'Open season on the public,' says critic as Alberta moves to eliminate traffic court

[scesfiremedic]

In a major overhaul in how driving violations are processed in Alberta, traffic court will be eliminated, tickets will be emailed and disputing those fines will cost up to $150, according to government documents.

And critics including a former police officer and defender of accused motorists are calling the move an “outrageous” run around due process.

The province is quietly implementing the changes that are to take effect Feb. 1 as part of an effort to streamline a backlogged court system and free up police resources by quickly moving two million traffic tickets through the system each year.

It also reduces the time motorists can decide to contest tickets from several weeks to seven days, and replaces traffic court with an adjudicator, with decisions rendered in 30 days in a process conducted online or over the phone.

A government document states “a few fines will be increased,” but the demerit system will remain unchanged and incidents that are “highly complex” and serious enough to involve bodily injury will be exempt.

What’s known as Phase 2 of the Justice Transformation Initiative (JTI) comes on the heels of changes made to impaired driving enforcement that on Dec. 1, 2020, removed cases from the court system while imposing significant immediate penalties, vehicle seizures and mandatory education.

The government said that’s proven successful in increasing justice system capacity by nearly 10 per cent while reducing the number of fatal collisions due to impairment.

Under the new regimen, accused motorists will be issued a roadside ticket with a QR code that will take them to an online portal to process their alleged violation or “contravention,” as the legislation states.

But critics say the new process, triggered by the 2020 passing of Bill 21 — the Provincial Administrative Penalties Act — ignores due process and deters citizens from fighting what they consider unfair fines.

“You no longer have the right to a trial, you’re guilty until proven innocent,” said Charlie Pester, a former police officer who operates POINTTS Calgary, which helps motorists fight traffic tickets.

“It’s a joke, police state stuff . . . it’s open season on the public. Is this what Albertans want?”

He noted the adjudicator, unlike the current system, can’t reduce fines or length of suspension.

The approach, which has been brewing since 2013 under PC, NDP and UCP governments, is a contravention of the Canadian Constitution, he said.

“The only thing that’s going to stop them is if the courts say it’s against the charter,” said Pester, adding the JTI effectively derails businesses such as his.

“The bottom line is, I’ll be shutting down shop. I’m done.”

Under JTI, those seeking a review of a ticket of $299 or less will pay a non-refundable fee of $50, while challenging a fine over $299 will cost $150.

Pester said he’s not surprised the provincial government hasn’t publicized the changes less than a month before their implementation.

“They’re using COVID as a cover — if the public knew, they’d be outraged,” he said.

A spokesperson for Alberta Transportation limited his comment on the changes.

“Alberta’s government has stated it will be expanding the SafeRoads program,” Rob Williams said in an email.

“That review is currently underway. We hope to make an announcement soon.”

But documents outlining the system are emphatic that it’s needed to address a backlogged court system, improve efficiency and reduce harm to the public, stating it’s expected to do just that.

“The JTI is focused on increasing capacity to the criminal court system, improving policing capacity across the province; improving public and traffic safety; and enhancing accessibility, efficiency and timeliness for all Albertans,” states one document.

Provincial documents say Phase 3 of SafeRoads Alberta will expand so “that it could be adapted for use by any regulated area of provincial jurisdiction that involves fines.”

A timeline for that will depend on how Phase 2 proceeds, it said.

Pester said that suggests what he calls an assault on civil liberties will go far beyond traffic enforcement.

“It’s not the end of it — they’re going to do every provincial offence and take away your rights to a fair trial,” he said.

A Calgary Police Service official said training on the new system should begin next week with implementation on Feb. 1.

The news comes about a month after the province said that beginning in April, municipalities will have to justify where they place photo radar traps to eliminate so-called “fishing holes”, and will be prevented from setting up in speed transition areas or those marked below 50 km/h except in construction and playground zones.

They’ll also require photo radar vehicles be made visible and that double ticketing of motorists within five minutes of the first one being issued be stopped.

But the Opposition NDP said those moves don’t go far enough, insisting the government should end the use of traffic cameras it calls cash cows.

Two years ago, CPS said photo enforcement revenue makes up around 70 per cent of police revenues annually, or approximately $40 million.

But in a report released in February 2019, a 170-page independent review of photo radar commissioned by the former NDP government found it earned municipalities $220 million in 2016-17, with marginal correlations to improved crash and fatal collision rates.

From article: https://calgarysun.com/news/local-ne...ine-challenges

[JULIUS]

All I can say is from reading this my interpretation is w&**^*%$# I can not believe what is happening to our once great province

[4extreme]

soon it will be cheaper to drive with no plate and take your chances.

[JDK71]

Originally Posted by 4extreme

soon it will be cheaper to drive with no plate and take your chances.

100%

[The Cook]

Originally Posted by JULIUS

All I can say is from reading this my interpretation is w&**^*%$# I can not believe what is happening to our once great province

Almost time to move to quebexico where the streets are lined with Alberta gold.

