PSA: VPD Handing Out VIs Like Candy

[!Aznboi128]

I know a few shops that can do inspections always take photos for reference.

[68style]

Originally Posted by ricecookerboi

General question, wonder if you guys have any insights.

1. If i had a VI a month ago and brought it to a shop to get it checked out and everything " CHECKS OUT". And I continue driving like that without adding any "mods".
Then... you get stopped a month after and the officer says that VI and the sticker on your windshield is not valid, "fake" and need to be ripped off, and siezes your VI paper work from the shop you did it from last month.. AND gives you another VI ontop your approved VI..... does this make sense to you guys? Is this allowed?. How can a certified VI shop be invalid....?


If any Rs'rs can clear it up for me or clarify it would be greatly appreciated.

There isn't anything you can do. They can give you as many VI's as they want... they could VI you driving out of your inspection... and VI you driving away from the next one again.

I think he got carried away saying it was "fake" nor did he need to seize your papers... he didn't need to say or do that, likewise you're fixated on the fact he said that and it's totally beside the point... he is within his rights to just give you one because he feels like it and does not need to justify it in any way whatsoever. Doesn't matter when you got your previous inspection done, they don't have 24/7 surveillance on you to verify you didn't change anything on your car for a month or a week or whatever it was since you last got inspected and they certainly won't go on your word.

There's currently no mechanism to fight this BS outside of small claims court, and even then it would be very difficult to prove.

[ricecookerboi]

Originally Posted by 68style

There isn't anything you can do. They can give you as many VI's as they want... they could VI you driving out of your inspection... and VI you driving away from the next one again.

I think he got carried away saying it was "fake" nor did he need to seize your papers... he didn't need to say or do that... he could just give you one because he felt like it. Doesn't matter when you got your previous inspection done, they don't have 24/7 surveillance on you to verify you didn't change anything on your car for a month or a week or whatever it was since you last got inspected and they certainly won't go on your word.

There's currently no mechanism to fight this BS outside of small claims court, and even then it would be very difficult to prove.

Thanks for the insight 68style. Damn .... time to go back to stock now lol good bye mod life.

[Jobo]

Originally Posted by ricecookerboi

General question, wonder if you guys have any insights.

1. If i had a VI a month ago and brought it to a shop to get it checked out and everything " CHECKS OUT". And I continue driving like that without adding any "mods".
Then... you get stopped a month after and the officer says that VI and the sticker on your windshield is not valid, "fake" and need to be ripped off, and siezes your VI paper work from the shop you did it from last month.. AND gives you another VI ontop your approved VI..... does this make sense to you guys? Is this allowed?. How can a certified VI shop be invalid....?


If any Rs'rs can clear it up for me or clarify it would be greatly appreciated.

The officer was questioning whether the shop you brought it to was legitimate or not. There ARE certified shops that are willing to pass your car if you're willing to pay up, which is illegal. If you legitimately got your car passed, why cut out the audio for the shop name in your video?

Help all of us out in case we get VI'd as well

[Tone Loc]

Originally Posted by ricecookerboi

Thanks for the insight 68style. Damn .... time to go back to stock now lol good bye mod life.

That's exactly the problem.

Are police officers experts on every single performance package offered for every single car? Such as M Performance, AMG S, even Honda HFP? Do police officers carry certified measuring equipment to make judgments on things like ride height, exhaust noise, etc?

When I was moving, I loaded up my old TSX full of stuff. I'm talking the entire trunk and passenger area aside from the drivers' seat had boxes, bags, small appliances. The rear of the car was squatting significantly lower than stock. And obviously there was more camber than normal. Could a car like that, an otherwise stock car, get a VI because it is "too low" or for "irregular camber"? Is a police officer a certified technician who has knowledge of "normal" suspension behavior?

Seems to me that what people who are wishing to fight these types of actions - which, unfortunately seems to be out of the question unless you have a ton of money and/or time - should be focussing on is what specialized certification and training, if any, is given to police officers to decide what is worthy of a VI and what is not...

[68style]

I have to drive my MR2 Turbo into Vancouver on Saturday and I am genuinely concerned... TRD springs (about 1.25" lower), 17" Gram Lights and GReddy exhaust... not exactly crazy mods and no camber issues beyond the fact MR2's are pretty cambered in the rear stock from the factory, but..............

[Energy]

Not sure how accurate or useful this is but I found this:

https://www.drivesmartbc.ca/enforcem...rder-questions

I have the following advice:

A VI cannot be disputed like a ticket, however, if it is not justified you may be able to have it withdrawn.

1) When it is issued, politely question the officer and ask for the items that triggered the order. If you know that they are lawful mods, point it out, and explain why you know it is legal. Ask them to reconsider issuing the VI.

2) If #1 doesn't work, go on with your day and do some research to make sure the mods mentioned are legal. Call the Detachment/Department the issuing officer works at and try to make an appointment to discuss a reconsideration with the officer.

3) If #2 doesn't work or the officer does not want to discuss it with you, contact the same Detachment/Department in a second phonecall and make an appointment to discuss the VI with the issuing officer's supervisor.

4) If #3 doesn't work at this point you are pretty much stuck with the VI unless you want to try one last appeal to the head of the Detachment/Department. Chances are that they will go with the supervisor's decision unless you can convince them otherwise.

