|
|
But the cop explicitly said something like "I'll write it under the by-law so that your fine is smaller and you don't get demerit points". Maybe it's just that he didn't know, or didn't want to upset me?!Originally Posted by Acadian1974
Current: 2003 Suzuki GSX-R1000
Previous ride: 2005 Yamaha FZ6
Whenever fighting a ticket, you have two options one is to challenge the cop this is where you and the cop would go in front of the judge and present your evidence however if you lose at this you are charged with the original offence plus court cost. Second option is to take the reduced sentence given to you by the crown prosecutor which is always offered before court is even in session this is usually the better option unless you have solid evidence to your case.
I don't know about it being that much of a hopeless effort. Just because there may be nothing stating the prescribed distance a sign has to be from an intersection, doesn't mean that a precedent can't be set. Personally, I would say the sign on the right side of the road is too far. It should be before the turn, to give oncoming traffic an advanced notice. If you're planning on making a left turn, you are in the left and and looking for oncoming traffic, or into the turn. Especially so when on a motorcycle. The sign on the other side is a little more obvious. It would be in your line of sight, although you may be able to claim that you'd be committed to your turn by the time it's noticed.
Check the ticket to be sure, it should name the offence and say "contrary to ... of the HTA ...." blah, blah...
Dude .. If you get convicted for ANYTHING, it will affect your insurance rates for three years, not matter how small or large the fine, points or no points.The golden rule is you fight all tickets , if you got one, chances are there will be another, it's jus a matter of time .
Trust me
I generally don't get involved in these discussions too but everybody is ignoring the OP's first post. He said he got written up on by-law infraction, that is not HTA. The OP said his record is pristine so what if there is two demerit points, means absolutely nothing to the insurance company. The cop was being nice by writing a by-law offence instead of an HTA offence. He can fight it all he wants but its not the end of the world for the OP.
Last edited by vkhamphi; 03-15-2012 at 10:41 PM.
OP states:
"So, I got an $80 fine for "make prohibited left turn, City of Hamilton by-law 01-215.14"."
This is not a HTA violation.
Well, this thread got me real curious about my situation since I recieved exactly the same ticket as OP in Toronto a little while back. Well, last night I ordered the driver's abstract online which should display all violations for the past three years and it's clean. No points and no record of that violation. Also the ticket has been written on the same form as the HTA tickets are with "Ontario Justice Court" bla bla bla...
I've read on another forum that municipalities often are irresponsible which is good when it comes to reporting these by-laws even though as it has been mentioned previously that it carries 2 demerit points and can appear on you record. So, most likely the officer was telling the truth and I suggest you just pay it. To be a little more sure, you can go into the nearest police station and ask, Im sure they'll be nice enough to confirm.
Good Luck!!
Isn't there some law stating that signage in most major cities in Ontario must be bi-lingual which the sign in question is not. I remember reading this awhile ago as a method of fighting restricted turn tickets.
03' SV1000S
yes
http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic2947.html
But it might not work since this is a by-law ticket. Not a HTA ticket. Read ¶ 7
http://www.yourbestdefence.com/illeg...igns_case.html
Last edited by Splash; 03-17-2012 at 05:26 PM.
"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
01001001 00100111 01100100 00100000 01010010
01100001 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010
00100000 01000010 01100101 00100000 01010010
01101001 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111
bilingual is not a slam-dunk defence, especially if you aren't comfortable conducting trial in French
Moderator
In the case of signage it can make the sign invalid, so you don't necessarily have to be a French speaker to take advantage of it. That's not the case, in this situation.
Morally Ambiguous (submissions welcome)
"Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth." - Oscar Wilde
did you read the above link before posting that?
The issue here is not whether or not Ms. Myers even understands or speaks French. It could be anyone from any language who could put this issue forward. It is not the point. The point is very clear and it is very straightforward here. Here, there is a legislation, the French Language Services Act, and here there is the Highway Traffic Act that directed the sign to read like that in a designated area. And this is the designated area, Toronto is.
"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
01001001 00100111 01100100 00100000 01010010
01100001 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010
00100000 01000010 01100101 00100000 01010010
01101001 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111
This horse has been flogged to death. Pay the fine and move on. 2 points and not HTA repercussions. Meh!
the R. v. Meyer decision was repealed by the City of Toronto; Brown representing Meyer accepted the conviction and the fine without contesting the charge during the City's appeal.
what everyone needs to understand is the significance of the R. v. Meyer decision to the City of Toronto, you're looking at a major overhaul of EVERY sign which will cost the budget-strapped city A LOT of money; so of course a backroom/under-the-table deal was made with Brown/Meyer to accept the charge for oodles of cash (Subscribe to iFly55's Conspiracy Theory)
HOWEVER, people are still using the R. v. Meyer defence in court today; JPs & crown attorneys who aren't familiar with the case-law might accept it, if you do run into a JP/crown that know what's going on, you're toast
that's why I said maybe a French Judge or Prosecutor might be more sympathetic/forgiving and quash the charge vs. an English speaking Judge who knows the R. v. Meyer decision was repealed and isn't having any of it... either way the FLSA isn't a sure fire defence
Can you explain how the City of Toronto can repeal a case? I am aware of no such option.
This post does not provide any legal advice and readers should consult with their own lawyer for legal advice.
my terminology must be wrong
what i meant to say is that the City appealed and won
I'm the OP, and today I went to the courthouse to request a hearing. The guy told me if I don't get a trial date in a month, to call them. Yeah right...right?! I'm thinking not calling, my goal is to buy as much time as possible.
Current: 2003 Suzuki GSX-R1000
Previous ride: 2005 Yamaha FZ6
Not right, let's say they schedule a hearing but you don't get a letter that states the date of your hearing; therefore you don't show up, they automatically convict you. I've read that it's a pain in the *** to reopen the case...
Hey guys,
I'm the OP and here's my news:
1) I got a hearing date for the beginning of next year.
2) Meanwhile, I'm changing my bike with the one I want (later this week), so I won't have to "wait" for the summer.
Having 2) in mind, isn't it a good idea that I accept the charges (e.g. next week after I already have my new insurance), so that I get the 3 year clock ticking? And how do I do that now, since I've already got a hearing date and all?
Current: 2003 Suzuki GSX-R1000
Previous ride: 2005 Yamaha FZ6
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks