OHTA.ca

Brief summary of what happened:

-JUST bought my first car in Jan/Feb 2013 so I was still pretty new to it and all

-In March 2013, I took a shortcut via residential streets 7-9AM without really paying attention to the signs and got pulled over by the cops trying to meet their quotas for Highway Traffic Act 144.9, Proceed Contrary to Sign at Intersection $110 / 2 points

-I decided Option 3 by Trial because I thought I could ask for a pardon being a beginner and all

-Did not want to pay third-party services $300+ for a silly, first ticket...so I decided to represent myself lol

-Went to the scheduled court date last week and was nervous as heck...everyone there had a lawyer except me apparently

-Stood in line and the law clerk/admin? asked me if I was willing to plead guilty to a lesser charge

-I was so scared/nervous/lost/unsure that I just said YES and took the offer (not knowing what it truly was)

-Judge called me up, asked me if I was guilty, I said yes, and he reduced the fine to $80/60 days

-Today I get the payment request in the mail citing Green Light - Fail to Proceed for $80

My question is, did I dodge a bullet? I tried searching this Green Light offense but there ain't much info out there. Apparently it's 0 demerit points too so is it safe to assume that it looks WAY better on my record than the 144.9 proceed contrary? Also, can anyone speculate if my insurance will take a HUGE hit or a SMALL hit after the modified conviction?

Thanks!!!

I believe your amended charge from S.144 (9) was HTA S.144 (12) - Green light — fail to proceed as directed

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... uote]Green light

(12) A driver approaching a traffic control signal showing a circular green indication and facing the indication may proceed forward or turn left or right unless otherwise directed. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (12).[/quote]S.144 (12) doesn't carry any demerit points.

The increase on your insurance premium would be the same even if you were found guilty of S.144 (9). Insurance companies look at the number of convictions, they do distinguish between minor/major offences. But both S.144 (9) & (12) would fall under the minor category.

If you're novice class driver (ie: G1, G2, G2M2, GM2) then saving the demerit points is a positive, because if you collect up to 4pts in a 2 year period... you're license is suspended for 30-days.

So I'm screwed either way. This is not good. I'm a G but the car is registered under my dad and I'm the primary driver. I don't want to affect his insurance

Daddy will not be too happy. I'm sure like most parents today he will find a way to blame the officer for doing his job; same like when they blamed the teacher for giving you a D in English so don't sweat it. It's too late now since you cannot take back a guilty plea. You might have been able to get the charge withdrawn if you had investigated all your options. (disclosure, 11b etc.)

ynotp wrote:Daddy will not be too happy. I'm sure like most parents today he will find a way to blame the officer for doing his job; same like when they blamed the teacher for giving you a D in English so don't sweat it. It's too late now since you cannot take back a guilty plea. You might have been able to get the charge withdrawn if you had investigated all your options. (disclosure, 11b etc.)

What could I have done? What were my chances of success? They wrote down my license plate # wrong (Y instead of J) but I was told it didn't matter as much as writing down my name wrong...

Same like anyone else. It will depend on the evidence against you, how long it takes for your case comes to trial, if the officer is present, etc.

ynotp wrote:Same like anyone else. It will depend on the evidence against you, how long it takes for your case comes to trial, if the officer is present, etc.

What evidence do they need? i simply drove into a street I should not have with my work clothes on and my lunch in the front seat. I could argue negligence/big truck is in front of me or I couldn't see a sign but it's not like they will buy that. Time was still 20 minutes before restriction was lifted so couldn;t say my clock was fast/slow. Can't even argue that I was sleeping over at a friend's because I don't have any friends I could use in that area.

When I went in last week, the officer was present.

If you are going to court to agree with the officers version of events then it is best that you plead guilty. Disclosure means you are entitled to study the officers notes about the events that transpired in relation to the charges against you before the trial takes place. The officer reads them before the trial and then paraphrases their contents when they testify. Maybe you aught to give the ticketcombat website a good read and see how what is written might pertain to your case.

ynotp wrote:If you are going to court to agree with the officers version of events then it is best that you plead guilty. Disclosure means you are entitled to study the officers notes about the events that transpired in relation to the charges against you before the trial takes place. The officer reads them before the trial and then paraphrases their contents when they testify. Maybe you aught to give the ticketcombat website a good read and see how what is written might pertain to your case.

Did I have a case when they incorrectly wrote down by license plate by one character??

mtx wrote:

ynotp wrote:If you are going to court to agree with the officers version of events then it is best that you plead guilty. Disclosure means you are entitled to study the officers notes about the events that transpired in relation to the charges against you before the trial takes place. The officer reads them before the trial and then paraphrases their contents when they testify. Maybe you aught to give the ticketcombat website a good read and see how what is written might pertain to your case.

Did I have a case when they incorrectly wrote down by license plate by one character??

At trial the crown can ask you what your correct license plate number is, and amend the ticket to reflect the correct one.

mtx wrote:What evidence do they need? i simply drove into a street I should not have with my work clothes on and my lunch in the front seat. I could argue negligence/big truck is in front of me or I couldn't see a sign but it's not like they will buy that. Time was still 20 minutes before restriction was lifted so couldn;t say my clock was fast/slow. Can't even argue that I was sleeping over at a friend's because I don't have any friends I could use in that area.

When I went in last week, the officer was present.

It's quite dangerous to pick and choose which signs you want to obey, we'd have traffic confusion/collisions.

mtx wrote:In March 2013, I took a shortcut via residential streets 7-9AM without really paying attention to the signs and got pulled over by the cops trying to meet their quotas for Highway Traffic Act 144.9, Proceed Contrary to Sign at Intersection $110 / 2 points

When I went in last week, the officer was present.

Without continued enforcement, that sign wouldn't carry any teeth.