ticketed for not producing insurance slip

[Comrade Yeti]

Sorry for jacking the thread, but i have a similar question. Right now i activated my insurance but it starts in june, so i went and got a new sticker for my plate which expires next year. I have an old insurance slip that the company sent me for renewal which expires next year, but i cancelled before they renewed it because the price was too high, so i still have the slip with an old policy number. I was going to bring my bike to a local shop like for a tune up before my real insurance starts so i can ride it right away. But i was wondering if a cop pulls me over can he verify if my insurance is active through my plate or from their little hi tech computers? Or would they have to call and verify? Thanks.. sorry if its a bit confusing..

The cop can phone it in now, and shortly will have instant access to query with their computer (Nov?). Don't do it. The driving without insurance and producing false insurance tickets you will get will be giant red flags that guarantee your insurance will be insane for the next 6-10 years.

 

[LiNK666]

The cop can phone it in now, and shortly will have instant access to query with their computer (Nov?). Don't do it. The driving without insurance and producing false insurance tickets you will get will be giant red flags that guarantee your insurance will be insane for the next 6-10 years.

+1 the police can check if the insurance is valid or not. Don't give them a reason to meet their ticket quota so easily.

 

[rukus]

don't pay the fine, go dispute the ticket and get a court date... as long as you could show the insurance slip on the court date, you will be fine.

bad idea. insurance was purchased at 12:30. ticket was prior to that.

he was driving without insurance, with illegal plates, and there would be much worse repercussions. pay the fine and move on.

 

[Jamie C]

Unbelievable..

1. Yes.. cops will be able to check whether insurance is valid within the next couple of months right from there computer in the cop car...Using a insurance slip from a cancelled policy is one of the oldest scams in the books.. and the reason cops will now be able to check..

2. If there were dealer plates on the van- the insurance responsibilty falls on the dealer but the Driver always assumes responsibility to make sure there is a valid slip in the vehicle.

3. If the van was already in your name.. your just ****ing lucky you didn't get driving with no insurance which is a court date and a fine up to $5000. If its a no insurance slip.. Pay the ticket and thank your lucky stars it wasn't worse

 

[reciprocity]

Sorry for jacking the thread, but i have a similar question. Right now i activated my insurance but it starts in june, so i went and got a new sticker for my plate which expires next year. I have an old insurance slip that the company sent me for renewal which expires next year, but i cancelled before they renewed it because the price was too high, so i still have the slip with an old policy number. I was going to bring my bike to a local shop like for a tune up before my real insurance starts so i can ride it right away. But i was wondering if a cop pulls me over can he verify if my insurance is active through my plate or from their little hi tech computers? Or would they have to call and verify? Thanks.. sorry if its a bit confusing..

they can easily verify and at this time of year they will be checking every slip, just for this reason.

 

[djltoronto]

don't pay the fine, go dispute the ticket and get a court date... as long as you could show the insurance slip on the court date, you will be fine.

Is this van considered to be a commercial motor vehicle?

 

[djltoronto]

and from the Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act

 

[dta]

ok thanks for the help! guess ill wait till june.

 

[bear22099]

don't pay the fine, go dispute the ticket and get a court date... as long as you could show the insurance slip on the court date, you will be fine.

The ticket is for not showing the slip when he was stopped, not for not having insurance. You can show the slip the next day, but you are still guilty of not showing it when you were stopped. Just because he shows the judge the slip will not automatically get the ticket tossed.

 

[crankcase]

yes it is a commercial van,i told my partner to pay the ticket and move on he told me he will take it to court cause he doesnt want it on his record,and i said look you numbskull the van was in my name and you chose to drive it without insurance,looks like a cagematch is coming soon,if my partner refuses to respect a vehicle in this way knowing it could negative impact towards me looks like we will have to part ways.Thank god there was no accident this could of turned out really bad.

 

[Marbleboy]

Lol, if you are bringing the whole rulebook out, then of course OP should just pay the fine and forget about it. But look at the ticket and see what it says. It probably says (pls correct me if I m wrong) "failed to show pink slip" or something. In that case, just bring it to court and very big chance that they will toss it out. It happened to me before.

 

[geoff-9]

turbo is right in that in this case it would be the owner getting the no insurance ticket if the officer follows up with insurance for the vehicle.
fyi - the officer can charge you for no insurance for upto 3 years after offence date.

if your partner takes the ticket to court and it shows insurance issued same day as offence date there will be some phone calls made to the company for sure and you will get caught. youll be charged. tell your partner to pay the ticket and stay under the radar...

 

[just_luc]

+1, the failure to provide insurance slip didnt count against my "ticket count" last time my insurance checked. they told me i was clear, just pay the damn fine and let it go away.

i got this ticket in my cage about 5 years ago..it does count twoards ticket count, and did affect my insurance for 3 years.. and i had insurance, just forgot to put the new slip in the car.. even went to court, proved i had insurance, didnt matter.. they said the ticket was for not producing, not for not having and it was tough ****..

If it's failure to show slip, and you put insurance on it the same day....it doesn't show what time insurance was placed on the vehicle. Take it to court, tell the judge your partner had your van and did not know where the slip was and show them your slip....they'll even void the $65 fine with a warning.

my car insurance slips dont show a time (coachmen) but my bike insurance slips (statefarm) say as of 1:30pm ln the day in question..

