notes and see if there is an obvious defence. If there ...

In that case, should I defend myself or go with a paralegal?
If they're more likely to get the construction thing taken down, I'd be happy.

Currently I'm leaning towards filing the ticket myself and the request for disclosure myself and seeing if there's documented evidence of workers present.
To be honest, I believe there were not in this ...

EDIT: I think my real question is, should I be willing to admit to speeding (because there's a good chance I was) due to the fact that it was for my own safety?
or should I just try to talk down to a lower category even though it's a speed trap and I imagine the police officer will be in court as they have regular speed traps here.