PSA: VPD Handing Out VIs Like Candy

[you!]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

The worst example was a first gen IS300 on steelies and snow tires.
Car was fully loaded with passengers and a roof mounted rack. Car was given a box 2 for being lowered and then the box 2 became a box 1 because the cop opened the hood and saw that the car had headers.

Why do people comply when asked to open their hoods? Everyone needs to fully exercise their rights because they cannot legally search your car without a warrant or reasonable suspicion.

If you get pulled over you should already know what's coming next so why not start recording the encounter? Since they are abusing their power everyone needs to protect themselves and if anything unjustified happens then at least you have a very good case for harassment using your video. If they insist to search you without a warrant or reasonable suspicion then demand for their superiors to show up at the scene but don't comply unless it's justified, if they are willing to abuse their power and waste your time then you may as well waste theirs.

[Eff-1]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

It would be nice if someone could get all the data from the VPD on how many box 1 and box 2 tickets they have handed out since August.

I'm sure you could put in a FOI request for that data. Information here:

https://vancouver.ca/police/organiza...n-privacy.html

Form here: https://vancouver.ca/police/assets/p...oi-request.pdf

[Eff-1]

Originally Posted by you!

Why do people comply when asked to open their hoods? Everyone needs to fully exercise their rights because they cannot legally search your car without a warrant or reasonable suspicion.

If you get pulled over you should already know what's coming next so why not start recording the encounter? Since they are abusing their power everyone needs to protect themselves and if anything unjustified happens then at least you have a very good case for harassment using your video. If they insist to search you without a warrant or reasonable suspicion then demand for their superiors to show up at the scene but don't comply unless it's justified, if they are willing to abuse their power and waste your time then you may as well waste theirs.

That's 100% not true. Do the rest of the world a favour and before you cry "ABUSE OF POWER" make sure you do your homework first. Otherwise you make the rest of the community look bad and uneducated.

The MVA allows an officer to inspect your vehicle to determine if it complies with the act and regs.

Motor Vehicle Act

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Eff-1

I'm sure you could put in a FOI request for that data. Information here:

https://vancouver.ca/police/organiza...n-privacy.html

Form here: https://vancouver.ca/police/assets/p...oi-request.pdf

I'll take a look at it tonight.
thanks.

My personal take on this whole thing, the system is flawed and needs an overhaul.
Can't stop the police from doing their job or tell them which laws to enforce and what laws to ignore.

I don't think any of this is a direct result of Duke's actions.

And if people have to unmod their cars to pass, then the system is working (kinda)

I watched a 2019 911 C4S (not Marco) start up their car and the stock exhaust was loud. And his exhaust wasn't the sport option and the sport button was not on.
But when he drove away, you could barely hear the exhaust.

[Berzerker]

Checks and balances exist for a reason. Get a ticket and don't think you deserve it? Dispute it. This is a right granted to us. This ensures that tickets are given in good faith and deserved to the person receiving it.

A VI has NOTHING that does this. An officer can give a VI notice AT ANY TIME to ANY VEHICLE, with NO option to dispute or argue if it was given in good faith. It then puts the burden on the person to spend money to prove innocence. This is the problem. The question is, How do we go about getting it "fixed"?

Berz out.

[nexusxv]

Originally Posted by Berzerker

A VI has NOTHING that does this. An officer can give a VI notice AT ANY TIME to ANY VEHICLE, with NO option to dispute or argue if it was given in good faith.

And you Cant make VPD pay back, if you passed

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Berzerker

A VI has NOTHING that does this. An officer can give a VI notice AT ANY TIME to ANY VEHICLE, with NO option to dispute or argue if it was given in good faith. It then puts the burden on the person to spend money to prove innocence. This is the problem. The question is, How do we go about getting it "fixed"?

Very well put.

Like Westopher. Getting shit on for red seat belts. That was definitely a stretch.

Technically, the officers can ask if the car was maintained at the dealer or did you DIY. if you DIY, then they could issue a VI cause they don't know if you did the work properly and issue a box 1 cause they don't feel the car is safe.

Rules are definitely vague at best.

