From TC's website: The cost of the transcript depends on how long your trial was. The longer it took, the greater the amount to be transcribed. You will be asked to pay a nominal $25 deposit to start the process. When the reporter examines the recording, she will provide an estimate that you will have to pay. It will cost a minimum of $60 to upwards of several hundred dollars. When the transcript is ready, you will likely be charged a final settlement amount if it was higher than expected. This is on top of the fine you've already paid to start the appeal process. The key point is, this is on ...

I just learned how much it cost to file an appeal. Forget it, no way.

If I file an appeal, can I drop it before it goes to court if I change my mind? I'm not sure I should be fighting this, as I have more pressing things in my life to deal with right now. But I'm getting hooked on this. I'd like to keep my options open on fighting this.

OK, I've spent some time with the HTA and POA and I can't find any mention of the crown being required to provide a by-law for moving violations. I think that whoever though up this strategy might have it confused with with the requirement for a by-law in respect to parking violations: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p33_e.htm#s17s5 A certificate of parking infraction issued for an infraction under a by-law of a municipality is not insufficient or irregular by reason only that it does not identify the by-law that creates the offence if the notice of trial giv...

I'm not sure I am capable of handling an appeal myself. I didn't conduct myself too well in court due to my inexperience. And I have read several members here post that an defendant should hire a professional to appeal a decision. That simply isn't an option for me right now.

I will give some thought about appealing, but I feel that I would first need to find some case law that proves the crown is required to provide a by-law. The Justice and the prosecutor in my case conferred with one another and agreed that the crown was under no such obligation.

I tried this defence and lost. I argued that contrary to HTA 137(a) the town had not passed a by-law authorizing the erection of the stop sign that I had been charged with failing to stop for. The Justice asked me how I knew this and I explained how my town had a website were you could review by-laws passed by council. Then she asked me for proof. This tripped me up somewhat, since I thought that the burden of proof would be on the crown. I asked the Justice how I could possibly prove the non-existence of a by-law. She said she couldn't say, but that I would have to provide her with something....

I'm resurrecting the dead because I had the same question and just found the answer from one of ticketcombat's posts. The crown cannot not serve disclosure at the last minute: Second,in R. v. Egger, [1993] (2 S.C.R. 451), the Supreme Court stated "disclosure must be made early enough to leave the accused enough time to take any steps that may affect that right..." In other words, you can't simply disclose at the last minute. In R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] (3 S.C.R. 326), the Supreme Court stated that the element of surprise had no place in modern trials since "acceptance of the pr...

You did not and cannot post an Act that allows a city to issue tickets on private property. Section 100 and 100.1 of the Municpal Act come close but in my view don't apply. First, is a parking area within a condo considered "land"? A condo is also not a parking lot within the meaning of s. 100, it is a condo that also provides parking spaces. Even if it falls within the meaning of s 100, the area requires signs to be posted at each entrance. No sign No fine! Section 100 does apply. The parking area of a condo is land. All land is land. Condominiums have parking lots. These parking l...

If you believe that the city can't issue tickets on private property (when given permission by the property owner), why not park your car in a condo parking lot and try it out yourself. Fight the ticket in court and let us know how it turns out.

Frozenover wrote:You should also consider organizing either:

1) A coup to elect yourself and your friends to the board so you can fix the bylaws.

2) Organize a bylaw change to specificially allow 2 your situation.

Good points. Even is the OP succeeds in a lawsuit, the board of directors can move to amend the bylaws to prohibit the parking of 2 vehicles in one spot. To really save your parking spots, you need to start politicking now and building up support among the other residents.

LOL, I will never buy into a condo.

Greatest Canadian wrote: If the building is not owned by the city then the Toronto Parking Authority has no jurisdiction to issue parking tickets on private property.

Wrong. The corporation can grant the parking authority permission to issue tickets on it's property. In fact, management firms usually use security firms that are licensed by the parking authority to write parking tickets. Payments of these tickets goes to the city. A nice little scam.

Fight the ticket, sure. But there is no need to go to court against your building yet. Simply bypass the property manager and take you issue up with the building's board of directors. Let them know that there is no no clause in the corporation's bylaws that state one space = one car. Let them know that you are willing to see it play out in court.

Taking the property manager to court on this issue is the same thing as taking the corporation to court since the manager is representing the interests of the corporation.

Well I'm confused then. I've read a number of posts here that say the crown must provide a municipal bylaw that authorized the placement of the stop sign. Otherwise, how can the sign be legal? I'm searching CanLii, but I haven't found anything yet. I'll let everyone know how it turns out in court.

OK, if this did end up going to trial, can the crown introduce evidence at trial that was not included in disclosure? Like introducing the by-law at the last minute?

I got pinched for a stop sign offence back in the spring. I requested disclosure using the template provided on Ticket Combat's site. The package I received from the prosecutor did not include a copy of the municipal by-law for that stop sign. Since my court date is one month away, I thought I should get my request to stay the proceeding ready, but I think I might have goofed my disclosure request – I did not ask for a clarification of the charge. Instead, there is just a request for all information that is not being disclosed ( I just downloaded the template, signed it, and sent ...