Great sunday so far. Occurred on the 410 north in brampton towards caledon. The last few miles of 410, even though it is still a 4 lane divided hwy drop to 80kph speed limit. It is not that well posted ... I drive that way quite often .. I have never noticed it. Pretty clear very few people are aware of it ... nobody is driving 80kph, no one slows down until they hit highway 10, which is 80kph. So to be honest, wasn't really aware it dropped to 80kph there. Feel a little swindled really. Clearly the police are, opp probably ticketed double digit vehicles for sure this weekend. One was a 76 yr old man, charged with stunt driving. Clearly a cash grab scenario ... It's a four lane divided highway with everyone driving in the 100+ range, but for some reason, the speed limit is dropped to 80 kph. Not something you would expect for any reason. I wouldn't drive 50 kph over speed limit, it that very safe to be moving that much quicker than other vehicles .... Slowing to 80 on that part of the 410, even if I was aware of the speed limit change would just mean a bunch of cars would back up behind, horns barming and a lot of unsafe passing. Wouldn't be safe to be that much slower than other traffic. Feels more along the lines of entrapment and/or obvious cash grab. Anyway, vehicle impounded, license suspended ... 7 day thing. Don't like the "stunt driving" label ... not appropriate in this case in my view. Certainly don't like being treated like a criminal. Early May is the initial court date ... I have no idea what this is all about or how it proceeds ... Quite concerned obviously .. given the name of offense being "stunt driving" ... when really it should just be 130 in 100 or something like that. Have no idea what happens next ... internet sites claiming jail terms are possible??? Seriously?? This is a four lane divided highway ... no one would expect the speed limit to be 80. It is 100 everywhere else on the 410 I am quite concerned really ... The label stunt driving sounds fairly extreme, and it most certainly wasn't. Any heads up help would be appreciated. No I don't typically have speeding tickets, none recent for sure, but there have been a few 10-20 ones over the years. It's a real concern as vehicles are typically required to earn income etc. In fact, cities/town re built around everyone having a vehicle. I don't think it is appropriate for vehicles to be taken under questionable scenarios like this. AND certainly the costs to me here, or anyone, in this case, are certainly excessive. Imagine a single mom trying to feed her kids having to deal with this. That's not me, but no doubt, there are people not in a position to lose thousands of dollars dealing with stuff. I'm new here ... just trying to see what this stunt driving stuff is all about ... trying to figure out how to best deal with it. BUT in my view, this is exceptional excessive ... if that's what is needed, which I doubt, to address whatever concerns ... then the solution is to raise speed limits, not try to beat everyone into submission ... Any heads up help/info would be appreciated. [Note: wasn't driving 130 on a road only capable of 80kph ... this is a four lane divided highway, the 410. I'm not a yahoo street racer, young adult, or any of that ... middle aged stiff like everyone else.]

Topic

Stunt driving ?? - 135 in 80 zone

by: gbs on

36 Replies

UnluckyDuck
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 11:03 am

Posting Awards

Re: Stunt driving-135 in 80- continued ...

Take the deal and run as fast as you can. It won't really get any better than this.

Take the deal and run as fast as you can. It won't really get any better than this.

gbs
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:24 pm
Location: brampton

Re: Stunt driving-135 in 80- continued ...

I asked about the - not having insurance slip in the car .... affecting insurance .... the prosecutor couldn't speak to that .. said he didn't know. The fine for that one is 50, he said. He referred to it as a paper ticket of little real concern .. (assuming of course you do have insurance, which I do) On the disclosure document it is written as : CAIA 3(1) Fail to surrender insurance card ... I don't know, what the CAIA means, I assume it's Canadian auto insurance act. Not a HTA offense. ---- Also, it seemed like they were being more lenient for that particular stretch of road, there were 6 that I heard, that was in that particular area.

argyll wrote:

Yes it does. Any minor tickets count. Basically he's decided that he's not willing to go from 5 to 1 ticket so he's picked one of the little ones. You either fight them all or live with the offer.

I asked about the - not having insurance slip in the car .... affecting insurance .... the prosecutor couldn't speak to that .. said he didn't know. The fine for that one is 50, he said. He referred to it as a paper ticket of little real concern .. (assuming of course you do have insurance, which I do)

On the disclosure document it is written as :

CAIA 3(1) Fail to surrender insurance card ...

I don't know, what the CAIA means, I assume it's Canadian auto insurance act. Not a HTA offense.

----

Also, it seemed like they were being more lenient for that particular stretch of road, there were 6 that I heard, that was in that particular area.

iFly55
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 569
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:08 pm

Posting Awards

Re: Stunt driving-135 in 80- continued ...

HTA and CAIA convictions will affect your insurance premiums; prosecutor and officer can/will lie through their teeth about the insurance effects of convictions. Take a look at the IBC brochure: http://assets.ibc.ca/Documents/Brochure ... FAQ-ON.pdf For multi-charges like the one you're facing; I would recommend accepting the plea-deal. Getting convicted of everything except the insurance, will make you uninsurable for the next 3 years... unless you're willing to pay +$10k/yr for facility insurance. +40kph and an insurance card will increase your insurance, but not enough to cancel your policy. Also keep in mind your insurance company won't necessarily run an insurance check. If you ask for a letter, this may raise a red flag... but you'll have to face the music sooner or later. You'll have to be a super careful driver for the next 3 years; generally 3 minor convictions in a 3 year window will result in a policy cancellation amongst major insurance companies (ie. State Farm).

HTA and CAIA convictions will affect your insurance premiums; prosecutor and officer can/will lie through their teeth about the insurance effects of convictions.

Take a look at the IBC brochure: http://assets.ibc.ca/Documents/Brochure ... FAQ-ON.pdf

For multi-charges like the one you're facing; I would recommend accepting the plea-deal. Getting convicted of everything except the insurance, will make you uninsurable for the next 3 years... unless you're willing to pay +$10k/yr for facility insurance.

+40kph and an insurance card will increase your insurance, but not enough to cancel your policy. Also keep in mind your insurance company won't necessarily run an insurance check. If you ask for a letter, this may raise a red flag... but you'll have to face the music sooner or later.

You'll have to be a super careful driver for the next 3 years; generally 3 minor convictions in a 3 year window will result in a policy cancellation amongst major insurance companies (ie. State Farm).

argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:30 am

Posting Awards

Re: Stunt driving-135 in 80- continued ...

How is the prosecutor saying he couldn't speak to the insurance implications 'lying through his teeth' ?

How is the prosecutor saying he couldn't speak to the insurance implications 'lying through his teeth' ?

Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !
gbs
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:24 pm
Location: brampton

Re: Stunt driving-135 in 80- continued ...

The brochure was helpful ... the "not having insurance card in vehicle" is mentioned specifically in the document as minor conviction. I will try on next court appearance to get the prosecutor to remove that charge as well. Once I have proof of insurance via letter requested, he may be a little more agreeable ... it's hypothetical until I have documents as requested. But not something I will push for, just mention it. The prosecutor I am dealing with is an older gentleman, who doesn't seem to have an axe to grind or anything to prove. That works well for me.

iFly55 wrote:

HTA and CAIA convictions will affect your insurance premiums; prosecutor and officer can/will lie through their teeth about the insurance effects of convictions.

Take a look at the IBC brochure: http://assets.ibc.ca/Documents/Brochure ... FAQ-ON.pdf

For multi-charges like the one you're facing; I would recommend accepting the plea-deal. Getting convicted of everything except the insurance, will make you uninsurable for the next 3 years... unless you're willing to pay +$10k/yr for facility insurance.

+40kph and an insurance card will increase your insurance, but not enough to cancel your policy. Also keep in mind your insurance company won't necessarily run an insurance check. If you ask for a letter, this may raise a red flag... but you'll have to face the music sooner or later.

You'll have to be a super careful driver for the next 3 years; generally 3 minor convictions in a 3 year window will result in a policy cancellation amongst major insurance companies (ie. State Farm).

The brochure was helpful ... the "not having insurance card in vehicle" is mentioned specifically in the document as minor conviction. I will try on next court appearance to get the prosecutor to remove that charge as well. Once I have proof of insurance via letter requested, he may be a little more agreeable ... it's hypothetical until I have documents as requested. But not something I will push for, just mention it.

The prosecutor I am dealing with is an older gentleman, who doesn't seem to have an axe to grind or anything to prove. That works well for me.

Ontarioracer91
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 11:31 am

Re: Stunt driving ?? - 135 in 80 zone

Before seeking a legal rep, read some facts about you charge and what you could be facing, but more importantly, what you're LIKELY to be facing, those are 2 very different things, check out this blog: http://www.mglegalservices.com/#!Stunt- ... 0269b14c7b And this company is pretty good to get a free consultation at least about your ticket - here their main site: http://www.mglegalservices.com/
gbs
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:24 pm
Location: brampton

Re: Stunt driving ?? - 135 in 80 zone

I did look at the links you provided ... From my understanding, a stunt charge that's speed based (even if just over), at best would only be reduced to a speeding charge ... even if you managed to get the stunt element removed or contested successfully. I was thinking if charged with stunt, they either have to convict on stunt or drop all charges. I don't think that is really the case though ... seems like stunt driving charge is still being defined in the courts at some level. ---- In any case, they stated a willingness to drop the charge to speeding anyway.. the real cost so for was impoundment/license 7 day thing and the costs for working around that. That costs is not recoverable anyway, so there really isn't anything to fight for at this point. -- Far as I'm concerned the police/govt stole that money .... I think they are confused about the differences between democracy and dictatorship.

Ontarioracer91 wrote:

Before seeking a legal rep, read some facts about you charge and what you could be facing, but more importantly, what you're LIKELY to be facing, those are 2 very different things, check out this blog:

http://www.mglegalservices.com/#!Stunt- ... 0269b14c7b

And this company is pretty good to get a free consultation at least about your ticket - here their main site:

http://www.mglegalservices.com/

I did look at the links you provided ...

From my understanding, a stunt charge that's speed based (even if just over), at best would only be reduced to a speeding charge ... even if you managed to get the stunt element removed or contested successfully. I was thinking if charged with stunt, they either have to convict on stunt or drop all charges. I don't think that is really the case though ... seems like stunt driving charge is still being defined in the courts at some level. ----

In any case, they stated a willingness to drop the charge to speeding anyway.. the real cost so for was impoundment/license 7 day thing and the costs for working around that. That costs is not recoverable anyway, so there really isn't anything to fight for at this point. -- Far as I'm concerned the police/govt stole that money .... I think they are confused about the differences between democracy and dictatorship.

Similar Topics