Hi guys! I just want to share my experience with the paralegal from Ontario Traffic Tickets Legal Services. Three weeks before my trial day I called the company office in Ajax and spoke with one of their paralegals. I wanted to discuss with him my case and a fee he would charge to represent me. At the end I did not hire the guy. :roll: On the court day he was in the room representing someone else. At the time of the court recess he approached me to make an offer on behalf of the prosecutor to plea for a lesser charge. When I rejected the offer he returned to the prosecutor and they started whispering again. I overheard him providing to the prosecutor with some crucial details of my defense that I shared with him. :evil: Now my case is postponed until February but I guess the prosecutor made some notes in my file. Guys, beware of paralegals! They are not on your side. They are part of the system and look at you only as a source of income. 8) They make a backroom deals with the prosecutors for the later reciprocation.
Hi guys!
I just want to share my experience with the paralegal from Ontario Traffic Tickets Legal Services.
Three weeks before my trial day I called the company office in Ajax and spoke with one of their paralegals. I wanted to discuss with him my case and a fee he would charge to represent me. At the end I did not hire the guy.
On the court day he was in the room representing someone else.
At the time of the court recess he approached me to make an offer on behalf of the prosecutor to plea for a lesser charge. When I rejected the offer he returned to the prosecutor and they started whispering again. I overheard him providing to the prosecutor with some crucial details of my defense that I shared with him.
Now my case is postponed until February but I guess the prosecutor made some notes in my file.
Guys, beware of paralegals! They are not on your side. They are part of the system and look at you only as a source of income.
They make a backroom deals with the prosecutors for the later reciprocation.
This probably warrants a complaint to the law society regarding the paralegal's conduct. The prosecutor, who is an officer of the court, also acted improperly and should also be the subject of a complaint. Next time, at the trial you should ask the judge prior to the trial for the paralegal and the presecutor to testity under oath about what happened. If you can elicit what you said happened, the charges should be dismissed due to presecutorial misconduct. Moreover, this may be a case of obstruction of justice under The Criminal Code and something that should and hopefully will be investigated by the police.
This probably warrants a complaint to the law society regarding the paralegal's conduct. The prosecutor, who is an officer of the court, also acted improperly and should also be the subject of a complaint.
Next time, at the trial you should ask the judge prior to the trial for the paralegal and the presecutor to testity under oath about what happened. If you can elicit what you said happened, the charges should be dismissed due to presecutorial misconduct. Moreover, this may be a case of obstruction of justice under The Criminal Code and something that should and hopefully will be investigated by the police.
I don't think its fair to jump to conclusions and accusations like that without more details and an understanding of how things are commonly done. First off, did you retain the paralegal (after all, why were they negotiating on your case)? You state they were doing so on behalf of the prosecutor---are you sure that's what happened? Secondly, how critical was the information that was shared with the prosecutor? After all, in most meaningful negotiations, information about the case's weakness is shared with the prosecutor so as to potentially get the charge lowered----after all, the prosecutor needs a 'reasonable prospect of conviction' in order to proceed----by giving them such info, you really are trying to put the prosecutor on notice so that they can't later claim they didn't know of the flaw in their case! A lot of issues arise from your post. For instance: did the paralegal have your consent to represent you (e.g. you retained them) or did they just interfere in your case without any direction from you? Secondly, was the information shared critical to your case or reasonably necessary to be disclosed in order to have a meaningful resolution meeting with the prosecutor? Keep in mind that resolution meetings are 'without prejudice' at law. I therefore suggest that if you're concerned about whether the paralegal acted outside their authority then you should seriously consider retaining a lawyer to review the matter and deal with this discretely first. After all, if you simply follow the suggestions of goldom1234 without proving your allegations, you could face a significant defamation lawsuit. This way, if a lawyer agrees with your assessment of the paralegal's actions, THEN you consider reporting them to the Law Society, suing them, etc. Finally, even if the paralegal's actions were inappropriate, keep in mind that you'll likely have a very difficult time recovering much----after all, your recoverable damages (if any) are likely quite small. Keep that all in mind so that you make an informed decision on whether this is all worth your time, money and aggravation.
I don't think its fair to jump to conclusions and accusations like that without more details and an understanding of how things are commonly done. First off, did you retain the paralegal (after all, why were they negotiating on your case)? You state they were doing so on behalf of the prosecutor---are you sure that's what happened? Secondly, how critical was the information that was shared with the prosecutor? After all, in most meaningful negotiations, information about the case's weakness is shared with the prosecutor so as to potentially get the charge lowered----after all, the prosecutor needs a 'reasonable prospect of conviction' in order to proceed----by giving them such info, you really are trying to put the prosecutor on notice so that they can't later claim they didn't know of the flaw in their case!