[Traum]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

It would be nice if someone could get all the data from the VPD on how many box 1 and box 2 tickets they have handed out since August.

As much as I'd like to know this as well, I am not sure what purpose it would server other than satisfying my own curiousity.

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

My personal take on this whole thing, the system is flawed and needs an overhaul.
Can't stop the police from doing their job or tell them which laws to enforce and what laws to ignore.

You can and cannot stop the police from doing their jobs or tell them which laws to enforce and which laws to ignore. On one hand, the police has been given the authority within the limits of the Police Act and other legislations to pursue whatever law enforcement work they deem necessary, so we can't stop them from doing what they've been authorized to do. On the other hand, police resources are just like another other government resources. There is a limit to what is available, and at any given time, they have priorities to focus on as well as ones to ignore. With the VPD and other municipal police force at least, any time an admissible service and policy complaint gets filed, the police board is required to get involved. Respective mayors sit on the police board, and they are politicians we elect. The police board sets priorities for their municipal police forces -- one of the reasons why Surrey wants their own police force -- and it is through the police board that regular citizens have some level of influence we can exercise to determine the priorities the municipal police should pursue.

The moral of the story is -- if enough valid official complaints get filed, there is a chance for positive change to shift away from this VI BS.

[Fok]

Just a suggestion, if you guys don't want to go on camera, maybe get them to not show your face and blur out the license plates?

Shows that we are afraid of repercussions of speaking out?

[Badhobz]

Originally Posted by SumAznGuy

Some of the examples he gave me were Ferarri 458 and 488 for noise violations.
All were bone stock, and no Ferarri dealers in Vancouver to do the inspections so they ended up going to Canadian Tire.
The owners contacted him to tow the cars in an enclosed trailer to CT.

makes no sense. Ferrari Maserati of Vancouver is an authorized dealer, and they will do the VI.

da fuck does a canadian tire guy know about exotics?!

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Berzerker

A VI has NOTHING that does this. An officer can give a VI notice AT ANY TIME to ANY VEHICLE, with NO option to dispute or argue if it was given in good faith. It then puts the burden on the person to spend money to prove innocence. This is the problem. The question is, How do we go about getting it "fixed"?

At the risk of sounding like a one trick pony, I think a viable and necessary thing to do is for as many people to submit an official service and policy complaint to the OPCC as well as our elected politicians regarding the inherent unfairness of the VI system.

The flaws of the system is well known:

- vehicle owners can be tangibly penalized (from incurring the cost of inspection) based on nothing more than mere suspicion from the police

- essentially, vehicle owners are assumed to be guilty until proven innocent, and we must prove that innocence with our own money; this is completely at odds with the presumption of innocence that is fundamental to our legal system

- there is no recourse to recoup the financial loss if we are shown to be innocent

- even if a vehicle owner has proven his innocence (with a passing VI), the same owner can be caught in a never-ending cycle of additional VIs since the police can write you up another VI again based on his own suspicions. And as before, there is no need for him to prove anything.

- more commonly, subsequent VIs will also be accompanied by either an additional ticket for failing to comply with the previous VI and/or having your plates taken away

I am hoping to wrap up my initial complaint on camber and vehicle lowering soon, and it seems like looking into the unfairness of the VI system should be something for me to try next. I can see some strong arguments on a VI complaint, but again, I really can't do it alone. We need numbers to flood the complaints channel because the authorities and police boards respond to numbers. That is how they work.

[SumAznGuy]

Originally Posted by Badhobz

makes no sense. Ferrari Maserati of Vancouver is an authorized dealer, and they will do the VI.

da fuck does a canadian tire guy know about exotics?!

I assume that is where you took your Mas?

He said the owner called the police officer and the cop said CT won't do any of that funny pay to pass business.

[vmak12345]

Originally Posted by Traum

At the risk of sounding like a one trick pony, I think a viable and necessary thing to do is for as many people to submit an official service and policy complaint to the OPCC as well as our elected politicians regarding the inherent unfairness of the VI system.

