Going for first resolution in court tomorrow...but..... | GTAMotorcycle.com

Going for first resolution in court tomorrow...but.....

theshnizzle

Well-known member
Site Supporter
I was charged with failing to stop at a red light. I go for first resolution tomorrow. I have never had a traffic ticket or been in court for anything. Possibly I may get my ticket down to no points and a nominal fine BUT it will still be a conviction,something I am trying to avoid. I don't care that much about the points, I do care about the conviction.

There were 2 witnesses plus the driver at the scene. I happen to know that the driver will not show up in court. Would that mean the case would possibly be dismissed? From what I understand ALL parties must be in the court room if I decide to go to trial.

IF I get convicted what sort of insurance hike may I be looking at? I have everything with Primmum, cars, bike,house.

Thoughts....quickly please!
 
You can accept any lesser plea the Crown offers or you can take your chances at trial. I doubt you'll beat a red light ticket completely though. They will set a later date for trial, witnesses are called for trial if required.
If you are polite, the crown will usually go pretty easy on you if you have a clean abstract.

Sent from my SM-A500W using Tapatalk
 
The driver of the vehicle you collided with doesn't have to be there. The Crown only needs for one of the two other witnesses to show up and say that you ran a red light. The hike depends on the insurer. You'd basically be working with an at-fault and a minor conviction. Sometimes you can get away with it if your insurer has accident forgiveness and doesn't surcharge minors too much.
 
The situation isn't clear to me – was there an accident, or was this just a simple traffic ticket?

If it's just a traffic ticket your chances of it getting thrown out completely are slim to none unless the officer doesn't show up or completely botched his notes, so you're only likely outcome is a dollar amount reduction but the conviction and points will stick. If you were taking a day off work to fight the ticket, arguably it's not even worth your time as any dollar amount saved is unlikely to be less than what you would have made just going to work.

With a simple traffic ticket it's been my experience that the surcharge is little to none, none being if you have an otherwise clean record & nothing that would cause them to run your abstract on an annual basis, in which they may not even notice or cut you some slack. It's a minor conviction really.

If this was an accident where you were at fault, the ticket is fairly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things – your Insurance company will be far more interested in the accident itself versus the ticket and surcharges will be based on that and likely that alone.
 
Call a traffic ticket fighter... or a lawyer if you don't mind spending some.

I haven't been convicted of a driving offence in almost 20 years... there's been a few tickets... all beat... and not one was because of the cop not showing up.

Most tickets are a "he said/she said" case.
 
The driver of the vehicle you collided with doesn't have to be there. The Crown only needs for one of the two other witnesses to show up and say that you ran a red light. The hike depends on the insurer. You'd basically be working with an at-fault and a minor conviction. Sometimes you can get away with it if your insurer has accident forgiveness and doesn't surcharge minors too much.

And how did we get to this step? Op did not mention anything about accident unless you inferred that from the use of the word scene.
 
From what I have been told by various officers is that ALL parties must be present at a trial.

This was a collusion, I wrote off my car,hit a tractor trailer which had extremely minor damage, he drove away.

When I call my insurance company to move/change my insurance I am always asked if I have had a conviction within the last 3 years.

I DO have a clean abstract.
 
From what I have been told by various officers is that ALL parties must be present at a trial.

This was a collusion, I wrote off my car,hit a tractor trailer which had extremely minor damage, he drove away.

When I call my insurance company to move/change my insurance I am always asked if I have had a conviction within the last 3 years.

I DO have a clean abstract.

uhm, so the tractor trailer left the scene of an accident?
right there seems reason to dismiss it
How do they know you ran the light?
And how did you run a red light and hit a barn?

This is one deal I would not want on my record.
Running stop signs and lights is one of those lines drawn vs. going 20km/h over on the highway.

They don't need the driver. They have the officers's notes and the Crown can continue the case without the cop present...if they feel they have enough evidence (as I recall with various discussions). This is not one of those deals where the cop was there and handed you a ticket...the cop came AFTER and investigated.
They saw you were at fault and have the witness statement.

Your car was written off, so this is not a minor crash to them as you make it sound. What if you had hit a pedestrian or cyclist or another car e.g. Civic...then what would have happen to the occupants in that car considering you hit a barn and your car was totaled?

It would seem wise to reconsider your strategy with your defense, on face value of what you posted here they will shred you.
They tend to look at these things as you tend to run stop signs/lights and this is the time you got caught.

Oh, and most insurance companies now run scans on MTO dbase regularly to find convictions so they can raise rates right away.
I am not sure if now subscribe to push notifications. I know they use CGI to get the info from MTO.

Good luck!
 
If this is a first resolution it's not a trial, but an attempt to resolve it without a trial.
There are no witnesses required at this meeting and the Crown will rely on the Officer's report and the witness statements.
Based on this, the Crown will probably not offer you much of a deal.
If you feel you can do better at trial, decline the Crown's offer and go to court.
 
There are two things, first appearance and early resolution. First Appearance is for a Part 3 Summons. This is not you, you are a Part 1.
You are going to an "early resolution". You will meet the crown and they will certainly offer you a lesser charge to take the plea on the spot. If you believe that you can provide enough evidence to have your charge thrown out then opt for a trial and decline the plea. If you don't think so then take a lesser charge and it will show up on your abstract. If you take a lesser charge it will certainly affect your insurance rate.

Now, if you want more time to decide and to review the evidence against you then go in and tell the crown you have not yet received disclosure and you are not prepared to defend yourself. Ask them for a disclosure form, fill it out and request disclosure immediately. They can only send it by fax, or give it to you in person (no email). So those are your options.

The witness does not have to appear in court, the crown can get a witness statement. So my advice is to get disclosure and that will give you time to decide, but don't play the witness game. The crown can also request that it be put over to another date multiple times if a witness doesn't show up (often this isn't the case with a minor charge like yours, but it is an option for them).
 
The driver of the vehicle you collided with doesn't have to be there. The Crown only needs for one of the two other witnesses to show up and say that you ran a red light. The hike depends on the insurer. You'd basically be working with an at-fault and a minor conviction. Sometimes you can get away with it if your insurer has accident forgiveness and doesn't surcharge minors too much.

This is correct.
 
accident forgivness does not mean forgivness from a convicted charge.
 
accident forgivness does not mean forgivness from a convicted charge.
no. the accident will be on your abstract, but will not raise your rate for that specific insurance provider. the convicted charge however can raise your rate even though the accident was forgiven. if you change providers they wont recognize the other providers accident forgiveness terms.
 
The proper question is DO you have accident forgiveness with your current insurer? If you do AND you think you have the evidence to win at trial, (IE you had a dash cam that clearly shows the light was green, etc). Then go to trial, and hope you can "rattle" the witnesses, (as stated above the other driver need not attend, although the crown will likely have sent a subpoena to him/her as a witness). All the crown truly requires, for a conviction is one of the witnesses, to testify, or the officer to enter witnesses statements.

If you don't have accident forgiveness, then your rates WILL be impacted MUCH more, by the at fault collision, (doesn't matter if your convicted of the traffic violation or not, as we are talking insurance FDR, Fault Determination Rules).

So in summary

Accident forgiveness + win in court = 0 increase
Accident forgiveness + lose in court = 15 - 25% surcharge, (depending upon your insurer), IF they find out about the conviction.
No Accident forgiveness + win in court = surcharge for at fault claim.
No Accident forgiveness + lose in court = At fault claim surcharge + "POSSIBLY" minor conviction surcharge, (although most companies will likely just ding you for the at fault claim surcharge.
 

Back
Top Bottom