“Park Vehicle In Area Of Park Not Designated For Parking - Code No 250”

Can still be fought - I did and won...ask for FULL DISCLOSURE...

Make sure:

- source of language of charge is provided

- notes are decoded and interpreted

- look for discrepancies in signage, missing, contradictions, etc.

Parks & Rec have own codes...if prosecution does not provide their wording, not just municipal by-laws (they tried that with me), it is not full disclosure.

e.g. Code no 250 - Park vehicle in area of park not designated for parking

Prosecutor referenced by-law 608-27A...BUT that is not the charge on the ticket, so cannot be prosecuted under that...prosecution needs to supply text and source of Code no 250. Failure to do so is lack of full disclosure.

In my case, Park lacked markings, maps, and signs to designate areas--lines are not sufficient--no code in law that defines meaning of lines for parking.

Under Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 24, rights to fair trial protected and section 7 protects right to full disclosure and right to be able to provide "Full Answer".

Use this Full Disclosure request form here:

Hope this helps someone...

One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of cities, including Toronto, have switched over to an administrative monetary penalty system for parking tickets. This means you can no longer challenge a parking ticket in Provincial Offences Court. Instead you must use an arbitration system set up by the city which is not bound by the same rules of evidence as a court. I've linked to a thread where the changeover is discussed in more detail.