The flaws of the system is well known:

- vehicle owners can be tangibly penalized (from incurring the cost of inspection) based on nothing more than mere suspicion from the police

- essentially, vehicle owners are assumed to be guilty until proven innocent, and we must prove that innocence with our own money; this is completely at odds with the presumption of innocence that is fundamental to our legal system

- there is no recourse to recoup the financial loss if we are shown to be innocent

- even if a vehicle owner has proven his innocence (with a passing VI), the same owner can be caught in a never-ending cycle of additional VIs since the police can write you up another VI again based on his own suspicions. And as before, there is no need for him to prove anything.

- more commonly, subsequent VIs will also be accompanied by either an additional ticket for failing to comply with the previous VI and/or having your plates taken away

I am hoping to wrap up my initial complaint on camber and vehicle lowering soon, and it seems like looking into the unfairness of the VI system should be something for me to try next. I can see some strong arguments on a VI complaint, but again, I really can't do it alone. We need numbers to flood the complaints channel because the authorities and police boards respond to numbers. That is how they work.

any chance you can write a generalised email of the unfairness in the VI system so that any concerned member of the public can just copy+paste and send off the same email to authorities (tbh I'm not sure who to send if off to... someone help me here please)

technically speaking this way even people who have not received a VI can voice up their concerns as a member of the general public.
even if you haven't gotten a VI, or drive a completely stock economical car (like civics, corollas, prius, etc.) you can still be a concerned member of the public that "fears" being pulled over for unfair / unjust VI tickets (like having compliant steelies winter rims+tires put on by the dealer) which makes you "eligible" to send off such an email anyway. (basically so anyone can send off such an email to generate more noise)

also this way we're not purposely targeting a specific officer (even though anecdotal evidence shows that it's mainly a few of them), but for more effective noise / publicity, it's probably better to not target / name officers (in my opinion at least)

not sure how well this would work... can someone chime in please?

[vmak12345]

Originally Posted by vmak12345

any chance you can write a generalised email of the unfairness in the VI system so that any concerned member of the public can just copy+paste and send off the same email to authorities (tbh I'm not sure who to send if off to... someone help me here please)

technically speaking this way even people who have not received a VI can voice up their concerns as a member of the general public.
even if you haven't gotten a VI, or drive a completely stock economical car (like civics, corollas, prius, etc.) you can still be a concerned member of the public that "fears" being pulled over for unfair / unjust VI tickets (like having compliant steelies winter rims+tires put on by the dealer) which makes you "eligible" to send off such an email anyway. (basically so anyone can send off such an email to generate more noise)

also this way we're not purposely targeting a specific officer (even though anecdotal evidence shows that it's mainly a few of them), but for more effective noise / publicity, it's probably better to not target / name officers (in my opinion at least)

not sure how well this would work... can someone chime in please?

and even if its just those of us here on RS lurking on this thread (which i think from a previous post is about 100 or so people), that should make some noise if we all send in the email...i hope

[RevYouUp]

Originally Posted by adrnlnrush00

Geez... VI's for noise violations? That's such overkill. How does a car being "noisy" make it an unsafe not-roadworthy vehicle that would mandate a VI.

There's already a ticket worth $109 and 3 points for noise violations. No need for a VI for a noise violation.

Then again, all logic is out the window with Cain & Co.

You know why they don't issue the $109 ticket instead? Probably because it can easily be disputed. Such cunts

[Berzerker]

Originally Posted by RevYouUp

You know why they don't issue the $109 ticket instead? Probably because it can easily be disputed. Such cunts

Exactly. Why issue a ticket that can be disputed when you can just issue a VI and have the person pay MORE than the cost of the ticket and no chance for dispute.

Berz out.

[RevYouUp]

Originally Posted by Berzerker

Exactly. Why issue a ticket that can be disputed when you can just issue a VI and have the person pay MORE than the cost of the ticket and no chance for dispute.

Berz out.

Makes you wonder if Cain and Co. will still issue VIs if they can be disputed. Probably not.

[!LittleDragon]

Anyone ever try taking it to small claims court? If you can't make a claim against VPD then why not try claiming against the officer personally? Exhaust all options.... Even if you don't win, maybe if this Cain guy has to show up to small claims all the time, he'll stop?

