Removal of Licence Plates - Unfit Vehicle Question (Sect 82)

Moderators: Reflections, admin, hwybear, Radar Identified, Decatur, bend

Post a Reply
oskar
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 1:55 pm

Removal of Licence Plates - Unfit Vehicle Question (Sect 82)

by: oskar on
Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:17 pm

Good Day,

This is my first post so please be kind. My question pertains to section 82 and removal of plates from what was deemed by an MTO inspector to be an unfit/unsafe vehicle (crack in exhaust, rust hole in door).

The key is that I received no documentation from the inspector/officer at the scene and was forced to tow my vehicle. Now, after reading the act, I see that subsection (11) states the following:
Defence if notice not received

(11) Despite subsections (9) and (10), a person is not guilty of an offence for refusing or failing to comply with a requirement under subsection (3), (4) or (5) unless the police officer or officer appointed for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act gave the person a written notice as required by subsection (6). 1999, c. 12, Sched. R, s. 14.
Now, sub-section (13) regarding removal of plates follows sub-section (11) and I am curious whether sub-section (11) applies to removal of plates. Of course, sisnce I was not provided ny documentation etc., I'm wondering whether they have the right to keep my plates.

Thanks for reading,

Dave
Top
User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:21 am
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

by: hwybear on
Fri Jun 12, 2009 4:22 pm

Sec 82

Sec 2 - officers can stop a vehicle and can have the driver move to a safe location for an inspection
Sec 3 - pertains to owners of vehicles having inspections done on the vehicle (OTHER than a safe location indicated by sec 2, ie garage)
Sec 4 - is to get the vehicle repaired
Sec 5 - after vehicle is repaired, officer can request to re-examine vehicle
and have the vehicle repaired again

Sec 11 - if a owner has not received a written notice, they do not have to comply with taking the vehicle to a shop, having repairs done, or having it re-examined by an officer, therefore the owner can not be charged with "failing to submit vehicle for tests"

Sec 12 vehicle can not have safety defects
Sec 13 plates can be seized

**************************
So officer inspections a vehicle at a safe location (82(2)) and finds a defect (Sec12) can seize the plate (Sec 13)
**************************
So officer tells the owner to take that vehicle to a garage for a safety (Sec 3) without a written notice.....owner can not be charged with failing to comply and plates can not be seized[/img]
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Top
Post a Reply
  • Similar Topics

Return to “General Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests