“Can Mto Pull Over Civilians?”

Hi everybody - been a luker here for a while and learned a lot. Just wondering about a ticket issued by an MTO officer. I have heard that in 'certain regions MTO officers are forbidden to pull over civilians'? Can anyone confirm this? How on Earth would anybody find out what region they are talking about?

Thanks in advance!

It's not that it's not lawful for them to do so, it's just that the MTO has no mandate to deal with passenger vehicles. If you received a ticket from an MTO officer you will still have to fight it in court and you can suggest to the crown that the officer was acting outside of his mandate to issue the ticket and see if they will withdraw it. If not, you could also make the same argument to a JP.

If you are that concerned by it you could also contact the MTO officer's supervisor and address the issue with them.

I don't believe the mandate is different for different areas as I spoke with one of the MTO regional supervisors about this when I was a police officer.

Hi fourmat:

fourmat wrote:...Just wondering about a ticket issued by an MTO officer. I have heard that in 'certain regions MTO officers are forbidden to pull over civilians'? Can anyone confirm this? How on Earth would anybody find out what region they are talking about?

Thanks in advance!

Can you give us more detailed information? What is the alleged offence, statute and section? What type of vehicle, under what circumstances?

Under the POA, any provincial offences officer may, on probable grounds, issue a ticket and has the authority stop and ticket a suspected offender.

POA, s. 3. (2) wrote:Issuance and service

3. (2) A provincial offences officer who believes that one or more persons have committed an offence may issue, by completing and signing in the form prescribed under section 13,

(a) a certificate of offence certifying that an offence has been committed; and

(b) either an offence notice indicating the set fine for the offence or a summons. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 4, s. 1 (2).

In Hamilton, MTO officers usually deal with the HTA and the Environmental Protection Act (EPA), and these offences are prosecuted by an MTO prosecutor. In fact, they have specially designated dates for court.

Cheers.

.

Hi Guys,

Thanks for the responses!

It is told to me like this: MTO officer was at the side of the road in the South Western region talking to another driver. The highway is one lane in each direction, and the ticket given to the driver was Fail To Move Into Another Lane for Emergency Vehicle (Section 159.1 (2)) MTO claims driver passed "too close" to him.

Love the site, I have learned a lot!

.

Hi fourmat:

fourmat wrote:MTO officer was at the side of the road in the South Western region talking to another driver. The highway is one lane in each direction, and the ticket given to the driver was Fail To Move Into Another Lane for Emergency Vehicle (Section 159.1 (2)) MTO claims driver passed "too close" to him.

You can beat this ticket like a walk in the park.

Well... Maybe not you but I would.

Cheers.

.

Research S.159 and look for the definition of "Emergency Vehicle" and the conditions for "moving over".

Biron wrote:You can beat this ticket like a walk in the park.

Based on?

Thanks for all your help, guys! I have learned so much from all of you.

Simon Borys wrote:

Biron wrote:You can beat this ticket like a walk in the park.

Based on?

I'd say based on the move over law "to another lane" portion only applies to highway where there is two or more lanes on the same side as the stopped emergency vehicle. If it was in fact a two lane highway then there is only 1 lane on the same side of the hwy as the stopped emergency vehicle.

Further depending on when this was written, 159.1 was repealed and it contents folded into 159. So date is important as to if the section issued was in force (not that it couldn't be amended).

.

fourmat wrote:...The highway is one lane in each direction, and the ticket given to the driver was Fail To Move Into Another Lane for Emergency Vehicle (Section 159.1 (2))

The Stig wrote:

Biron wrote:You can beat this ticket like a walk in the park.

I'd say based on the move over law "to another lane" portion only applies to highway where there is two or more lanes on the same side as the stopped emergency vehicle. If it was in fact a two lane highway then there is only 1 lane on the same side of the hwy as the stopped emergency vehicle.

Further depending on when this was written, 159.1 was repealed and it contents folded into 159. So date is important as to if the section issued was in force (not that it couldn't be amended).

.

The Stig wrote:Further depending on when this was written, 159.1 was repealed and it contents folded into 159. So date is important as to if the section issued was in force (not that it couldn't be amended).

Approaching stopped emergency vehicle

159.1 (2) Upon approaching an emergency vehicle with its lamp producing intermittent flashes of red light that is stopped on a highway with two or more lanes of traffic on the same side of the highway as the side on which the emergency vehicle is stopped, the driver of a vehicle travelling in the same lane that the emergency vehicle is stopped in or in a lane that is adjacent to the emergency vehicle, in addition to slowing down and proceeding with caution as required by subsection (1), shall move into another lane if the movement can be made in safety. 2002, c. 21, s. 1.

Slow down on approaching stopped emergency vehicle

159.(3) Upon approaching an emergency vehicle with its lamp producing intermittent flashes of red light or red and blue light that is stopped on a highway with two or more lanes of traffic on the same side of the highway as the side on which the emergency vehicle is stopped, the driver of a vehicle travelling in the same lane that the emergency vehicle is stopped in or in a lane that is adjacent to the emergency vehicle, in addition to slowing down and proceeding with caution as required by subsection (2), shall move into another lane if the movement can be made in safety. 2009, c. 5, s. 49.

Cheers.

.

Thanks a million guys!

I just want to say that I love that OHTA has current and former officers posting here. It helps so much to have peeps that know what they're talking about. I have seen other forums where the mods don't keep a close eye on the content and posters end up getting flamed all to hell...

Just saying that u guys have a great site here. I'm gonna keep comin back.

I won't comment specifically on the charge section used because I'm not that familiar with it but as far as MTO authority to pull over vehicles...section 216.1 of the HTA is a blanket authority for MTO officers to pull over any commercial vehicle for the purpose of establishing compliance with the HTA, CAIA and the DGTA. for this section a commercial vehicle means any commercial motor vehicle (ie. pickup truck, cube van, flat bed, tractor trailer, delivery van ect.) and any motor vehicle pulling a trailer. So a car, SUV or motorcycles are not commercial vehicles. However a car, SUV, or motorcycle pulling a trailer is a commercial vehicle for the purpose of s216.1

s.82 of the HTA give Police and MTO the authority to pull over any motor vehicle or motor assisted bicycle (and direct it to a safe location for inspection) to check it's equipment (anything found under that part 6 of the HTA, things like lights, seat belts, hand held devices...)

If an MTO officer stops you to check your equipment, he can still check your license, ownership, insurance.

If an MTO stops you while driving a car and tells you he stoped you for a moving violation like fail to move over for emergency vehicle I would take that to court and say that he doesn't have the authority to pull over a ar for that reason because a car is not a comercial vehicle for section 216.1 and he's not checking your equipment under section 82. and frankly if he sais he's pulling you over to check your tail lights and then sais"oh btw, here's a ticket for a moving violation" I'd take that to court also, it seems kinda fishy!!!

The MTO does have policies in place because they don't want their officer using their authority under s82 nor do they want them issuing tickets for moving violations but if you go to trial you're in a court of law, not a court of policy.