Search found 3 matches

by Rdlz82
Tue Apr 26, 2011 4:57 pm
Forum: General Talk
Topic: Driving without Headlights...Interpretation of Law
Replies: 12
Views: 15921

Re: Driving without Headlights...Interpretation of Law

When I had a person claiming their fog lights were head lights for the purpose of 62(1), I charged under O/Reg 596 s. 2(1) for the lack of high/low beam capability. It's an $85/110 fine as well. That is the correct wording for a charge under HTA 62(1). You can look it up under O.Reg 950. "Driv...
by Rdlz82
Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:12 pm
Forum: General Talk
Topic: Driving without Headlights...Interpretation of Law
Replies: 12
Views: 15921

Re: Driving without Headlights...Interpretation of Law

Hi Stanton, The reason I'm saying that my ticket should not be valid is based on the fact that the officer gave me that ticket on the incorrect perception that "headlights" are required. The ticket says "Drive without headlights - motor vehicle" 62(1). My argument is that based o...
by Rdlz82
Sat Apr 23, 2011 1:50 am
Forum: General Talk
Topic: Driving without Headlights...Interpretation of Law
Replies: 12
Views: 15921

Driving without Headlights...Interpretation of Law

So my luck (and arrogance) has finally run out. But I still need to understand if I'm interpreting Section 62(1) correctly. Background: I've been driving around GTA for several months now with no headlights, only my fog lights on. I've done this pretentiously because of my interpretation and underst...

Go to advanced search