OHTA.ca

Was alleged speeding in an un-posted road traveling south to north. The officer was parked in-front of a natural gas pumping station that had signage of no parking and danger (no smoking). Regardless from start of the road (south) traveling north the officer was hidden in a dip in the road. From the start of the south point of the road all the way up 600 meters to the officers car there was not one single sign posted in this direction. However on the opposite side I discovered afterwards had proper signage. The regulations state that the signes shall be erected in each direction of travel.

As per the regulations:

R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 615, s. 1; O. Reg. 339/09, s. 1.

(a) not more than 600 metres apart where the speed limit prescribed is 60 kilometres per hour or less; and

***

I did question the officer saying I did not notice any sign and the officer stated 'It's up the road want me to show you it' I said I would take the officers word. Later to find out there was no posted sign in this direction of travel.

3 Days after I request a trial the sign (that was never there for sure at least 7 years) they erected the sign as it should be on the right hand sign as soon as you turn onto the road (consistent with all the other roads around that area).

We have all pictures of the roads prior and after.

This area was rural on road XYZ. The ticket wrote 'Speeding in a Posted 50/KM per hour'.

My questions are:

1. If the street XYZ at said time had no sign and there is evidence to support this the word 'Posted' is it valid on the ticket?

2. Why would a sign be erected immediately following me notice to appear?

3. Is it possible that an officer could be referring to another sign posted on another road in a separate direction of travel?

4. I know as humans we all require reminders and typically on rural roads the signs are posted on the right hand side to make drivers aware and promote safe driving is it possible I will just be convicted anyways?

5. Last but not least: If anyone can provide me with reference to a similar case where signage was missing from one direction compared to the other I would appreciate it also willing to pay for such information.

I've studied a lot of cases this week I've noticed when signs are the issue officers testify that they confirmed signs in both directions of travel. However I can't seem to find one that is just missing and suddenly erected.

In a nutshell, the maximum speed limit is 50 km/h unless posted otherwise.

So you can not use the argument of no sign was posted if he charged you with speeding in a 50 zone, if he charged you with speeding in a 40 zone, that is a different discussion.

You have not mentioned what rate you were charged with in what zone, so it is a little ambiguous at best.

As another member put this once before (I believe one of the officers on this forum), maximum 50 signs are not required/mandatory, they are courtesy signs, you can see this based on the wording of HTA.

So the word 'POSTED' = Public Display has no bearing on the type of violation on the ticket no the comments of the officer stating 'there is a sign up the road' not.. 'there is no sign' or 'there is a sign somewhere else in the city'.

Also the inconsistency of signage in a rural area has no bearing. ie: The southbound has proper signs (two) as per the regulation and the entire stretch of raod the officer patrolled had absolutely no signs at all (zero)?

The regulation is very clear 'SHALL' be erected on both sides... not one side and not another.

I find this hard to believe. We have reminders in consistently surrounding this area in place in the upper right hand side of the road for a reason. Why suddenly immediately after the alleged violation a sign is erected. Actually 5 to 6 signs altered and erected.

I believe I'm innocent given the circumstances and how rural this area is and the surrounding speed zones. Should the ticket not read ---> "Unposted' or everything is Posted even if it fails regulation 615?

Just seems rather harsh to enforce a road without proper signs and then erect them and then prosecute those who failed to somehow guess the speed limit in this rural area.

The alleged speed was 75 I believe consistent with driving in an 80 zone.

All the roads surrounding this section all have signs as soon as you turn on the right hand sigh posted clearly and consistently to provide proper reminders.

I guess what I'm arguing is that the entire area had marked signs with one exception this road in this direction for some 'odd' reason. Then afterwards it was erected along with the correction (and increasing the limits) of 6 signs.

This is only a few short days after the incident...

There is no correlation between your tickets and the signs going up. It takes waaaaaaaaaaaaay longer for things to happen. That's just a coincidence so I wouldn't waste too much mental energy on that aspect of this.

