B.C. moves to eliminate court trials for traffic violations

[Bouncing Bettys]

This is just the slippery slope which began with the Immediate Roadside Prohibition program for drunk driving from a few years ago. On the spot drivers are awarded up to: a 90 day suspension, 1 month vehicle impoundment, a safe driving program, the installation of an ignition interlock breathalyzer device, fines, and all the fees that come with it which can go upwards of $5000. If you were below the legal limit and received a fail from an out of date or miscalibrated breathalyzer or any other technicality, you have to wait for your day in court and suffer the punishment in the meantime which often results in the loss of a job. The intitial law was later ruled unconstitutional and modified, though the people who received their IRPs before the changes still had to serve out their punishment.

The government likely saw how the general public wasn't willing to defend drunk drivers or drivers with any level of alcohol in their system from their unconstitutional laws, and figured why not take away the rights of all drivers if it saves them a little money.

[Timpo]

Originally Posted by Soundy

And for the record, I'm not disagreeing with you about any of this. I don't see this as a good move either, but I don't see it as being something completely arbitrary, nor a simple outright cash grab. It's largely a response to, as you put it, a fundamental misuse of the system that's supposed to be there to protect the innocent, not to be misused by the guilty to skirt their offences.

That's like saying let's deny all whiplash claims because it's the #1 scam for insurance company.
Because insurance is for people who actually got whiplash, not for those trying to work system out.

I won twice disputing my violation tickets(or maybe once, because one of them was the officer decided to drop the charge due to the circumstance/situtation), I would hate this new system because without me having a right to dispute my tickets, I would not have won those cases and cops will have the ultimate power over me.

I personally found that it's rare that cops do not show up, maybe used to happen all the time, but not anymore. So maybe that's the problem they should fix so that people won't file a dispute in hopes for cops not showing up.
Because the last time I was disputing my ticket, the other woman in the court room, she was disputing her speeding ticket, cop didn't show up, so the Justice of Peace told her that she has to come back so that he could hear both sides of story.

[Timpo]

Originally Posted by Bouncing Bettys

This is just the slippery slope which began with the Immediate Roadside Prohibition program for drunk driving from a few years ago. On the spot drivers are awarded up to: a 90 day suspension, 1 month vehicle impoundment, a safe driving program, the installation of an ignition interlock breathalyzer device, fines, and all the fees that come with it which can go upwards of $5000. If you were below the legal limit and received a fail from an out of date or miscalibrated breathalyzer or any other technicality, you have to wait for your day in court and suffer the punishment in the meantime which often results in the loss of a job. The intitial law was later ruled unconstitutional and modified, though the people who received their IRPs before the changes still had to serve out their punishment.

The government likely saw how the general public wasn't willing to defend drunk drivers or drivers with any level of alcohol in their system from their unconstitutional laws, and figured why not take away the rights of all drivers if it saves them a little money.

I'm not a lawyer so I might be wrong but..
Drinking and driving is completely different.

Speeding, not having N sign, ignoring STOP sign, etc... are all under Motor Vehicle Act or Motor Vehicle Regulations.

DUI/drunk driving are crime, it's under Criminal Code or Canada, not Motor Vehicle Act like speeding.

If you drink and drive, you will lose your job like you said, you will have a criminal record, you won't be able to travel outside of Canada, etc.
It's so much more serious than paying $5000 fine and getting your car impounded for a month.

I think debate here is Traffic Court, which is for Motor Vehicle Act.

[Bouncing Bettys]

IRPs and the possible elimination of traffic courts are very much alike since it gives the police all the power to become judge and jury. It started with IRPs and now this. Do you really think that the government would even suggest the elimination of traffic courts if they didn't already do the same for drunk drivers and their due process?

Under the IRP laws, drivers who, for example, may be below the legal limit or have not had a drink but receive a fail due to miscalibrated or outdated breathalyzers, receive immediate punishment. This could result in the loss of employment, before they even have the opportunity to go to court to fight it.

[Ohkun]

Lee says disputing a driving notice under the new system will involve a three-part process. If the driver maintains innocence, they are obligated to provide evidence during a pre-hearing. After that, they will attend an actual hearing.

Police must submit a sworn report as evidence, but if the officer who issued the driving notice can't do it, another officer can, Lee said.

So... Can I just send my buddy over if I'm busy on the court day?

[Tone Loc]

Originally Posted by joh

So... Can I just send my buddy over if I'm busy on the court day?

Actually, you can have someone else to appear and plea on your behalf (and show evidence, if any) if you are not able to make it to court.

My bad meme405, thanks for setting me straight on that one... just another reason why we can't have anything nice. Stupid people...

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by Timpo

I'm not a lawyer so I might be wrong but..
Drinking and driving is completely different.

Speeding, not having N sign, ignoring STOP sign, etc... are all under Motor Vehicle Act or Motor Vehicle Regulations.

DUI/drunk driving are crime, it's under Criminal Code or Canada, not Motor Vehicle Act like speeding.

If you drink and drive, you will lose your job like you said, you will have a criminal record, you won't be able to travel outside of Canada, etc.
It's so much more serious than paying $5000 fine and getting your car impounded for a month.

I think debate here is Traffic Court, which is for Motor Vehicle Act.

