When a vehicle is on a dolly/trailer. The trailer ITSELF is considered as a vehicle, the car on it is considered as a load. Trailers in this province does not need to be insured but must be plated. However standard trailer regulation applies. Anything over 1360KG has to have its own braking system. Regardless if it's a tow dolly or a flat-trailer itself. Some tow dollys have surge hydraulic brakes. When you tow a vehicle w/a tow bar, the car itself is considered as a trailer which means it must be plated but not necessary insured. Again the brake rule I mentioned above applies. That's why a l...

This information could be accessed no doubt by hiring a paralegal firm to fight this ticket. This I wont do as no points are involved and the fine is not exorbitant. This has made both of us aware of this traffic regulation and will no doubt aid us in making sure the whole car is cleaned off before driving. I think though that I will encourage her to fight this ticket for the reasons discussed. Insurance companies don't care about points - they don't track them. The points are for MTO to assess your ability to drive according to the rules of the road. Get too many and they call you in to expl...

They're illegal so you threw away your money the moment you paid for it.

I'm sure others will chime in but if you are riding your bike on a crosswalk then you are at fault. The operative work is walk. If you want to cross on a crosswalk then you must be walking your bike.

It's unfortunate that your paralegal didn't know how to handle the fatal error.

My brother-in-law received a ticket in Gatineau while working - He now locks the door but leaves the window open.

Typically the amount of space between the sidewalk and the road can only accommodate a small vehicle. A pickup truck would either block the sidewalk or stick out onto the road in a possible hazardous situation. Instead of approaching it as parking in the boulevard take the position that it's blocking the sidewalk. There should be bylaws preventing the blocking of a sidewalk and maybe there's something in the HTA about the way the vehicle is sticking out on the road at a right angle.

From the photo it looks like the Acura had to cross the solid yellow line. Wouldn't he be at fault for failing to drive in a marked lane?

It seems there are more than a few officers who tell people that the offence is only a fine and no demerit points as it happened to my son as well. People are willing to pay the fine without question because of the hassle to go to court but demerit points change that. The officer wants to avoid being questioned on his actions so he states something that isn't true. People have a tendancy to believe them and then get screwed. My son's charge was dismissed by the JP based partially on this scenario. Not all officers do this but when you're told that there are no demerit points - don't believe it...

Remember, the standard required is not one of absolute proof.

What about reasonable doubt?

Legal advice was the best route. I know from past experience that there needs to be a witness to the careless driving. No witness, no statement - how does the officer know you were driving carelessly? He must of assumed you were driving carelessly because your car was wrecked - assumptions have no standings in court.

Did anyone witness your careless driving? Just because your car was wrecked doesn't mean you were careless. I know of one case where this was the situation and the JP through it out.

So if you're doing 151 km/hr, the time thru the zone is 11.92 sec but if you're doing 149 km/hr, the time thru the zone is 12.08 sec - difference of 0.16 sec. Given the distance between the officer in the plane and the subject vehicle it could be argued that the accuracy of the officer's reaction time resulted in too high of a speed recorded. I'm thinking that the difference in penalty between 151 and 149 is fairly high?

This post started off asking about the margin of error - can we get back to that?
Is there a requirement for the officer to prove that the stop watch was calibrated (same as for a radar unit)? What about the human error component? If the bear in the air starts the stop watch a fraction too late and stops it a fraction too early then the recorded speed is higher than the actual. The difference between 51 over and 49 over might be substantial?

Is there a requirement for the officer to prove that the stop watch was calibrated (same as for a radar unit)? What about the human error component? If the bear in the air starts the stop watch a fraction too late and stops it a fraction too early then the recorded speed is higher than the actual. The difference between 51 over and 49 over might be substantial?