I disagree. Had the timing been a few weeks later the reminder (public display) and signage as per the regulations the event may never have taken place ... possibly the officer would not pick such an easy spot to pick-off human beings who are programmed by the regulations to follow the signage in the patterns they're regularly custom to. Also the local city/township/corporation was unable to provide documentation as to the approval of erecting these signs.

It's possible others who also received tickets complained and someone figured out that the roads are not marked properly.

Is there such thing as marking a ticket UNPOSTED? This is my question. I realize that items can be amended however I'd like to know who the violation is to be written.

You can disagree all you want. There is zero chance that because of your speeding ticket the officer went to the municipality and had them erect speed signs. Zero.....it just doesn't work that way. Municipal crews are not just sitting around waiting for work to do to help a copper justify a run of the mill speeding ticket. This ticket is clearly a big deal to you, and I get that, but to the officer and the system its just one of many.

All speeding charges are posted because at the start of that portion of the road there will have been a sign. However if the speed is considered 'normal', ie 50 or 80 then the signs do not need to be repeated as they would if the speed were different. Basically lack of signage means it is to the default speeds.

Your quote:

There is no such sign at the start of that portion. This is what I'm saying (no signs on the entire road northbound at the rate of speed on the ticket).

Along with all this the area was completely rural rather difficult to make such guesses as to what the speed limit may or may have not been at material time.

As for the signs being erected, I received a call from a friend mine indicating they have now placed a temporary (trailer-electronic police speed meter) almost exact to the location of where the officer was positioned. Perhaps you will say this is just random as well. Seems like the road itself had some sign issues at material time.

powerbyford wrote:Your quote:

"All speeding charges are posted because at the start of that portion of the road there will have been a sign."

There is no such sign at the start of that portion. This is what I'm saying (no signs on the entire road northbound at the rate of speed on the ticket).

Along with all this the area was completely rural rather difficult to make such guesses as to what the speed limit may or may have not been at material time.

As for the signs being erected, I received a call from a friend mine indicating they have now placed a temporary (trailer-electronic police speed meter) almost exact to the location of where the officer was positioned. Perhaps you will say this is just random as well. Seems like the road itself had some sign issues at material time.

If they have placed a temporary electronic speed measuring sign, that is due to the fact that they have been getting too many complaints of people speeding in that area.

Those electronic signs are meant to get the driver's attention to slow down, not to show the actual speed limit.

A road in my area with a max 40 posted limit was a problem area, officer was there for about 3-4 days over a 3 week span, issued some tickets then they posted one of those electronic signs for about 3 months. No officer was there while the sign was in place, with the sign gone for a while now, he might feel the need to come back and see how drivers are behaving 5 months later.

You can fight your ticket (as I personally would) but I think you are going about it the wrong way, this is not a winnable strategy...

Thank you for your reply.

So some facts are that the road went through some heavy duty signage and speed changes (even if the nature of these events could possibly be complaint driven). Most likely now that there is proper signage (as per the regulations) suddenly people slow down (fascinating).

I know this sounds like the wrong strategy. You would fight the ticket personally but this isn't the winning strategy.. I'm listening

What the exact charge? What speed in what posted zone?

Observer135 wrote:In a nutshell, the maximum speed limit is 50 km/h unless posted otherwise.

So you can not use the argument of no sign was posted if he charged you with speeding in a 50 zone, if he charged you with speeding in a 40 zone, that is a different discussion.

You have not mentioned what rate you were charged with in what zone, so it is a little ambiguous at best.

As another member put this once before (I believe one of the officers on this forum), maximum 50 signs are not required/mandatory, they are courtesy signs, you can see this based on the wording of HTA.

*** Sorry the trail took so long that my account as disabled ****

Sorry to correct you however improper signage can dismiss your case particularity if the presumption of regularity is at hand.. meaning the office used the signs as a reference and not actually doing some leg work to figure out what the actual 'Law' is for this example. To be frank with you if an officer writes on a piece a paper an infraction that is not correct it is a hand written lie or error.

