Rear Splash Guard

[Robbiemac]

Hey everyone,

Just a quick question as I have read a couple posts about being ticketed for not having a rear splash guard.

So is it illegal to totally remove it or is the issue on how the plate is being displayed from the rear? I have a 2012 Ninja250 and I hate the look of the rear splash guard on it. Also what is the fine on the ticket and does it effect Insurance

Thanks

 

[Jimsun]

I belive its $85+ surcharge.
Any ticket given by a cop will affect your insurance
gl op

 

[Splash]

Hey everyone,

Just a quick question as I have read a couple posts about being ticketed for not having a rear splash guard.

So is it illegal to totally remove it or is the issue on how the plate is being displayed from the rear? I have a 2012 Ninja250 and I hate the look of the rear splash guard on it. Also what is the fine on the ticket and does it effect Insurance

Thanks

It's illegal.
Mudguards
(3) Every motor vehicle and every trailer shall be equipped with mudguards or fenders or other device adequate to reduce effectively the wheel spray or splash of water from the roadway to the rear thereof, unless adequate protection is afforded by the body of the motor vehicle or trailer or by a trailer drawn by the motor vehicle. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 66 (3).

I belive its $85+ surcharge.
Any ticket given by a cop will affect your insurance
gl op

Every ticket? no. AFAIK non moving violations will not affect your insurance. Tickets like Parking, burnt light bulb.... No rear fender probably lands in this category.

 

[Jimsun]

It's illegal.
Mudguards
(3) Every motor vehicle and every trailer shall be equipped with mudguards or fenders or other device adequate to reduce effectively the wheel spray or splash of water from the roadway to the rear thereof, unless adequate protection is afforded by the body of the motor vehicle or trailer or by a trailer drawn by the motor vehicle. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 66 (3).






Every ticket? no. AFAIK non moving violations will not affect your insurance. Tickets like Parking, burnt light bulb.... No rear fender probably lands in this category.

Burnt headlight does affect insurance unless your insurance provider considere this as an administrative ticket - which will then not alter your premium. Parking tickets are given by parking enforcements.

I got a ticket for not carrying my G an having a burnt headlight (probably burnt on the day of). The pig didnt give me a break and just wrote me off. These tickets affected my isurance so i went with an insurance company that would consider such tickets administratve to avoid the premium hike.

Rule of thumb, cop ticket = higher premium

hope this helps

 

[hedo2002]

Burnt headlight does affect insurance unless your insurance provider considere this as an administrative ticket - which will then not alter your premium. Parking tickets are given by parking enforcements.

I got a ticket for not carrying my G an having a burnt headlight (probably burnt on the day of). The pig didnt give me a break and just wrote me off. These tickets affected my isurance so i went with an insurance company that would consider such tickets administratve to avoid the premium hike.

Rule of thumb, cop ticket = higher premium

hope this helps

Equipment infractions, (mud guard, Burnt lights, horn not working etc), do NOT affect your insurance.
Moving violations, (not carrying your licence, speeding, red light etc) DO affect premiums

Of course there are exceptions to this rule of thumb. But to state EVERY ticket affects your insurance is simply not fact.

 

[d00dz]

But who's to say that the sub-frame above the seat isn't adequate to prevent spray? Practically every bike out there has had their fender eliminated.
What about bobtailing trucks?

 

[Splash]

Burnt headlight does affect insurance unless your insurance provider considere this as an administrative ticket - which will then not alter your premium. Parking tickets are given by parking enforcements.

I got a ticket for not carrying my G an having a burnt headlight (probably burnt on the day of). The pig didnt give me a break and just wrote me off. These tickets affected my isurance so i went with an insurance company that would consider such tickets administratve to avoid the premium hike.

Rule of thumb, cop ticket = higher premium

hope this helps

wrong.

your insurance went up because you didn't have your "G" with you.

 

[Jimsun]

Equipment infractions, (mud guard, Burnt lights, horn not working etc), do NOT affect your insurance.
Moving violations, (not carrying your licence, speeding, red light etc) DO affect premiums

Of course there are exceptions to this rule of thumb. But to state EVERY ticket affects your insurance is simply not fact.