A lot of issues arise from your post. For instance: did the paralegal have your consent to represent you (e.g. you retained them) or did they just interfere in your case without any direction from you? Secondly, was the information shared critical to your case or reasonably necessary to be disclosed in order to have a meaningful resolution meeting with the prosecutor? Keep in mind that resolution meetings are 'without prejudice' at law.
I therefore suggest that if you're concerned about whether the paralegal acted outside their authority then you should seriously consider retaining a lawyer to review the matter and deal with this discretely first. After all, if you simply follow the suggestions of goldom1234 without proving your allegations, you could face a significant defamation lawsuit. This way, if a lawyer agrees with your assessment of the paralegal's actions, THEN you consider reporting them to the Law Society, suing them, etc.
Finally, even if the paralegal's actions were inappropriate, keep in mind that you'll likely have a very difficult time recovering much----after all, your recoverable damages (if any) are likely quite small. Keep that all in mind so that you make an informed decision on whether this is all worth your time, money and aggravation.
Hi goldom1234, Thank you very much for your reply. Unfortunately, I am an old and ill person and I do not have time and energy required to pursuit this issue at the law society. Also I do not have enough hard evidence to prove paralegal's wrong doing. The only purpose of my post was to warn others from unnecessary giving paralegals important information as I foolishly did unless one actually hire the paralegal to represent him or her in court.
goldom1234 wrote:
This probably warrants a complaint to the law society regarding the paralegal's conduct. The prosecutor, who is an officer of the court, also acted improperly and should also be the subject of a complaint.
Next time, at the trial you should ask the judge prior to the trial for the paralegal and the presecutor to testity under oath about what happened. If you can elicit what you said happened, the charges should be dismissed due to presecutorial misconduct. Moreover, this may be a case of obstruction of justice under The Criminal Code and something that should and hopefully will be investigated by the police.
Hi goldom1234,
Thank you very much for your reply.
Unfortunately, I am an old and ill person and I do not have time and energy required to pursuit this issue at the law society. Also I do not have enough hard evidence to prove paralegal's wrong doing. The only purpose of my post was to warn others from unnecessary giving paralegals important information as I foolishly did unless one actually hire the paralegal to represent him or her in court.
Hi highwaystar, Thank you very much for your reply. I did not hire the guy and he did not have my consent to represent me. But three weeks before the trial date I called him to inquire about his fee. When we discussed the case I foolishly volunteered some important for the case information thinking he should be on my side. I mentioned to him that I am going to argue that I was charged under a wrong subsection of HTA. I believe (but I cannot prove it) he passed this information to the prosecutor. Crown now has time before the next court date to make changes to the ticket (I am not sure they actually can do it). Why the paralegal did it? I believe he hopes for getting some favor back from the prosecutor at some point of time. I am not going to pursuit this issue at law society. I just wanted to warn other people to be very cautious when they deal with some paralegals.
highwaystar wrote:
I don't think its fair to jump to conclusions and accusations like that without more details and an understanding of how things are commonly done. First off, did you retain the paralegal (after all, why were they negotiating on your case)? You state they were doing so on behalf of the prosecutor---are you sure that's what happened? Secondly, how critical was the information that was shared with the prosecutor? After all, in most meaningful negotiations, information about the case's weakness is shared with the prosecutor so as to potentially get the charge lowered----after all, the prosecutor needs a 'reasonable prospect of conviction' in order to proceed----by giving them such info, you really are trying to put the prosecutor on notice so that they can't later claim they didn't know of the flaw in their case!
A lot of issues arise from your post. For instance: did the paralegal have your consent to represent you (e.g. you retained them) or did they just interfere in your case without any direction from you? Secondly, was the information shared critical to your case or reasonably necessary to be disclosed in order to have a meaningful resolution meeting with the prosecutor? Keep in mind that resolution meetings are 'without prejudice' at law.
I therefore suggest that if you're concerned about whether the paralegal acted outside their authority then you should seriously consider retaining a lawyer to review the matter and deal with this discretely first. After all, if you simply follow the suggestions of goldom1234 without proving your allegations, you could face a significant defamation lawsuit. This way, if a lawyer agrees with your assessment of the paralegal's actions, THEN you consider reporting them to the Law Society, suing them, etc.
Finally, even if the paralegal's actions were inappropriate, keep in mind that you'll likely have a very difficult time recovering much----after all, your recoverable damages (if any) are likely quite small. Keep that all in mind so that you make an informed decision on whether this is all worth your time, money and aggravation.
Hi highwaystar,
Thank you very much for your reply.
I did not hire the guy and he did not have my consent to represent me. But three weeks before the trial date I called him to inquire about his fee. When we discussed the case I foolishly volunteered some important for the case information thinking he should be on my side. I mentioned to him that I am going to argue that I was charged under a wrong subsection of HTA. I believe (but I cannot prove it) he passed this information to the prosecutor. Crown now has time before the next court date to make changes to the ticket (I am not sure they actually can do it). Why the paralegal did it? I believe he hopes for getting some favor back from the prosecutor at some point of time. I am not going to pursuit this issue at law society. I just wanted to warn other people to be very cautious when they deal with some paralegals.
As you didn't retain the paralegal nor likely instruct them to contact the prosecutor on your behalf, then you SHOULD file a complaint with the Law Society---the paralegal was acting outside of their authority. They should not have interfered with your case. While you likely won't get any compensation out of it, the paralegal should learn from their behaviour and hopefully the Law Society's involvement will protect the next person from such unsolicited intervention. As for your HTA charge, while it is doubtful the prosecutor will actually change the charge based on the information shared, if they do, then you certainly should raise your concerns on the record in court, call the paralegal as a witness AND let the Law Society know of your concerns (since it establishes the consequences of the paralegal's actions). While the paralegal likely meant well in trying to negotiate on your behalf free of charge, they should never lose cite of the fundamental concept of always making sure they have your authorization first!
As you didn't retain the paralegal nor likely instruct them to contact the prosecutor on your behalf, then you SHOULD file a complaint with the Law Society---the paralegal was acting outside of their authority. They should not have interfered with your case. While you likely won't get any compensation out of it, the paralegal should learn from their behaviour and hopefully the Law Society's involvement will protect the next person from such unsolicited intervention. As for your HTA charge, while it is doubtful the prosecutor will actually change the charge based on the information shared, if they do, then you certainly should raise your concerns on the record in court, call the paralegal as a witness AND let the Law Society know of your concerns (since it establishes the consequences of the paralegal's actions). While the paralegal likely meant well in trying to negotiate on your behalf free of charge, they should never lose cite of the fundamental concept of always making sure they have your authorization first!
Hi. My wife was pulled over tonight for merging into a carpool lane to turn right 65 meters before the turn, rather than 45 meters. They had 16 cars pulled over (she took a picture with her cell phone camera), 5 cruisers. Not much you can do about that one I guess, just a bummer. That, however, is not why I am here.
The officer also wrote her a ticket for failing to submit her permit (which I…
I recently got pulled over and charged with 135 in a 100 zone. the cop claims i was doing 135 when i had my cruise control on the whole way only doing 115. the cop said he was travelling in the opposite direction on the 401 and his radar picked me up. he then did a u turn and caught up with me. there is NO way i was speeding. i was locked into my cruise control at 115 the whole way! i am planning…
I've searched for hours looking for a similar situation to mine on a number of forums, and I couldn't come up with anything close. I know I need to file for disclosure tomorrow (my court date is October 7th), and plan to do so regardless of what else I end up doing, but I could really use some help with this one.
I was arrested on private property after being watched and stalked for over two hours…
Hey everyone. Back last summer I got a parking ticket for being within 3m of a fire hydrant. Funny thing is, I parked (in my estimation) at least far enough away from it, deliberately. There were no markings on the pavement but I can't believe I was within 10 feet of that thing (sorry I suck at metric.)
It's only $20 but I was ticked off 'cause I don't park in front of fire hydrants and don't…
Looking for some guidance here. This was the first time I have been stopped by the police and ticketed etc. so not too familiar with the process.
I was exiting a parking lot in the east end at Jackman Avenue and Hurndale just north of the Danforth near Chester subway station. It is a weird intersection where Jackman is a 2 way street from Danforth to Hurndale and then becomes one way southbound…
I got a speeding ticket today while I was at a stand still.
I had to stop as there was an elderly gentleman walking accross the left lane I was in. I could clearly see the speed trap up the hill as well as the en-mass brake lights from the vehicles ahead. I then accelerated up the hill and watched the speedometer. I never went above 60KM/H, speed limit is 50 I know but I'm trying to be honest.…
Hey everybody this is my first post so please don't be to harsh in responses :p.
So today on my way to work I was headed down a road called "airport road" located in Hamilton /mount hope.
The part of the road I was on was a good 5-6km of flat very very minor changes in elevation in the road and had a single solid yellow going all the way down it . even though you can see more than 2km ahead of…
Crested a hill, officer coming at me, pulled a u turn and pulled me over.
I will go back and look again but I thought I was in an 80 not a 70 and I am positive I wasn't doing more than 120. My speedo read 110-115. I have aftermarket tires and rims so I assume this would be the difference.
It was around 7pm, already dark, nobody on the road but myself,…
Ok so my brother in law was caught the other day after he drove into a ditch for driving while having a suspended license. His license was suspended due to a seizure he suffered months ago. So not only was his license suspended but he was found to have a BAC of 3x the legal limit. He is scheduled to appear in court on January 17 2017. I have done research and I can find info about driving…
So I was driving a friend on crutches to Buxton, ON this past Thursday from Brampton. We we're cruising while catching up. So about 10 km before our exit an OPP and unmarked car come tearing down the off ramp. I glance down on the speedometer although I know I wasn't speeding so we continued chatting. There was a pick up truck behind me and a transport truck in the right lane. So my friend…
On Friday I was received a ticket for jaywalking. I was downtown (Toronto) at King and Yonge and started walking as my light turned green, but didn't notice that it was an advance green and I didn't have a walk signal until I was halfway through the intersection (pretty sure the advance had been added recently due to the king street congestion pilot). Unluckily for me there was a police…
Reference is made in the HTA to Stop Signs at Railway Crossings (passive crossings):
HTA, 163 (2)
O Reg 615 (7)
However I cannot find specific regulation detailing how a railway crossing controlled by a stop sign must be configured.
The Ontario Traffic Manual, Book 11 - Markings and Delineation under section "3.9 Reserved Facility Markings - Railways" (p99) speaks to the needs for marking, but is…
I got the disclosure from the prosecutor office 1 page from the officer, 2 pages from the Genesis 2 manual showing the 8.1 test and 8.2 road test. I was travel north west on 4 lanes highway speed limit 80km. There was another car side by side with me . The officer was south east bound. It was 6:35 AM (complete dark). Highway has no street light and sunrise was not until 7:36 (weather web site).…
OK so a friend and I were driving in Brampton and I wanted to turn left. I entered the middle of the intersection and waited until I had a chance, I had to wait until the light was red. Around 5 seconds of me in the intersection, the oncoming car does not slow down and weaves around another car that was stopped on the red and hits my car.
I was deemed at fault by the police and received the ticket…
Well first of all ... glad to have found the forum - hoping to find answers to 'alot' of questions
I was unfortunate in July 2010 in that I ended up rolling my 2009 Ranger three times, through a fence and landing on the roof on a rained-out road that was/is in need of proper repair in Eastern Ontario.
I was assisted out of the vehicle by the driver who was behind me.
Just wondering how the prosection goes about proving who was the driver at trial. If I tell the officer I was driving the black car is that sufficient proof or is that hearsay or does it have to be discussed in court. Just curious.
I commited the offence of Disobeying to stop on a stop sign this morning. The officer says I slowed down but did not completely stop at the sign. This was at a 3-way stop in a school zone.
The weather is bad and there was freezing rain warning in the morning. The roads were not entirely slippery, but I was wondering if I can have a case here.
I know it was stupid of me, I've just been very stressed recently with my wife going through Post Partum and being off the deep end. She's refused help for months, and now that she finally talked to a doctor about it, shes at risk and I really am going nuts over it. Anyways I called her to check up on her, I know I shouldn't but the thought of her not being on the other end scares the *EDIT* out…
My court date is nearing at old city hall at appeals court.
iwhats going to happen and what do i do?
do I present my certificate of offence and point out to the judge the fine was incorrect, I did not appear and am now appealing on the grounds the Justice of the peace erred and failed to quash the ticket on the basis of the certificate not being properly examined and is not complete and regular on…
I recently made the worst mistake of my life, currently 22 was driving home from downtown toronto when Igot pulled over by a police car, I had a few drinks officer knew i was under the influence arrested me and took me into the police station to do a breathalyzer, I refused to do it and was released 3 hours later. Car is now impounded for 7 days...what are the most likely consequences for my…
I am hoping to get advice on how to proceed with my defence regarding a ticket I received for improper use of a high occupancy vehicle lane on an interprovincial bridge between Hull, QC and Ottawa, ON. The ticket was given in Ottawa by the Ottawa Police.
What happened:
I was staying at my girlfriend's in Hull, QC because it was close to my new job in Ottawa. This area was brand new to me.
As a result of a recent ticket I got over the weekend, I've been reading up on Vascar / Aerial Surveillance and have been quite surprised as to the accuracy at the results by this measurement method. There seems to be a lot of room for error seeing as how the start / stop is human triggered .
From what I've heard, the OPP evaluates the time to travel a 500 m distance, from which a…
I was in a unfamiliar area of Toronto and was not feeling very well and god knows how that happened but I hit a car in near the driver's side front and my right side front. Air bag burst in my car. That driver hit the other car in the lane because of the impact. My 2008 Honda Civic and their 2002 Cavalier and 2002 Sienna were written off for insurance.
Beware of paralegals!