Quality post from Timpo... WTF is happening to RS? My whole world is topsy-turvy now...

[Timpo]

Originally Posted by Soundy

Quality post from Timpo... WTF is happening to RS? My whole world is topsy-turvy now...

what do you mean? I always only post quality posts

[Timpo]

ok so it's not in effect yet

Dispute a traffic or red light ticket

[AndroidAAA]

Same thing that happened with parking tickets in Vancouver and Burnaby is probably what they want to do do with traffic tickets. Moving them out of court and to adjudication.

Here is a link showing how that process works, it is for parking tickets in Burnaby but I assume they are proposing something very similiar for traffic tickets
Adjudication Process

some notes...

- The officer who issued the ticket will simply submit an evidence report, and will not be required to attend. There will only be one officer there (not necessarily the one who issued the tickets) who will answer questions for all the tickets being disputed for that day.
- The adjudicator will have no authority to reduce the fine amount, or do other things such as allow you to pay the fee without having any points going towards your driving licence.
- The adjudicator will only decide if the offence occurred or did not occur, only other times they would cancel a ticket is if there is an error, insufficient evidence, medical emergency etc.
- You have to pay the full fine amount plus an additional adjudication fee if you lose

What I have personally noticed from the switch to adjudication from traffic court, based on my experience with parking enforcement, is the conviction rate is substantially higher. It is very difficult if not impossible to get a ticket cancelled/voided the vast majority are upheld. Also the time it takes to dispute a ticket, and go to a hearing is significantly reduced.

I don't think this is the way to go for traffic tickets, maybe they can amend the current system instead of switching to adjudication.

[Timpo]

^ breaking the law for medical reason is not acceptable depending on who the officer is
Vancouver Island police nab 109 speeders en route to Swartz Bay ferry terminal

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by Timpo

^ breaking the law for medical reason is not acceptable depending on who the officer is
Vancouver Island police nab 109 speeders en route to Swartz Bay ferry terminal

Sorry, but this guy is a moron:

“It was 8:28 and we had to be there for 8:30,” Hodges said.

First, there are no half-hour departures on that route, so what's the hurry?
uploadfromtaptalk1429404998829.jpg


Second, even if there was an 8:30 sailing, at 8:28 he would have already missed the 5 minute cutoff for ticket sales and had to wait for the next sailing anyway.

Hodges said he feels he was unfairly dealt with. “I didn’t even know they could [impound a vehicle]. I was stunned.”

HOW CAN YOU LIVE IN BC AND NOT KNOW THIS BY NOW???

[Timpo]

Disputed traffic tickets on the rise in B.C.

Disputed traffic tickets on the rise in B.C.

Under new system, lawyer says there will be no right of appeal

By Yvonne Zacharias, Vancouver Sun April 10, 2015

As the B.C. government moves to shift traffic violations out of court, data from ICBC show the number of disputed tickets has been on the rise since 2008.

Lawyers are questioning the planned shift of Motor Vehicle Act violations from the criminal justice system, fearing the move will strip motorists of their constitutional rights.

Numbers obtained from ICBC show the number of tickets disputed rose to 75,597 last year from 67,638 in 2008, with increases each year in between.

That’s at a time when there has been a downward trend in the number of tickets issued, from 551,598 in 2008 to 476,445 last year.

Under legal amendments enacted by the B.C. government, police will stop writing tickets and will electronically issue what are called “driving notices” with an online payment system.

Disputing a notice involves a three-part process, according to Vancouver lawyer Kyla Lee.

Initially, adjudication officers with the office of the superintendent of motor vehicles provide an opportunity for drivers to plead guilty.

Failing that, drivers can go to a hearing before the Driving Notice Review Board. Before the hearing, however, there will be a pre-hearing where the accused must provide evidence, Lee said.

The police officer must submit his or her evidence by way of a sworn report. If the officer who issued the driving notice can’t do it, any other officer can.

The decision of the board is final, with no right of appeal, she said.

Experts were unable to cite a precise reason for the increase in the number of disputed tickets but Sarah Leamon, a criminal defence lawyer specializing in traffic cases, suspects people are becoming more aware of the impact of being found guilty or pleading guilty by paying the fine.

Having a less than pristine driving record can affect a person’s career, especially if it is a driving-related job. “Employers get to be choosy about who they are hiring,” she said.

It can also affect car insurance and can even involve vehicle impoundments.

Leamon, who is with the Acumen Law Corporation, said disputed traffic tickets cover just about every clause in the Motor Vehicle Act, with speeding, electronic device use and driving without due care and attention being among the most common.

She is staunchly opposed to the province’s move to shift traffic violations out of the court system.

“I think it’s so dangerous to do that because you don’t get an opportunity to cross-examine the officer or go through the court process,” she said. “There is no access to justice.”

[Ohkun]

Originally Posted by Soundy

Sorry, but this guy is a moron:


First, there are no half-hour departures on that route, so what's the hurry?
Attachment 24563


Second, even if there was an 8:30 sailing, at 8:28 he would have already missed the 5 minute cutoff for ticket sales and had to wait for the next sailing anyway.


HOW CAN YOU LIVE IN BC AND NOT KNOW THIS BY NOW???

He probably had a reservation for 9AM ferry.
Cut off time is 30min before the scheduled departure otherwise your reservation is not honored.