“Need Help, Please Help..”

i got 2 sumons to court, one was drive a motor vehicle while suspended contrary to Sec 53 of the Highway Traffic Act, another was failed to surrender an insurance card contrary to Sec3(1) of the Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act.

i was pulled over by OPP on July 11 and notified that my license was suspended as of March 30, luckly a friend was able to drive. so i attended courst 2 times already and got my disclosure. So is it true that the prosecutor has to prove that i have the full knowledge that my license was suspended while operating a motor vehical???

i was looking through the disclosure and prior to my conviction by the OPP i was already pulled over once on May 28 for speeding, but only speeding ticket was given and was not notified my liscense was suspended on as of March 30. also on the disclosure, the General Occurence Report and also Driver Record Information requested by the officer to the Ministry of Transportation, it was missing part of my name, missing one word of my name.

also on the disclosure the officer had my address number wrong, let say my address number is 90 and the officer had mis-typed it for 96. another thing is that the car was not under my name.

i know i have a pretty good chance wining the case, but i need to know which sec of the law to use, any input would be great. thanks in advance

The court would probably consider the errors you described about the name and address number to be minor, that is to say not negatively impacting your ability to make a full defence to the charge, and so would not be likely to quash the charges for those errors. The prosecutor could amend if necessary

With respect to notice, the prosecutor does not have to prove that you received personal notice of the suspension (i.e. when you were stopped the first time). The HTA says that a person is deemed to be served 7 days after the suspension kicks in, via the letter that the MTO sends out to the last address on file.

HTA 52(2) Deemed date of service

(2) Notice sent by registered mail under clause (1) (a) or by mail under clause (1) (b) shall be deemed to have been given on the seventh day after the mailing unless the person to whom the notice is sent establishes that he or she did not, acting in good faith, through absence, accident, illness or other cause beyond his or her control, receive the notice. 2000, c. 26, Sched. O, s. 4.

Simon Borys wrote:HTA 52(2) Deemed date of service

(2) Notice sent by registered mail under clause (1) (a) or by mail under clause (1) (b) shall be deemed to have been given on the seventh day after the mailing unless the person to whom the notice is sent establishes that he or she did not, acting in good faith, through absence, accident, illness or other cause beyond his or her control, receive the notice. 2000, c. 26, Sched. O, s. 4.

So, if the address is wrong on disclosure - it could show that the MTO sent the letter to the wrong address and therefore, 'acting in good faith' and outside his control, he did not receive the suspension.

This may help with the driving while suspended ticket, but not the insurance.

Good Luck