OHTA.ca

Hi,

I got a speeding ticket and the cop wrote $355 on the ticket even though it should have been $359. I got it on April 4th and just today (11 days later - or 10 if you consider the fact that the actual offence date was April 5th (he wrote the wrong date as well)) did it appear in the Toronto.ca online payment system. The amount due is $359. How is that possible? Who fixed it? My understanding is that it can't be adjusted except in court if I brought it to their attention in trial. Shouldn't this be quashed? As recommended, to force a fatal error, I had done absolutely nothing (expect calling to see if the ticket was filed within 7 days).

Thanks

You should have kept this post with your original thread.

The only thing I can think of is that your copy of the ticket looks like $355 and the original is actually $359. Altering a ticket after service isn't allowed except by the court and the ticket should be quashed if that's the case, but the JP wouldn't even know if that happened. You may have to wait and re-open your case. Make sure you keep your copy of the ticket that you were issued to be able to compare it to the original. As stated before, the wrong date isn't a fatal flaw at all.

Thanks. Should I move this thread?

Isn't the original just a carbon copy (or whatever they use these days)? It should be literally identical, no? Mine is definitely $355, it's unmistakable if you compare his 5's with his 9's. Also, I know this isn't evidence per se, but when I called Edward St and spoke with the employee there I asked her how much the ticket was for and she said $355...so I *know* somebody changed it there. If legally my next step is still the same step (re-open the case and have it quashed) that's fine, but all I want to know now is who in the ticket office modified it and why did they break the law to do so!? Did they think they could slip it by? This doesn't make me have any respect for the law if this is what the legal system does.

Thank you for your input!

Am I crazy or is it obvious that his 9's are 9's and his 5's are 5's??

I agree the total payable shows $355.

The online fine payment system may be somewhat automated, where a clerk just types in the speed and the computer figures out the correct fine.

I agree that it's $355. The original isn't a carbon copy. It's the one the officer actually wrote on. I'd be asking at some point for a copy of the original to see if it's been altered after you were issued the Offence Notice. I'm not familiar enough with the input process to know where the tickets go after they are turned in at the end of a shift. There's something to be said for electronic tickets I guess. After they are printed, there is no chance for modifications to be made and there's no need for deciphering handwriting!

According to this case I can no longer use the "total payable" as a defence to appeal this case in the hopes of having it quashed.

So I'm wondering if anybody has any suggestions on how I should proceed?

If I appeal saying it should have been quashed then I'm afraid it will just get dismissed

If I appeal saying I want to argue the facts then they may ask why I didn't do that in the first place.

Thoughts?

So I lost.

The judge said the Total Payable looked liked $359 even though it's quite clearly written as $355. I think he was biased because of the charge and refused to compare the 5 with the rest of the 9's on the ticket to show that it was indeed not even close to how the officer writes 9's and in fact looked much more like every other 5 on the ticket.

Not only that but he questioned my intelligence, which I find quite odd for a judge to be doing to a citizen.

Can you sue a judge for slander? Can you appeal an appeal?

At best it was a very weak approach to the case. Even if it were read as a 5 there is conflicting case law about the total payable being fatal. A JP questioning a person's intelligence is not unheard of and often merited. You can appeal the decision if you want, there are many levels of appeal....is it worth it? Maybe you should argue that the POA notice is unconstitutional because and should be changed so the numbers are also written out in words like a cheque. j/k

You're debating whether a 5 looks like a 9, not the merits of the case. Regardless, it is not a fatal error.