If it is a posted area and the road is not posted in accordance of the by-law (nor the regulations) and as well as such by-laws are not accessible per the Municipal Act.

You cannot simply hand out tickets on a road that has improper or misleading signage.

It turns out in my case upon investigation the entire road was not in accordance with the by-law for 10 years! (hmmm)

Sorry this is a pure victor (and I won).

Example of improper bylaw records:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN vs. Jamie Shelson

March 18, 2016 Burlington (Appeal)

Regards!

argyll wrote:There is no correlation between your tickets and the signs going up. It takes waaaaaaaaaaaaay longer for things to happen. That's just a coincidence so I wouldn't waste too much mental energy on that aspect of this.

This (the signs going up) was actually the entire case. The signs were not in accordance of the by-law for almost a decade.

Glade I spent a lot of energy on this As I won the case in court.

Regards,

jsherk wrote:What the exact charge? What speed in what posted zone?

Exact charge was posted 50 speeding 60 (reduced).

I beat this in court the entire road was not in accordance with the by-law for 10 years.

Took me almost 30 days just to get a copy of such by-laws. (Crazy)

Was able to get records case was thrown out right away.

Regards,

Congratualtions on winning!

What the law says is that it is ASSUMED the posted speed limit sign is correct UNLESS you can prove otherwise.

So if there is NO by-law at all, then the speed of the road is assumed to be either 50 or 80, and a sign showing either 50 or 80 would be correct. A sign showing something other than 50 or 80 would be incorrect.

But if there IS a bylaw saying the road speed is X but the posted sign says speed of Y, and you can produce the bylaw in court, the charge is incorrect and the posted speed is incorrect and the charge should be dropped.

Is this how you won... by showing the court the by-law that said the speed was something different than 50?

jsherk wrote:Congratualtions on winning!

What the law says is that it is ASSUMED the posted speed limit sign is correct UNLESS you can prove otherwise.

So if there is NO by-law at all, then the speed of the road is assumed to be either 50 or 80, and a sign showing either 50 or 80 would be correct. A sign showing something other than 50 or 80 would be incorrect.

But if there IS a bylaw saying the road speed is X but the posted sign says speed of Y, and you can produce the bylaw in court, the charge is incorrect and the posted speed is incorrect and the charge should be dropped.

Is this how you won... by showing the court the by-law that said the speed was something different than 50?

Correct UNLESS you can prove otherwise.

However the debate of exact positioning wasn't even brought up. I had to literally pull teeth from the city clerk to even access the by-law. Which contradicts the 'Municipal Act' sections .253 and 254.

Eventually after a long long period of time I got fed up and I filled a freedom of information act request (for public records) yes that is sad.

So eventually they had to respond in writing admitting the 10 years of neglect and that every posted sign on the road was in fact not in accordance of their own by-laws on the day of alleged violation. I submitted a lot of evidence including emails, pictures, statements, receipts and letters. I summoned a large number of city staff who we're responsible.

This was enough I believe to put the Crown down at this point I believe the Justice wouldn't even have this is his court room to be honest with you.

So to answer your question no I never even submitted the by-law however it was mentioned in the letter by the city and I did examine it very closely. I learned that in this match it's what you and your opponent bring to the table that gets to be looked at or used as pieces over the chess board. It's possible some pieces are not worth using or not to your advantage. The prosecutor called me and said the guilty letter from the City was checkmate.

In all reality you should not be able to prosecute people nor hand out infractions of roads at have 100% incorrect signage as per the LAW. Let's just sit back and think about that for a minute.

However it's safe to say this must happen over 1000 times a day! Let's see... incorrect signs for 10 years.. imagine how many convictions have been handed out.

This is why they resigned.

Thanks for your support on this one. To be honest with you I had about 60 people including one judge say I wouldn't win this case....

But I did! ---> First case and first attempt at trail. Submitted about 54 pieces of highly detailed evidence.

PS. I like the private property case I'm following