[DaJo]

Originally Posted by RevYouUp

Makes you wonder if Cain and Co. will still issue VIs if they can be disputed. Probably not.

More than likely no, because there is now a way to make the officer look bad in front of a judge.

Originally Posted by !LittleDragon

Anyone ever try taking it to small claims court? If you can't make a claim against VPD then why not try claiming against the officer personally? Exhaust all options.... Even if you don't win, maybe if this Cain guy has to show up to small claims all the time, he'll stop?

Not sure how much it cost to hire a lawyer these days but I'm assuming not cheap... Probably why many decided against this route. If anyone has extra money to spend, do it for a good cause!

[!LittleDragon]

You don't need a lawyer for small claims. Could bring one if you want but it's not worth the cost unless you're going after thousands.

And don't you win by default if he decides not to show up? If you passed and he wasted your time, why not waste his?

[Alpine]

Honestly, best bet is to just hammer the VPD with complaint emails and phone calls if you have a valid case (ie. vehicle that received a VI but passed without any changes) and bring up the fact that you are concerned that their officers may not be interpreting the MVA correctly (ie. stock vehicle with VI). If an officer is unable to interpret the MVA correctly then that officer should not be enforcing it as they don't have the appropriate training or judgement to do so. When they receive enough complaints they will look into it and review it. Until then nothing will change. 1 complaint every 100 VIs sounds like the officer is doing a pretty great job to me. 20 complaints every 100 VIs and that will raise an eyebrow (just throwing #'s out).

If you have a valid case, you HAVE TO file a complaint. Right now this is OUR problem, but by complaining and taking up the VPD's time/$/resources it becomes THEIR problem as well.

[nsx042003]

Originally Posted by Berzerker

Checks and balances exist for a reason. Get a ticket and don't think you deserve it? Dispute it. This is a right granted to us. This ensures that tickets are given in good faith and deserved to the person receiving it.

A VI has NOTHING that does this. An officer can give a VI notice AT ANY TIME to ANY VEHICLE, with NO option to dispute or argue if it was given in good faith. It then puts the burden on the person to spend money to prove innocence. This is the problem. The question is, How do we go about getting it "fixed"?

Berz out.

you basically can't, because all these power were granted by the general public. Same goes with roadside checks and all roadside prohibitions.

The only way to reverse that power is to have the public overthrow it. But i doubt it will happen at all, due to the stigma of the modified scene

[vmak12345]

Originally Posted by nsx042003

you basically can't, because all these power were granted by the general public. Same goes with roadside checks and all roadside prohibitions.

The only way to reverse that power is to have the public overthrow it. But i doubt it will happen at all, due to the stigma of the modified scene

or if we can keep it focused to the abuse of power.. maybe it can generate some noise with the public?

like framing it: "do you put on winter wheels / tires? under current laws you could be fined and have no way to dispute it! be ready to pay some money to prove your innocence!"

I would imagine the "pay to prove your innocence" part will not go well with A LOT of the general public.

[E90M3]

Originally Posted by vmak12345

or if we can keep it focused to the abuse of power.. maybe it can generate some noise with the public?

like framing it: "do you put on winter wheels / tires? under current laws you could be fined and have no way to dispute it! be ready to pay some money to prove your innocence!"

I would imagine the "pay to prove your innocence" part will not go well with A LOT of the general public.

The thing is, people are only getting tickets which you can dispute. Not VIs for "winter wheels/tires". IF people were getting actual VIs for that then it would be helpful.

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by you!

if they are willing to abuse their power and waste your time then you may as well waste theirs.

Originally Posted by !LittleDragon

And don't you win by default if he decides not to show up? If you passed and he wasted your time, why not waste his?

Originally Posted by Alpine

but by complaining and taking up the VPD's time/$/resources it becomes THEIR problem as well.

isn't it funny how just the previous page y'all were thanking the guy who said every resource counts and traffic enforcement should be tackling gang violence/petty theft, but now we should waste police resources as a retaliation?

this is why the OP gave up...got burnt out due to the lack of cohesion in trying to resolve this VI fiasco

but yeah, let's keep calling peace officers cunts and cucks on the Internet/open forum, that'll show 'em