jetpack wrote: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 Prosecutor may withdraw one of the charges, but that all depends on how generous the Prosecutor is feeling that day.

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 also have to stop and allow pedestrians in crossovers (which are usually mid-block crossings) and school crossings to completely cross the road before proceeding. Crosswalks at intersections are not affected by this rule change.

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 the front and rear window of the police vehicle. That's the radar. You are correct in saying that the officer's notes are the most important piece of disclosure evidence. The only other thing you'd probably get are relevant parts of the r...

harry7171 wrote: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 Determination Rules, unfortunately, don't have much variety in them and don't make allowances such as 25/0 etc.

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 can fix it. However, if you ignore it and default, the Justice of the Peace is supposed to check the ticket to see if the critical components (the fine is one of them) are correct; if not, the ticket is supposed to be thrown out. Confused ye...

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 insurance perspective, but having said that, it also is a bit harder to get a conviction on. The Prosecutor has to prove that your friend drove in a manner that was a "departure from the standard of care of a reasonable and prudent driver," whic...

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-morning?

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 called you within about 2 weeks, call them and ask what the status is. They've likely sent an officer to investigate the vehicle; if they find "corresponding damage" or a recent repair job, then that driver is in for an expensive lesson. Dependin...

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 quick trial should be easy. If the Prosecutor keeps doing things like failing to provide proper disclosure, it keeps the clock ticking... but the disclosure request has to be reasonable.

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 items (and you make a good effort to get them), the courts are more likely to toss the charge. HOWEVER, you have to be reasonable. Asking for numerous, irrelevant items (which is what Ticketcombat's list has) actually works against you, because it looks...