Bicycle Wheelie | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Bicycle Wheelie

nobbie48 said:
I'm not sure how HTA 172 relates but the law looks at the danger to the public and determines the risk regardless of whether the property is private or public.
Click to expand...

The HTA applies, or it doesn't apply - there is no in between.

This was hashed out in Ontario during the infamous Tim Hortons texting ticket story last December. People here in Ontario were quick to ask if the same law potentially applied here in Ontario...and the result was basically the same as in the story linked here:

“They can only be charged if they are on a highway, which includes the sidewalk and driveway into the establishment,” says Const. Clint Stibbe, with Toronto police traffic services. “The drive-thru, if on private property, is not included because the highway ends at the edge of the sidewalk closest to the establishment.”
That’s because Ontario’s Highway Traffic Act (HTA) doesn’t apply on private property, like drive-thrus or shopping centre parking lots.
Click to expand...

If the HTA doesn't apply for cellphone tickets on private property, it doesn't magically apply for anything else either...including 172.

Of course that wouldn't stop a LEO from issuing a ticket of course, but I see no way it would stand up in court.

Even amusement park rides have to pass some inspection criteria.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges.
 
nobbie48 said:
I'm not sure how HTA 172 relates but the law looks at the danger to the public and determines the risk regardless of whether the property is private or public. Even amusement park rides have to pass some inspection criteria.
Click to expand...

This falls under TSSA regulations..... Elevators, escalators, rollercoasters, even those inflatable bouncy castles you rent for birthday parties are supposed to be TSSA inspected if for public use.
 
PrivatePilot said:
Hows that? As I understand it the HTA doesn't apply on private property, so farm trucks can operate with no plates and no insurance on private property but for one example...so how does HTA172 somehow apply?

Inquiring minds want to know as it doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Click to expand...

Simple if your operating a farm machine on your OWN property, it is completely different than if your operating that same machinery in a mall parking lot, (still private property). You can for example operate an ATV on your OWN property without a plate, insurance, or a helmet. You can not ride your atv across your neighborhood lawns doing the same..lol

Now if someone were operating in a lot as someone else asked which was gated and closed off to the public and you had permission from the land owner to use that property again a different kettle of fish. This is why stunters generally try to choose out of the way lots where they are away from "prying eyes", rather than just going to say the Oshawa Center at midnight to practice.
 
Last edited:
hedo2002 said:
Simple if your operating a farm machine on your OWN property, it is completely different than if your operating that same machinery in a mall parking lot, (still private property). You can for example operate an ATV on your OWN property without a plate, insurance, or a helmet. You can not ride your atv across your neighborhood lawns doing the same..lol

Now if someone were operating in a lot as someone else asked which was gated and closed off to the public and you had permission from the land owner to use that property again a different kettle of fish.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I still call shenanigans. And there's lots and lots of stories to back it up aside from the one I already posted.

It still seems very clear to me that either the HTA applies, or doesn't apply. Again, it makes zero sense that there's some magical line in which it can somehow apply in one scenario, but not in the other...which is what you are suggesting, and is not backed up by virtually anything I can find online, including plenty and plenty of quotes from the OPP and various regional police forces.

I recognize that federal charges can still be applicable to private property - dangerous, impaired, etc...but S172 is not federal, it is very clearly Ontario HTA...which again, does not apply on private property...and is what we are discussing here.

Your scenario of someone driving their ATV across someone else's private property would result in a trespassing charge at worst (IF the property owner wanted to pursue such) again, barring the guy driving like an idiot or drunk, crossing the federal line) and that's about it. It's actually clearly mentioned in the MTO's own documents that helmets (or insurance, or plates) isn't even mandatory for ATV's on private property, only when operated on any public land or property.
 
PrivatePilot said:
Sorry, I still call shenanigans. And there's lots and lots of stories to back it up aside from the one I already posted.

It still seems very clear to me that either the HTA applies, or doesn't apply. Again, it makes zero sense that there's some magical line in which it can somehow apply in one scenario, but not in the other...which is what you are suggesting, and is not backed up by virtually anything I can find online, including plenty and plenty of quotes from the OPP and various regional police forces.