 

[crankcase]

if they were gonna charge the owner of the vehicle with no insurance and the driver with failing to produce insurance slip,wouldnt the police go out of there way to come to my address and pursue the charge,why would they wait on it.hopefully this doesnt happen i cant believe my partner would put me in this situation,i learned a valuable lesson you cant trust anyone,it pisses me off because i was not notified in any way the van would be moved from the dealer i made it very clear i was in the process of finding cheaper insurance and the van would stay at the dealer until that time,i have always respected the law and when a so called friend would put me in a situation likes this says alot about the friendship

 

[turbodish]

if they were gonna charge the owner of the vehicle with no insurance and the driver with failing to produce insurance slip,wouldnt the police go out of there way to come to my address and pursue the charge,why would they wait on it.

Because there's no requirement for them to rush?
Because your partner took the van out some time on Friday and got the ticket on Friday which means that the cop may not have had a chance to follow up before the insurance company office closed for the weekend.
Because to verify the details of insurance coverage or an insurance binder that may still be in the paperwork stages and not yet in the computer system would have to wait until Monday at earliest?

Or maybe you'll get lucky and there will be no follow-up right now. However, if suitably motivated the police can still do all that months from now and still lay charges then.

 

[just_luc]

if they were gonna charge the owner of the vehicle with no insurance and the driver with failing to produce insurance slip,wouldnt the police go out of there way to come to my address and pursue the charge,why would they wait on it.hopefully this doesnt happen i cant believe my partner would put me in this situation,i learned a valuable lesson you cant trust anyone,it pisses me off because i was not notified in any way the van would be moved from the dealer i made it very clear i was in the process of finding cheaper insurance and the van would stay at the dealer until that time,i have always respected the law and when a so called friend would put me in a situation likes this says alot about the friendship

i dont think your going to have a problem.. granted your "friend" should just pay his ticket, that said.. if this is true, and you had no knowledge of this person driving your vehicle.. then he stole it.. and if push comes to shove, proceed as such.

 

[nobbie48]

If there was no insurance on the van, be very happy that YOU didn't get a ticket for that, because the vehicle owner is eligible for that ticket regardless who was driving at the time unless that person was operating the vehicle without your permission.

The way I read it the van wasn't taken with permission but would the owner have to lay charges of theft to escape the wrath of the court?

I was under the impression it was the drivers responsibility to assure licence and insurance compliance, not the owners. If the ticket is "failure to produce", the lesser charge to "Driving without" and the driver pleads guilty is there a chance of the few hour time gap coming to light and the more serious charge being laid?

 

[turbodish]

The way I read it the van wasn't taken with permission but would the owner have to lay charges of theft to escape the wrath of the court?

I was under the impression it was the drivers responsibility to assure licence and insurance compliance, not the owners. If the ticket is "failure to produce", the lesser charge to "Driving without" and the driver pleads guilty is there a chance of the few hour time gap coming to light and the more serious charge being laid?

Ok, so all that the owner needs do is file a complaint against his partner for taking the vehicle without permission, and then go on the stand on give sworn testimony to the court. Easy, right? ;-)

In any case, have a look at this part of the HTA. Notice in particular in 207.(2) the limited exceptions where a vehicle owner can NOT be charged for an offence recorded while the vehicle was driven by someone else.

Vehicle owner may be convicted
207. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the owner of a vehicle may be charged with and convicted of an offence under this Act or the regulations or any municipal by-law regulating traffic for which the driver of the vehicle is subject to be charged unless, at the time of the offence, the vehicle was in the possession of some person other than the owner without the owner’s consent and on conviction the owner is liable to the penalty prescribed for the offence. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 207 (1).

When owner not liable
(2) The owner of a vehicle, except if the owner is also the driver, shall not be convicted for a contravention of,
(a) subsection 106 (2) or (4);
(b) sections 129 to 143, subsections 144 (1) to (17), subsections 144 (19) to (32), sections 145 to 168, section 172, subsections 175 (1) to (10), subsections 175 (13) to (18) or section 176, 182 or 199;
(c) a regulation or by-law made or passed under a section or subsection referred to in clause (a) or (b) or under section 106; or
(d) a by-law passed under any Act regulating or prohibiting turns on a highway. 1993, c. 31, s. 2 (10); 1998, c. 38, s. 5 (1); 2004, c. 22, s. 6 (1); 2006, c. 25, s. 3.

The insurance requirement is a bit different. The requirement to carry and produce evidence of insurance is an HTA requirement, and the driver can be charged for failing to do so.

However, failure to have insurance on a vehicle is an offence not under the HTA, but under the Compulsory Autombile Insurance Act. That act stipulates only that the owner or lessee, not the operator, can be charged for permitting the operation of an uninsured vehicle. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c25_e.htm#BK1

If the fail to produce evidence of insurance charge is quickly disposed of, then that particular tickets goes into the out-of-sight, out-of-mind basket as far as the charging cop and prosecuting Crown are concerned. If the driver intendeds to fight the ticket though, then that opens up the door for the ticket to linger in the minds of both cop and Crown, and that in turn means much greater potential for someone to decide to go digging deeper into whether or not there ever was any insurance at all at the time.

 

[nobbie48]

In any case, have a look at this part of the HTA. Notice in particular in 207.(2) the limited exceptions where a vehicle owner can NOT be charged for an offence recorded while the vehicle was driven by someone else.

Getting off on a tangent, this adds new insight into the test ride debates. I was under the impression that only the driver took the rap for the violation and the owner got hit by the insurance company (If there was a collision). The exception being camera recorded charges such as photo radar and red-light cameras where the driver's ID might be in question.

If someone gets looks it up before me, what types of offences are generally in the owner NOT chargeable catagory and owner chargeable catagories?

 

[daught]

When I went to my agent he filled a paper form, then he sent it in to the ins company. Jevco for example takes about a month to actually have you in the computer system. SF on the other hand does it all on the computer. Depending on who you are with there might not be a computer log.