I see. Well it seemed like almost all insurance company did tell me that cop ticket = higher premium. Its just up to the insurance company whether they will rule it as admin or not.
Having a broken headlight does fall under the HTA. Thus why the insurance company have told me it does go up.

Moving violation? This doesnt make sense. You are moving/operating a vehicle with a missing/broken part are you not?

Im just arguing that it does because ive personally have experience it. So has a friend whose tails werent operatin properly - one bulb out.

Best thing though is call your insurance.

 

[hedo2002]

In the HTA there are two classes of violations..

1. Equipment/administrative violations
2. Moving violations.

Equipment are exactly that they deal with the equipment, and related items, (lights, horn, color of lights etc). Administrative deal with issues such as class of licence for vehicles, weight restrictions, type of braking systems, no insurance etc.

Moving violations include virtually everything else, Not carrying licence or proof of insurance, (as your operating the vehicle when you committed these offenses, therefore they are moving as opposed to administrative).

Trust me I spent many many hours of training in police college, as opposed to someone hired by an insurance company dispensing advice, (who may/may not even live in Ontario).

But as I said, there are exceptions, and insurance companies as has been stated by the member who helps sets insurance rates has posted on this forum each company has their own criteria. I was merely pointing out that the blanket statement that cop ticket = increased premiums is simply not fact. Perhaps time for you to consider a differnet insurer if they are dinging you for administrative offences.

 

[Jimsun]

wrong.

your insurance went up because you didn't have your "G" with you.

Wrong.
My insurance went up for the headlight offense then an increase again with the 'g'.

 

[Jimsun]

In the HTA there are two classes of violations..

1. Equipment/administrative violations
2. Moving violations.

Equipment are exactly that they deal with the equipment, and related items, (lights, horn, color of lights etc). Administrative deal with issues such as class of licence for vehicles, weight restrictions, type of braking systems, no insurance etc.

Moving violations include virtually everything else, Not carrying licence or proof of insurance, (as your operating the vehicle when you committed these offenses, therefore they are moving as opposed to administrative).

Trust me I spent many many hours of training in police college, as opposed to someone hired by an insurance company dispensing advice, (who may/may not even live in Ontario).

But as I said, there are exceptions, and insurance companies as has been stated by the member who helps sets insurance rates has posted on this forum each company has their own criteria. I was merely pointing out that the blanket statement that cop ticket = increased premiums is simply not fact. Perhaps time for you to consider a differnet insurer if they are dinging you for administrative offences.

I agree with the difference with 1&2
However, when you say

Moving violations include virtually everything else, Not carrying licence or proof of insurance, (as your operating the vehicle when you committed these offenses, therefore they are moving as opposed to administrative).

so youre saying that if a cop stops me on the road with a broken headlight/ illegal colour headlights (note that im operating a vehicle, moving from point A to B), that is not considered a moving violation? Im sure blue and red are illegal colours. Thus this will produce an HTA ticket that may cause your insurance to increase.

But as I said, there are exceptions, and insurance companies as has been stated by the member who helps sets insurance rates has posted on this forum each company has their own criteria. I was merely pointing out that the blanket statement that cop ticket = increased premiums is simply not fact. Perhaps time for you to consider a differnet insurer if they are dinging you for administrative offences.

As i said, dif companies have dif set of rules. You'll have to call in to find out. Some insurers may think ticket A is an admin and ticket B is not. Where in another company, its vice versa or either/neither.

Thus by saying cop ticket = higher premium, its safe to say that this statement is true and the missing 'x' variable is how the insurer view the offense/ticket

My current insurer view my not having my 'g' on hand ticket as an admin. So im sure it varies from company to company. Maybe they have different clauses for dif ppl (age/license/ etc). You have to call to find out whats ok and whats not.

Hope this makes sense.

 

[hedo2002]

I agree with the difference with 1&2
However, when you say



so youre saying that if a cop stops me on the road with a broken headlight/ illegal colour headlights (note that im operating a vehicle, moving from point A to B), that is not considered a moving violation? Im sure blue and red are illegal colours. Thus this will produce an HTA ticket that may cause your insurance to increase.

Yes the vehicle is moving with a burnt out head light BUT it is an EQUIPMENT violation as it is directly related to the vehicle equipment. The color blue is perfectly acceptable on a vehicle it is only red or red AND blue combined which is illegal and again that is an equipment violation. I JUST this last spring confirmed that with MTO as it came up that one of our club members had red and blue LEDs on his ATV. Now that more police services are using ATV's as of 2009 MTO included it as an offence, (equipment) on ATV's Motorcycles, and of course vehicles, (the vehicles and motorcycles were an infraction as soon as the law was changed to permit police vehicles to use red/blue lights. At one time it was actually illegal for police cars in Ontario to have ANY colour other than red.

It is also illegal to have a vehicle display a flashing GREEN light to the front, (unless you are a Volunteer Firefighter or Paramedic, WHILE responding to a call). But MOST coppers don't know that. I am not arguing with you, as I didn't "classify" what is an equipment as opposed to a moving violation that is done by the MTO.


As i said, dif companies have dif set of rules. You'll have to call in to find out. Some insurers may think ticket A is an admin and ticket B is not. Where in another company, its vice versa or either/neither.

I agree 100% with this statement

Thus by saying cop ticket = higher premium, its safe to say that this statement is true and the missing 'x' variable is how the insurer view the offense/ticket

My current insurer view my not having my 'g' on hand ticket as an admin. So im sure it varies from company to company. Maybe they have different clauses for dif ppl (age/license/ etc). You have to call to find out whats ok and whats not.

Hope this makes sense.

....

 

[Robbiemac]

Thanks for the info everyone!!

So basicly don't give the Ins company an option to raise your premium due to any ticket..LOL

 

[hpvchewy]

My insurance went up for the headlight offense then an increase again with the 'g'.

My insurance went up also for headlight violations (driving at night with just my foglights on, headlights were purple/wrong colour, two tickets ).

 

[stevex]

Thanks for the info everyone!!

So basicly don't give the Ins company an option to raise your premium due to any ticket..LOL

words to live by

 

[kiwi]

But who's to say that the sub-frame above the seat isn't adequate to prevent spray? Practically every bike out there has had their fender eliminated.
What about bobtailing trucks?

Hang on.. Not every bike.. And then it's mainly SS or SS wannabes that do it.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

 

[Rob MacLennan]

But who's to say that the sub-frame above the seat isn't adequate to prevent spray? Practically every bike out there has had their fender eliminated.
What about bobtailing trucks?

The government of Ontario and the Federal Government; that's who. A motorcycle is not supposed to be able to pass safety inspection, upon resale, if the 'stock mudguard' is not present for example.

 

[kiwi]

The government of Ontario and the Federal Government; that's who. A motorcycle is not supposed to be able to pass safety inspection, upon resale, if the 'stock mudguard' is not present for example.

Exactly. Beware when buying bikes.. Especially out of province.

 

[Splash]

The government of Ontario and the Federal Government; that's who. A motorcycle is not supposed to be able to pass safety inspection, upon resale, if the 'stock mudguard' is not present for example.

That's not true. You don't need the "STOCK" mudguard to be legal. You can ad your own...

If I replace mine with a carbon fiber one it would still be legal.

Or you can add something like this http://cdn.carpimoto.com/Images/Products/Zoom/Rizoma_Ducati_Diavel-7.jpg and keep it legal.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

That's not true. You don't need the "STOCK" mudguard to be legal. You can ad your own...

If I replace mine with a carbon fiber one it would still be legal.

Or you can add something like this http://cdn.carpimoto.com/Images/Products/Zoom/Rizoma_Ducati_Diavel-7.jpg and keep it legal.

True enough that it doesn't have to be stock as the regulation is written. In practice, however, there aren't a lot of replacement parts that do fit the requirements. For example the one that you posted DOES NOT meet the requirements.

1. (1) The motorcycle shall have,

(a) where they were originally installed, securely mounted fenders, mudguards and operative footrests;
(b) every seat thereon securely mounted so as to maintain its position and adjustment; and
(c) every component thereof securely mounted and not interfering with the safe operation of the motorcycle.

The why of it, is that it doesn't appear to use the original mounts. At any rate we were discussing the practice of removing the rear mudguard, as when installing a fender eliminator, were we not? It would seem counter to that concept, to replace the stock mudguard with something of equal size and location.