pirish wrote:It's my understanding that they can't change the charge. you're there to fight the speeding they can't just change it to something else to suit their needs. (I believe this falls under double jeparody) This can only be done if the circumstances changed... IE.. you got charged with aggravated assault first.. then the victim dies so it's upped to murder. Now keep in mind that HTA court is different then Criminal court... they could charge you with something under the Criminal code on top of what you currently have.
My wife asked my lawyer the same thing.. I was charged with Careless driving and she wanted to know if I fight the charge (trial) can they stick me with something else instead of that... and the answer is no...
Jake, if it were me I would be doing the following
1. consult with a Pointts, xcopper, etc.. (first consult is free usually) as it was mentioned the crown might drop some tickets for a plea deal... In my opinion $500 is worth keeping your license...
2. Chose one of the options on the ticket (lawyer will help explain everything)
3. Request crown disclosure, (this is all the evidence against you) this can help you plan your defence.
The response from your lawyer may have been for your specific situation; the facts may not have supported other charges. Not to go too off-topic but S.55 of the POA allows for a finding of guilt w.r.t. "included offences", this is usually applied to S.130 Careless Driving which is a broad and general charge.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... e]Included offences
55. Where the offence as charged includes another offence, the defendant may be convicted of an offence so included that is proved, although the whole offence charged is not proved. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33, s. 55.[/quote]__________________________
Within thirty-days of the alleged offence the officer can serve the defendant with a Part I ticket (Provincial Offence Notice).
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... quote]PART I
COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS BY CERTIFICATE OF OFFENCE
Service
(3) The offence notice or summons shall be served personally upon the person charged within thirty days after the alleged offence occurred. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.33, s. 3 (3).[/quote]Or within six months of the alleged offence serve the defendant with a Part III Summons.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... quote]PART III
COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDING BY INFORMATION[/quote]http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... Limitation
76. (1) A proceeding shall not be commenced after the expiration of any limitation period prescribed by or under any Act for the offence or, where no limitation period is prescribed, after six months after the date on which the offence was, or is alleged to have been, committed.[/quote]If you read Part III of the POA, you'll see that serving a summons is not as simple as writing a ticket... for the officer to go through all that trouble it would have to be serious. It also doesn't allow for prosecutors/police officer to change the charge when you're at trial; especially if the trial takes place after the six-month limitation period.
pirish wrote:iFly55 wrote:If the premiums do go up to unaffordable # as a result of conviction(s), your parents can exclude you from the policy so the premiums aren't affected.
Um.. I would like to know what insurance company does this...because I have never heard of this. My car is insured with a different company then my bike and when I asked the car insurance to remove me from the policy, that my wife will be the sole driver of the car they said that they can't.. that all licensed drivers have to be added regardless if they drive the car or not because they have access to it. When I spoke with my bike insurance company they told me the same thing.... (if my wife decided to get her M license she's automatically added). Same thing happened when my daughter got her licence. Even though she didn't drive the car she was added to the policy... That's why the insurance companies ask "are there any other licensed drivers in the house." Failure to answer this truthfully could result in cancellation.
I believe you're correct about disclosing licensed drivers under the same roof; you can also have the drivers excluded from your policy by having them sign an exclusion form. Just because your roommate has a DUI doesn't mean your policy should be rated based on him if he's not driving your vehicle.
Forms from the FSCO
http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/forms ... /1069E.pdf http://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/autob ... 5_93-2.pdf Section 149 in the Insurance Act of Ontario also facilitates this exclusion.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... ]Insurance Act
Excluded driver endorsement
249. A named insured may stipulate by endorsement to a contract evidenced by a motor vehicle liability policy that any person named in the endorsement is an excluded driver under the contract. R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8, s. 249.[/quote]_____________________
You may want to speak to someone higher up the food-chain at the insurance company; first-line call centre folks may not be aware.