mva 144 1(c)
 

so I got a ticket last night for 144 1(c) "speed relative to conditions" while approaching a road block by an officer who was like 200 feet away and talking to another driver.

i'm kind of confused by the logic involved here. I was on the Grandview onramp onto Canada way. I'll be honest, i'm not really sure where the speed limit is 50 and where it is 90 when you're on that stretch of road leading to the freeway. I always assumed you could build up speed leading to the merge. anyways I was doing something like 80 coming around the bend and the road block was a lot higher up the ramp then normal (I go through that road block all the time) so I hit the brakes and I had a wheel on the large white hov line which caused it to skid for literally a fraction of a second but enough to attract attention. I was still slowed down and safe well before the actual check point.

i'm just going to pay the ticket, it's not worth fighting over $167 minus 25 and I have a relatively clean driving record so the points won't matter, but I was curious, what's the burden of proof for this? it's such an ambiguous ticket. I could understand getting this if I caused an accident or something but for something as small as a small tire skid while braking for a road block positioned around a blind corner. it seems a bit frivolous. I don't get it. it would have made more sense to me to get a regular speeding ticket or something. the officer claimed I "almost rear ended all of them" and all I could do was chuckle, which probably didn't help my case but I tried to explain the white line deal and she would have non of it.

Sounds like one you should be fighting. What were the "conditions" you were speeding relative to?

Considering the weather lately, black ice is a possibility.

my case aside. can you guys explain mva 144. how are any of those ticket explained in court? is it just up to the officer? is there some type of guidelines the officers are taught in order to determine when each subsection is relevant? all 3 subsection are so ambiguous and subjective. not to mention subsection a and b are 6 point tickets.

last night when i was out it wasn't raining but the roads were still wet. i'm just going to pay it and save myself a headache. it could have just as easily been a speeding ticket i guess plus i left out the part where i had forgotten to put my up to date insurance sticker on the back plate. insurance was valid but i forgot about the sticker. which i'm sure was something i could have been fined for also. it just wasn't relevant info in regards to my initial question.

It will be up to the Crown (Police) to prove that you were going too fast "relative to conditions".....you can see what the conditions are...they must prove at least one of the ones below...in your case maybe the road, traffic or visibility???

Careless driving prohibited
144 (1) A person must not drive a motor vehicle on a highway
(a) without due care and attention,
(b) without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway, or
(c) at a speed that is excessive relative to the road, traffic, visibility or weather conditions.

I would assume of them witnessed your skid and that was enough for them to deem you were driving to fast for the conditions. If you managed o stop/slow down without any skidding at all, they probably wouldn't have done anything.

To someone standing on the road, hearing a car skidding usually sounds a lot worse than what it might have been, so in your opinion, it was a small skid but to an observer on the road, they might not notice anything until they hear the skid, look up and see the tail end of the skid and assume you were going too fast.

As someone who has had to run for cover on numerous occasions, to escape drivers who were not paying attention, focused on something else, driving too fast to stop in time etc...I know what it sounds and feels like. Police will have to paint a mental picture to the JP so that he agrees with the ticket writer.

again completely irrelevant to my case.

could you maybe give an example of the "mental picture" you would paint, or just an example of a situation where you feel mva 144 1(b) would be appropriate?

i had i situation where a guy passed me and the driver in front of me on sperling in burnaby (a single lane in each direction) on the right hand side between my car and the curb. i could easily classify this in my head as "driving without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway" but it could also easily be speeding + illegal pass or a host of other more specific tickets. does it just come down to the officers preference?

My reply was in response to wing woo...not your post. The tickets I issued were almost always weather related....speeding on icy or snowy roads, loosing control on wet corner, driving the speed limit of 80k in fog with about 20 foot visibility....that sort of thing.

(b) without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway,
144 1(b) example...driving by pedestrians and splashing them as you drive thru a puddle...

The Member would have to select the best charge to most appropriately fit the individual situation he witnessed. The example you gave here could fit any of the charges you suggested. If you stop someone with no insurance, the charge of failing to register the vehicle is also appropriate...and is not $598. Speeding goes from $138 to $483...it depends on what speed is actually involved, the total circumstances of what happened and to whom and if the Member wants to give you a break. If I stopped a driver with a bad driving record...specially for speeding, and this again was yet another speeding ticket, then you get one from the menu for your actual speed. Clean record, no other traffic involved, not badly into the fine range and you might get a $138 minimum one for 30k over...that sort of thing.

It doesn't help that roadblocks are often set up right around a blind corner where drivers often have to slow down faster than normal.

All drivers should be driving so that they can stop in the clear distance ahead....if you can't see, slow down so you can stop in the available roadway. Many drivers speed, don't pay attention, are distracted by any number of things. When required to stop they often are unable.

Checkstops are set up so that drivers cannot turn off and sometimes this means encountering drivers find them around corners. Whoever sets them up should never do so that it is impossible to stop safely. If a driver is speeding and/or distracted, how much space should you give them to pay attention and stop? The location has to be carefully chosen with safety a prime concern. The pople manning the Checkstops are the very people likely to get hit if they don't!

The times I had to run for safety were at crash scenes where the idiots were looking at the crash and not what was going on around them.

And did the OP stop prior to the roadblock? Hard to articulate he was driving too fast for conditions if he was able to stop safely prior to the roadblock.

The fact that he's paying this just helps to reinforce the behavior of issuing these bogus tickets.

Dispute it, and explain in detail what happened in court. Literally too many factors for anyone to weigh in accurately enough about it.

I've never run into a checkstop where there was not enough time to slow down tbh..

There you are!!! Happy New Year....glad to see you are off to a flying start for 2016!! :yuno::chairdance:

Usually where the sign is. If you were coming off the freeway onto Grandview, then the whole exit lane is 60 km/h according to the sign posted where you exited the freeway.

Hence defensive driving.

My place in Salmon Arm is at the top of a very twisty, mountainous road full of switch backs and heavily cambered corners. It's extremely fun to drive at speed. However, because it has so many blind corners, being cautious is part and parcel of driving it. There have been more than a few times where I've rounded a corner, only to see a deer, dog or bear in the middle of the road. Just because the official posted speed limit is 50 (or 70 or whatever), those limits don't often take into account the possibility of moving obstacles being right around that corner.