I recognize that federal charges can still be applicable to private property - dangerous, impaired, etc...but S172 is not federal, it is very clearly Ontario HTA...which again, does not apply on private property...and is what we are discussing here.

Your scenario of someone driving their ATV across someone else's private property would result in a trespassing charge at worst (IF the property owner wanted to pursue such) again, barring the guy driving like an idiot or drunk, crossing the federal line) and that's about it. It's actually clearly mentioned in the MTO's own documents that helmets (or insurance, or plates) isn't even mandatory for ATV's on private property, only when operated on any public land or property.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that insurance was required anywhere except your own property so you could get hit with an uninsured ticket even if you had a neighbour's permission to cross his land.

HTA 172 is so loosely written that you could be impounded and banned for a week for sneezing. Winning in court afterwards doesn't pay the impound fees or reimburse a trucker for a week off.
 
I didn't say the HTA applied to helmets and plates and insurance for an ATV on someone else's property, I was merely pointing out the provincial regs can still be enforced, In the case of an ATV it would fall under Off Road Vehicles Act. I can assure you that you can and will be charged with riding an ATV on someone else's property without proper helmet, Plates and Insurance. An easy example would be the Rail Trail from say Lindsay to Bethany, it is private property, (it is owned by the City of Kawartha Lakes), If you ride on it without those requirements then you will be charged. Or the trails north of Bobcaygeon, (which cross both crown land and private property, (the land owners give permission for those with permits to cross their lands). But the ONLY place you can ride without a helmet is your OWN property.

Military bases, Universities etc are all private property, but you can be charged under the HTA, (I know this as a fact as I worked for a short period for University of Waterloo Police, (Waterloo Regional Police also used to conduct radar on campus). Also did a stint as Military Police, in both cases HTA violations were common, As were "university violations", Where we would lay say a speeding charge against a student, but it was a $20 fine no matter what the speed, and if they didn't pay it, the school withheld transcripts, (this was challenged and is no longer permitted, the withholding of transcripts for unpaid "fees"). So yes indeed HTA violations can in deed be issued on private property.

As has been discussed here thousands of times the HTA is a VERY VERY poorly worded set of regulations, As for a TPS or OPP spokesperson, they can't possibly know EVERY scenario, they speak in "general terms" such as a shopping mall parking lot etc. I wouldn't expect Cst Stibbe of TPS to know ANYTHING when it comes to say the ORVA, or many other regs, that they don't deal with on a regular basis..lol

PrivatePilot said:
Sorry, I still call shenanigans. And there's lots and lots of stories to back it up aside from the one I already posted.

It still seems very clear to me that either the HTA applies, or doesn't apply. Again, it makes zero sense that there's some magical line in which it can somehow apply in one scenario, but not in the other...which is what you are suggesting, and is not backed up by virtually anything I can find online, including plenty and plenty of quotes from the OPP and various regional police forces.

I recognize that federal charges can still be applicable to private property - dangerous, impaired, etc...but S172 is not federal, it is very clearly Ontario HTA...which again, does not apply on private property...and is what we are discussing here.

Your scenario of someone driving their ATV across someone else's private property would result in a trespassing charge at worst (IF the property owner wanted to pursue such) again, barring the guy driving like an idiot or drunk, crossing the federal line) and that's about it. It's actually clearly mentioned in the MTO's own documents that helmets (or insurance, or plates) isn't even mandatory for ATV's on private property, only when operated on any public land or property.
Click to expand...
 
Soooo....the laws apply to private property then despite everything to the contrary...including multiple quotes from various officers, including provincial ones? I found more than a few lawyer websites that backed it up, including an article from the Injury Lawyers of Ontario from just a few weeks ago confirming it again?

I don't doubt that LEO's issue tickets on private property, and I don't doubt that many of them lead to conviction and payment of the related fines...but that doesn't mean that if the person charged had decided to fight the ticket it wouldn't have been thrown out. I strongly suspect most people don't actually know that the HTA doesn't apply to private property.

Mixing the ORVA into the mix just unnecessarily muddies the waters...we're talking HTA.

So, here's some situations for you.

- Some years ago the city of Oshawa had some city busses down at the mall and let people (not propertly licensed) drive them under close supervision as part of some event...maybe doors open or something, I forget, but there was a bunch of regular G class licence people operating busses in the confines of the mall parking lot. Illegal?

- In the past we have had regular G class licence drivers operate our A class trucks in the confines of our property (at my employer) for the purpose of shunting trailers in and out of doors. Illegal?

- Motorcycle training courses with 20-30 people on unplated motorcycles on college/university property. Illegal?
 
As I said, not going to continue to go around in circles, military bases in Canada are indeed private property, and HTA violations are issued thousands of time each day by Police. Also to reiterate the police don't go "looking" for offences, lawyers, and Police spokes people are speaking in "generalized" terms, that doesn't mean it isn't possible. If you asked a lawyer or police spokes person will I be charged with speeding if I drive 1 km/h over the limit the standard answer will be no, That doesn't mean that there has been no offence committed just in generalized terms it is not a normal practice.

As for the bus, issue, If it was an "organized event" then the Police wouldn't have been called now if one of those drivers had been involved in a collision could a charge be laid, yes, (but it would also likely require the co-operation of the land owner to state that the event wasn't sanctioned by them).

The issue of Motorcycle training, is simple, they are held on a "closed course" meaning members of the general public are not permitted in the area while the course is being conducted.

Does your employer permit members of the general public to drive through the yard, on a consistent basis? I suspect the answer is no, so as I stated earlier it is similar to closed course or a parking lot which is closed to the public

We can, go on with "what if's" all day. I have demonstrated, that indeed charges "can and are" laid daily under the HTA on private property. I guess if it is that big of an issue for you, drive to one of the nearby military bases, do something really stupid, get issued a violation and take it to court, then report back. Till then I have much more pressing items on my agenda.

PrivatePilot said:
Soooo....the laws apply to private property then despite everything to the contrary...including multiple quotes from various officers, including provincial ones? I found more than a few lawyer websites that backed it up, including an article from the Injury Lawyers of Ontario from just a few weeks ago confirming it again?

I don't doubt that LEO's issue tickets on private property, and I don't doubt that many of them lead to conviction and payment of the related fines...but that doesn't mean that if the person charged had decided to fight the ticket it wouldn't have been thrown out. I strongly suspect most people don't actually know that the HTA doesn't apply to private property.

Mixing the ORVA into the mix just unnecessarily muddies the waters...we're talking HTA.

So, here's some situations for you.

- Some years ago the city of Oshawa had some city busses down at the mall and let people (not propertly licensed) drive them under close supervision as part of some event...maybe doors open or something, I forget, but there was a bunch of regular G class licence people operating busses in the confines of the mall parking lot. Illegal?

- In the past we have had regular G class licence drivers operate our A class trucks in the confines of our property (at my employer) for the purpose of shunting trailers in and out of doors. Illegal?

- Motorcycle training courses with 20-30 people on unplated motorcycles on college/university property. Illegal?
Click to expand...
 
hedo2002 said:
As I said, not going to continue to go around in circles, military bases in Canada are indeed private property, and HTA violations are issued thousands of time each day by Police. Also to reiterate the police don't go "looking" for offences, lawyers, and Police spokes people are speaking in "generalized" terms, that doesn't mean it isn't possible. If you asked a lawyer or police spokes person will I be charged with speeding if I drive 1 km/h over the limit the standard answer will be no, That doesn't mean that there has been no offence committed just in generalized terms it is not a normal practice.

.
Click to expand...

Anytime I ask this sort of question I get a question as an answer. I'm asked "What does the law say?" The cop / lawyer etc wasn't going to shoulder any blame if you get a ticket for some obscure offence.
 
PrivatePilot said:
- In the past we have had regular G class licence drivers operate our A class trucks in the confines of our property (at my employer) for the purpose of shunting trailers in and out of doors. Illegal?

?
Click to expand...

I used to work at the Brampton Chrysler assembly plant. The person driving your new car off the assembly line may or may NOT have an Ontario drivers licence. The Union decided that the ODL was irrelevant to the ability to do the job. Company was only to evaluate the ability to do activity required for this job position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom