Is it true that we can ignore the parking tickets issued by private companies and only paid the ones issued by the city?
- 3 demerit points
- car rental
- disobey stop signs
- nitrous oxide testing
- ontario driver's license
- parking ticket
- parking ticket trial
- red light camera
- red light camera ticket
- stop sign
- stunt driving
- toronto police
- traffic ticket
- traffic violation
Feb 5th, 2016 06:15 PM #9916
- Join Date
- Dec 29th, 2007
Feb 5th, 2016 09:06 PM #9917
I recently got caught speeding 30 over posted sign in peel region. Cop was nice and he reduced it to 15 over no points.
Cop also said that if i go to court and try to fight it judge might increase the fine back to 30 over with points
What should i do?
a) go pay the fine
b) meet with prosecutor and talk to him that how ticket might have an impact on my job and request him to drop it?
c) request trial(eventhough cop warned me my ticket might go back up)
Feb 5th, 2016 10:05 PM #9918
Feb 5th, 2016 10:07 PM #9919
Feb 5th, 2016 10:25 PM #9920
2. License plate. You are going to testify that you inspected your vehicle before you got into it and started driving. Your license plates were clean on your inspection. Your argument is going to be that you did what was reasonable and can't be held at fault for dirty license plates since it happened while you were driving in traffic. There's no way you could have known they were too dirty and you shouldn't be expected to stop your vehicle so frequently to check for dirty license plates as it would be a disruption on the road. This is a strict liability offence. You'll also testify that you looked at your license plates shortly after the stop or even at the police stop and you noted that you could still see the insurance sticker and letters and numbers on the license plate. You do not want to say that your license plate wasn't dirty because this could imply that you may not have good judgement regarding this. You'll simply going to leave it as you could still see the information on the license plate. You'll also motion for non-suit when after you've testified and the prosecution has rested their case when you realize they have no evidence to support the testimony of the Police Officer (e.g., no photos). You'll cite lack of evidence and your contradictory testimony and motion for non-suit due to the Crown not proving beyond a reasonable doubt your guilt.
Feb 5th, 2016 10:31 PM #9921
The following errors are fatal and will get your traffic ticket thrown out:
no offence date;
no defendant’s name (if your name is misspelled, the traffic ticket still counts);
missing officer’s signature;
unknown offence (e.g. speeding 70kh/hr in a 64km/hr zone);
the filing date is beyond seven days.
I would not follow this advice. First off, this fatal error list is wrong. It doesn't apply to all jurisdictions. For example, in BC, there is zero requirement for the Officer to sign a ticket. All he has to do is swear in court that the ticket was served on you. Second, the JP can amend information in court. It all depends on the jurisdiction in terms of what can be amended. You may need to follow the strategy of not showing up and then if a conviction is entered, appeal it based on an error of law if an amendment was made that wasn't supposed to have been made in your absence. Or if a ticket is processed and you're found guilty when an error on a ticket still remained.
For example, an essential element that must be proved by the Crown is the location of the offence. If that's missing on the ticket, it could be amended in court with you present. If you're not present, this typically can't be amended.
Feb 5th, 2016 10:50 PM #9922
Feb 5th, 2016 11:36 PM #9923
They can also tow your car if you park again at their lots when have unpaid tickets with them and can also send them to collections agencies.
Now it seems controversial if Equifax will post it in your credit report since there is no court decision for confirming this debt.
In short - it is a gamble depending on the circumstances and parties involved.
Feb 5th, 2016 11:44 PM #9924
Yes, it seems that if one is certain that their ticket bears a fatal flaw it is better to ignore it as it it never existed.
I was wondering if the 7-day filing deadline also applies in BC/AB/QC?
I looked up in QC and AB POAs but could not find definitive sections.
Last edited by kkostadinof; Feb 5th, 2016 at 11:48 PM.
Feb 6th, 2016 12:04 AM #9925
Feb 6th, 2016 12:06 AM #9926
My understanding is that the US prosecutors are more flexible and sometimes may lower your charge to a parking offence if you submit a preliminary declaration with some explanation/excuse and see if they make you an acceptable offer in exchange for your guilty plea.
If you don't plan on going back to fight it, this seems like a reasonable approach to see if you can get a break. I would accept only a non-moving violation charge. Barring that ( and assuming you don't want to research and go back to fight in court), pick the $250 fee option and chalk it up to life experience. It is still a much lower cost than having it on your record as a moving violation.
Feb 6th, 2016 12:25 AM #9927
Cop was correct - they may up the charge to the original offence at trial.
c) seems your best shot at getting out of this.
Feb 6th, 2016 12:36 AM #9928
Feb 6th, 2016 02:15 PM #9929
What you are saying cannot possibly be true otherwise statistically most drivers would be having more tickets than you on average. Chance can play only so much in the law of averages. Also, even if you are indeed not as lucky as the rest of us - what you gonna do about it? Keep chancing it and hoping you won't get caught or recognize that you are not as lucky as the others and act accordingly?
It is your life and your record but if I were you I would drive as if I am on court supervision since if convicted on all 3 tickets I would be at a very close distance to license suspension and could not afford any more tickets. Not to mention the insurance ramifications.
But it's your call.
Feb 6th, 2016 02:28 PM #9930
- Join Date
- Mar 17th, 2007
Oh BTW that was Albert Einstein, you know, that guy who conceptualized and proved the Theory of Relativity, there's probably some truth to what he said.