Search found 2654 matches

But when I got home, I found that my wife put the permit and insurance paper inside her sun glass case (in the car)

Were you charged with failure to surrender the permit and the insurance? If so, going in and saying "but I had them in the car" is not good enough; you need to give them to the officer when you are stopped. There is a chance the ...

ynotp wrote:I was under the presumption that they must provide it if you specifically request it and it exists?

They should provide it as you describe, at least from a fairness/common sense perspective. Having said that, there's a number of conflicting cases out there right now... sigh...

Thanks Decatur.

Also relevant changes (point form):

- Bigger fines for dooring cyclists
- Bigger fines for cyclists not properly equipping their bikes (e.g. lights, reflectors)
- When passing a cyclist, you need to give them at least 1 metre of room (which most normal-functioning people would give, if not more)

Beginning in January, drivers will ...

And yes police can have two different antennas, one on the back and one on the front and they can be used while driving or standing still.


Also sometimes referred to as "forward and rearward-looking radar."

Officer indicated that the police car is equipped with "antenna in the front and back".

You might see a disc-shaped object sitting in ...

If my tire broke down can it be proved as a 50/50 fault. So it does not take full toll on me.

As the others above are saying, the answer is no. Your tire blowout is not the fault of the other driver. For something to be 50/50, the other driver had to have contributed to the collision through their actions, which was not the case here. The Fault ...

What Karra is saying is a fine of $315 is incorrect for the offence of Careless Driving. If that's what he wrote, the ticket should be thrown due to incorrect fine. It's one of those bizarre twists of the law/court system... in Ontario, if your ticket has an incorrect fine on it, if you walk in to court and say "hey, the fine is wrong," the court ...

Unless the other motorist can identify the driver (you), the police cannot proceed with charges. That's why the Road Watch Letter is the most likely outcome, if anything.

I wouldn't stress to the point of a panic attack over this one.

Besides, if your friend can testify as to what the cyclist was doing, a conviction for careless doesn't seem as likely. Maybe an unsafe pass...

At the very least, get a consultation from a lawyer or paralegal regarding the next steps. Careless driving can be quite serious from an ...

1. Clerk should have it.
2. See what they say. Sometimes a Prosecutor will come out and answer questions, but that hasn't been very often in my experience.
3. You still sign that you've received it. It doesn't mean you're satisfied with what you received, only that you picked it up. You can still request additional material as needed.
4. Dunno. Mid ...

You do have to notify the insurance company within 7 days of the collision if you intend to start a claim... but since you've already notified them, just talk to your adjuster and let him know what your plan is.

Police will be calling me and provide me with their numbers or they're just summoning them to the court? IDK what would be the next step.


Is the stupid @$$h*** who hit you actually that dumb? That area has surveillance cameras EVERYWHERE, on top of your dashcam... but that's a side note...

The police will likely be in touch; if they haven't ...

They have within 6 months of the original offence to issue a summons... so they met that window. A bit bizarre as to why they decided to go after you again.

SO... with that in mind, can you tell us what happened that led to the charge? Please omit the exact location of the offence.

You'll get the notes. Typed will only happen if the notes are illegible.

Audio/visual was a reasonable request. Unless I'm missing something I think your disclosure request is complete.

11B is the section of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that guarantees the right to a speedy trial.

An 11B application (although that's not its formal title) is where you file a motion to stay the charge, based on the fact that it took the Prosecutor too long to get it to trial, thereby violating your rights. For minor matters like speeding, a ...

Just a heads-up on the Ticketcombat requests: Most of the items they tell you to ask for either don't apply, don't exist or you wouldn't get them at all. In this case, the only items you need to ask for are the officer's notes, and any video/audio evidence that may exist.

The reason for this is, if the Prosecutor fails to disclose the requested ...

Dwayne2 wrote:Thank you iFly, I take it this is the same if you are turning right or straight?

Correct - any driver with a Stop sign must yield to traffic on the road without the stop sign.

Just a heads-up, Quebec's traffic ticket court system is very complicated. If you're contesting any ticket in Quebec, I'd recommend consulting with some sort of legal representative who has experience with the Quebec system. For example, in Ontario if the officer doesn't show up, the Prosecutor will usually withdraw the charge - but that's not the ...

I'd say yes. The London v. Young ruling focused heavily on the set fine issue. As we know, there are only a few things that render a ticket null and the set fine is definitely one of them. There's the R. v Monahan decision which says quite clearly that even if the total payable is correct, if the set fine is wrong, the certificate is not complete ...

"sad dig s little bit".

In context: "You might want to contact the court and dig a little bit to make sure you haven't been convicted."

Is it possible to cast reasonable doubt that his headlights were non-functioning through correlating the fact that 1) he was uninsured and 2) it was an old 1994 vehicle and therefore would more likely neglect to change his headlights?

Shadow of a doubt? Yes. But reasonable doubt, no.

Your testimony regarding the condition of his headlights ...

I know, but I did not have to pay the $150 fee, according to the lady I spoke to at Service Ontario.

Oops, I misread your post... that's what happens when you read too quickly. Anyway... Maybe it was due to it being an Administrative suspension only? Don't know.

I will definitely seek disclosure and legal aid if I'm not offered a plea deal. I ...

File for disclosure of the evidence against you (if you haven't already). You want the officer's notes and a copy of the relevant parts of the radar/laser manual, as well as any audio/video evidence that they have. Maybe the officer's notes have something missing.

So if the officer in the pickup had his head turned to talk to the other officer ...

Yes it does, from a signage standpoint. However, if you exited an 80 km/h zone into a 50 zone while going east, the lack of an 80 km/h westbound sign at the changeover point doesn't provide a defence to going 80 in a 50 zone, if that's what you're asking. They don't really expect drivers to look in their rearview mirror. So, it would be a valid ...

Also, I went to Service Ontario to reinstate my license, and I was informed I did not have to pay the $150 reinstatement fee. Does anyone have any idea why?

Any time your licence gets suspended, MTO (by extension Service Ontario) wants $150 to make it valid again. They say it's due to administrative costs. I think $150 is a cash grab, but that's ...

This is why it is very important to call around and talk with several paralegals/lawyers before you pay one to defend you. Unfortunately, this has been my experience while observing trials as well. Again I am not saying that ALL paralegals/lawyers are like this, because you will eventually find one that is willing to prepare properly and be ...

By pleading guilty, you can't change it. That's why some jurisdictions have Early Resolution, since they are leaving it open for discussion. The plea bargaining would take place on the day of trial anyway, so an early meeting with a Prosecutor saves court time versus a "guilty, guilty with explanation or not guilty" offence certificate.

There's numerous instances where the Supreme Court has overruled and/or declared it's own rulings outdated. 20 years ago, it may have been necessary to stop every single car to check insurance, but advancements in technology can make it possible to check insurance without having to stop the vehicle today. Therefore, there is validation to the ...

The ride program has already been deemed to infringe on the Constitution, yet for some reason... they've allowed it for the purpose of security. Anytime you enter a motor vehicle, the police have significantly more rights than they would normally have and use 'safety' as the justification for this unparalleled power. I'm not a big fan either, but ...

Just to add... you'd likely get the ticket in the mail.

Do you know if there is a chance at the Early Resolution they can just charge me as the owner of the vehicle and the driver just like the police officer said? I would rather get that at the meeting then having to go to trail. Even though I know my defense is strong and that I did nothing wrong, I do not want the stress of going to court and going ...