[Ken07AOVette]

Originally Posted by 4extreme

soon it will be cheaper to drive with no plate and take your chances.

cheaper yet not to speed, and actually stop for red lights, stop signs lol.

but

but

but

[Dewey Cox]

Originally Posted by Ken07AOVette

cheaper yet not to speed, and actually stop for red lights, stop signs lol.

but

but

but

Which is why you shouldn't have to automatically pay a fine given to you in error.

[JohninAB]

Originally Posted by Ken07AOVette

cheaper yet not to speed, and actually stop for red lights, stop signs lol.

but

but

but

It is about the loss of due process not speeding, red light infractions or stop signs.

Remember when the traffic light cameras screwed up and people were getting tickets which were issued in error. Under the new system you have to pay to contest the ticket and not in a court of law but with an adjudicator. That is not due process as we were taught.

[elkhunter11]

Mistakes do get made by red light cameras and the people interpreting them, just as mistakes do get made by radar operators, especially photo radar. People should not have to pay to get justice when mistakes are made, and more importantly, we should not lose our right to a trial. Taking away our right to a trial is all about money, just as the fees to challenge the charges are, and we lose our rights, to save the government, who operates with our money, some cash. And as we lose our right to a trial, we move closer to becoming a police state.

[KegRiver]

People should not contest tickets the deserved.

I'd wager, from what I've seen in over 2 million miles of driving, at least 90% of tickets that are contested were deserved.

[Dynamic]

I'm torn on this.

One one hand it makes sense. At least for these low level driving offences. Just hearing stories at work of people fighting their traffic ticket that was 100% deserved even by their own admission, and getting it reduced seems like a total waste of resources. I've never fought a traffic ticket before so forgive my ignorance but is it true a police officer has to be in court if you are fighting it.? If so there is a literally a million better things a police officer can be doing than wasting a part of a day sitting in a court room arguing with Jim Bob about his $250 failure to yield ticket on his way to Canadian Tire.

The part I don't agree with is the non refundable fee. Why not make it refundable if you win the challenge? Like when in the NHL when you challenge a call on the ice you should not be penalized for the challenge if you win, only if you lose.

[pikergolf]

I worked with a guy that got 4 to 6 photo radar tickets a year. He took time off to contest every one. He would ask if the machine had been properly calibrated and then pay the fine. Just because he could. What a waste of tax payer money.

[Penner]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

People should not contest tickets the deserved.

I'd wager, from what I've seen in over 2 million miles of driving, at least 90% of tickets that are contested were deserved.

90% I would suggest is being conservative.

[58thecat]

Drive accordingly to the road conditions defensively and we would not have issues.
This area has had three horrible accidents due to NOT driving accordingly but hey ask the dead what they think now!

Ohh yeah stop means stop until two that think it means roll on through or a yellow light means step on it ahhh eventually two meatheads meet and then it’s point fingers and lay blame.

50 in a a school zone and a camera picks this upon photo radar and yup got a problem not going to court

Cut cost and nail the guilty or have a cop nock on your window asking for licence and registration and your butt hurt....dam butt hurt people need to accept responsibilities for their actions.....period.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by KegRiver

People should not contest tickets the deserved.

I'd wager, from what I've seen in over 2 million miles of driving, at least 90% of tickets that are contested were deserved.

Exactly...guilty of all tickets I have been issued.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Dynamic

I'm torn on this.

One one hand it makes sense. At least for these low level driving offences. Just hearing stories at work of people fighting their traffic ticket that was 100% deserved even by their own admission, and getting it reduced seems like a total waste of resources. I've never fought a traffic ticket before so forgive my ignorance but is it true a police officer has to be in court if you are fighting it.? If so there is a literally a million better things a police officer can be doing than wasting a part of a day sitting in a court room arguing with Jim Bob about his $250 failure to yield ticket on his way to Canadian Tire.

The part I don't agree with is the non refundable fee. Why not make it refundable if you win the challenge? Like when in the NHL when you challenge a call on the ice you should not be penalized for the challenge if you win, only if you lose.

The non refundable fee to review a ticket, is just another way to increase revenue. Now whether you are guilty or innocent, as long as you are accused you pay. People who are found not guilty, should not pay. How can anyone justify the fee not being refunded, if the review finds that a mistake was made, and that you are not guilty?

[Ken07AOVette]

Originally Posted by Dewey Cox

Which is why you shouldn't have to automatically pay a fine given to you in error.

I agree completely.

Have you ever gotten a ticket in error?

I have not. And before anyone starts throwing numbers, I drove 4000km a week for a decade in my own vehicle without a single ticket, also have not had a ticket since 1997 which was 10kph over in Jasper at 2am.

Originally Posted by JohninAB

It is about the loss of due process not speeding, red light infractions or stop signs.

Remember when the traffic light cameras screwed up and people were getting tickets which were issued in error. Under the new system you have to pay to contest the ticket and not in a court of law but with an adjudicator. That is not due process as we were taught.

Agreed. We have to hope that when they find it is an error the process will be reversed.

[Dynamic]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The non refundable fee to review a ticket, is just another way to increase revenue. Now whether you are guilty or innocent, as long as you are accused you pay. People who are found not guilty, should not pay. How can anyone justify the fee not being refunded, if the review finds that a mistake was made, and that you are not guilty?

I agree 100%, that is what I am saying. I don't agree with the non-refundable part of it. IMO if you fight the ticket and win you get the fee is refundable and you don't pay the ticket. If you lose your case you pay the ticket and the fee becomes non refundable. I don't see it as a way to increase revenue but more a way to deter people from fighting traffic tickets that are deserved.

[Whipper Billy]

His concerns with Bill 21 Provincial Administrative Penalties Act and the 3 Phase implementation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXHF_fULvwA

[Ken07AOVette]

Originally Posted by 4extreme

soon it will be cheaper to drive with no plate and take your chances.

Learn this phrase;

'It must have been stolen at the wal-mart'

[Chuck_Wagon]

Originally Posted by scesfiremedic

The news comes about a month after the province said that beginning in April, municipalities will have to justify where they place photo radar traps to eliminate so-called “fishing holes”, and will be prevented from setting up in speed transition areas or those marked below 50 km/h except in construction and playground zones.

They’ll also require photo radar vehicles be made visible and that double ticketing of motorists within five minutes of the first one being issued be stopped.

This is a positive thing by the Prov. Gov.

Originally Posted by scesfiremedic

But the Opposition NDP said those moves don’t go far enough, insisting the government should end the use of traffic cameras it calls cash cows.

This comment by the NDP is laughable. They know full well the Provincial Gov. does not use or allow photo radar cameras on the Hwy network and would have a huge fight on their hands to try and stop municipal Gov. from using photo radar in cities, etc.
It’s deceitful of them to make it appear its a Prov. Gov. issue.

[6.5 shooter]

Chip, chip, chip as your rights are slowly chipped away. Amazing how many frogs are willing to sit in the water.

Just like they will never come for MY guns. LOL

[Ken07AOVette]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

Drive accordingly to the road conditions defensively and we would not have issues.
This area has had three horrible accidents due to NOT driving accordingly but hey ask the dead what they think now!

Ohh yeah stop means stop until two that think it means roll on through or a yellow light means step on it ahhh eventually two meatheads meet and then it’s point fingers and lay blame.

50 in a a school zone and a camera picks this upon photo radar and yup got a problem not going to court

Cut cost and nail the guilty or have a cop nock on your window asking for licence and registration and your butt hurt....dam butt hurt people need to accept responsibilities for their actions.....period.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The last calls to 911 for road help around here resulted in fatalities. People don't learn.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Dynamic

I agree 100%, that is what I am saying. I don't agree with the non-refundable part of it. IMO if you fight the ticket and win you get the fee is refundable and you don't pay the ticket. If you lose your case you pay the ticket and the fee becomes non refundable. I don't see it as a way to increase revenue but more a way to deter people from fighting traffic tickets that are deserved.

The fact that the fee is non refundable, will deter some innocent people from contesting a ticket, because even if found not guilty, they still pay. If they have to pay anyways, some people will just accept a wrongful ticket , and not challenge it. And what does the review consist of? If it's a quick glance at the paperwork, and they collect the fee, they make good money for the minutes it would take.

[sewerrat]

https://globalnews.ca/news/8494169/a...ustice-access/

So what you guys think?
It does help out the police officers a lot by freeing them up for more urgent things.
Quite often they go to court, and the offender is a no show, so the cop just wasted a whole day waiting in court.
Now you can appeal your ticket in 7 days for a fee.

I guess they have been doing this in BC and other provinces for some time now.

[Phil McCracken]

Simple...don't break the law...

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

Simple...don't break the law...

So are you saying that mistakes never happen, that every person that is issued a ticket is guilty? We should always have the right to a trial, because both people and equipment, are not perfect, and the idea of a non refundable fee to have someone review a ticket is asinine. No matter what system is used, a person that is found not guilty should not be charged a non refundable fee.

[tirebob]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

So are you saying that mistakes never happen, that every person that is issued a ticket is guilty? We should always have the right to a trial, because both people and equipment, are not perfect, and the idea of a non refundable fee to have someone review a ticket is asinine. No matter what system is used, a person that is found not guilty should not be charged a non refundable fee.

Yep... I had to fight a ticket a couple years back now that I was 100% not guilty of doing anything even remotely illegal. I already had to take a day off of work to go to court and they took one look at it, looked at the evidence I put forth and immediately said I did nothing wrong and quashed it. I was even told by the JP that the officer who wrote that ticket is famous for "throwing crap at the wall to see what sticks" and that if he wrote that ticket to 10 people, 9 would never show to fight it so in the end he doesn't care.

This is not a good thing... I am shocked anyone would think it was. There are better ways to do what the intent of this new law is I would think.

[Phil McCracken]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

So are you saying that mistakes never happen, that every person that is issued a ticket is guilty? We should always have the right to a trial, because both people and equipment, are not perfect, and the idea of a non refundable fee to have someone review a ticket is asinine. No matter what system is used, a person that is found not guilty should not be charged a non refundable fee.

No, I said simply do not break the law.

And as usual, thank you for your input...

[splake0]

Just another Kenny Government ****** up. Seems whatever he does it is the wrong thing to do.