5) If you go through with the VI and the facility finds no defects, you can consider a complaint to the RCMP Public Complaints Commission or the BC Police Complaints Commission depending if it was an RCMP officer or a city police officer that issued the VI.

6) You could consider trying to recover the cost of the VI, but at this point I suspect that you would need legal counsel for advice.

If you do have defects, even if they are different from the ones the issuing officer originally pointed out, perhaps it is best to take the VI as it is. All equipment violations are $86 tickets and if written under section 219(1) MVA they end up on your driving record. The VI doesn't (unless you have a National Safety Code Number - commercial vehicles).

I would also try and protect myself by having the inspection facility that passed my vehicle list the mods that I had made and they had passed on a piece of letterhead that they attach to the pass document. If you are stopped again, you can use this to point out to the officer that the mod they are questioning was passed by the facility.

[ricecookerboi]

Originally Posted by Jobo

The officer was questioning whether the shop you brought it to was legitimate or not. There ARE certified shops that are willing to pass your car if you're willing to pay up, which is illegal. If you legitimately got your car passed, why cut out the audio for the shop name in your video?

Help all of us out in case we get VI'd as well

jobo !, I didn't cut the audio in the video. It was a legitimate shop and I said In Burnaby in the video. Didn't want the cop to ask more question and take more of my time because I had places to go during that moment so I just said where which was in burnaby.

They were mentioning, yeah we see a lot of cars going " to abc 123 " shop and just using that, but I know the shop I went to isn't just a abc w.e shop. But yeah it was just wrong place wrong time to be honest... I guess.

Lesson. Pay to play. But still the car who was flagged down while i was waiting for a ticket, he was plain stock and just had a red Honda Emblem from what I saw... literally sigh. Just not fair.

[nexusxv]

Well, i see only one solution, Camera on, be polite, calm. Go to inspection, if everything is legal and passed, go and write a complaint on officer with all attached documents and video files.

tell that stop was unjustified, he was unprofessional in evaluating vehicle condition. Of course this complain would go to nowhere and would be closed, but let them enjoy a paper work and your close to everyday calls with question, how is investigation is going.

Complaints mechanism exist for a reason. When there will be too much complaints - it may trigger higherups.

[JDMDreams]

Lol what about Alberta plates, can they vi you if you have none bc plates?

[GabAlmighty]

Originally Posted by JDMDreams

Lol what about Alberta plates, can they vi you if you have none bc plates?

I don't believe so. At least I hope not, as that has always been my backup plan so I can drive a missile around town.

[TouringTeg]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

So just in case this spreads to the island somehow...

Does this mean my mid-pipe w/ high flow cat has to come off? It doesn't stink when the car is fully warmed up. Still have my stock cat around, but it will be a PITA to install it since it's heavy AF.

Hoping it doesn't spread over to Victoria. I would rather the cops spend some time catching red light runners and late left turners. Oh and everyone speeding in the McKenzie/Hwy 1 interchange construction zone.

[Expresso]

Originally Posted by dorian

E92 335i / VRSF 5" FMIC - Charge Pipe - DCI - Downpipes / TurboSmart Plumb Back DV / XHP Stage 3 / E40 Custom Tune by Wedge / APEX ARC8 / Michelin PS4S / 11.95 @ 116 / Instagram.com/silent11n54

Originally Posted by 68style

I have to drive my MR2 Turbo into Vancouver on Saturday and I am genuinely concerned... TRD springs (about 1.25" lower), 17" Gram Lights and GReddy exhaust...

68style: You didn't do it right.

[JDMDreams]

Cheaper insurance plus no front plates, just saying

Originally Posted by GabAlmighty

I don't believe so. At least I hope not, as that has always been my backup plan so I can drive a missile around town.

[nexusxv]

Guys again, this is truth, that they can write vi 5 minutes after inspection, we can write complains, after every inspection. The complain mechanism was maid up for such situations. Just do not be lazy to use it. And calm down. Think strategically and behave perfectly.

[J.C]

My old plates are collecting dust. Should throw them on my beater

https://imgur.com/a/eKhNS3K

[BIC_BAWS]

Guys let's get back on topic. It seems like the issue is no longer targeting modified cars, as for many of us, we know it's pay to play.

The issue at hand seems to be lack of education and knowledge.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[AzNightmare]

Originally Posted by Tone Loc

should be focussing on is what specialized certification and training, if any, is given to police officers to decide what is worthy of a VI and what is not...

Probably none... Seems like a waste of resources to train Police in detecting what car is worthy of VI considering on a grand scheme of things, modified cars are not dangerous. Of course there are extremes, but if it's that extreme, you don't need training to make that call. Anyhow, this is all pretty BS, especially if lightly modded to stock looking cars are also being VI'ed.


I'm not sure if this was answered earlier when I asked. But what's the MVA code for wheel fender gap?
From what I'm aware, I thought as long as the wheels aren't tucked, it's not illegal? Correct me if I'm wrong.

[- kT]

Originally Posted by AzNightmare

I'm not sure if this was answered earlier when I asked. But what's the MVA code for wheel fender gap?
From what I'm aware, I thought as long as the wheels aren't tucked, it's not illegal? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Clearance height
7.091 A motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 4 500 kg must have a minimum clearance for all parts of it, other than the wheels in contact with the level roadway, that is no lower than the lowest point on the rim of any wheel in contact with the roadway.

"minimum clearance for all parts of it" also means that you don't rub fender or liner when turning or at full lock. there's another section in the MVA (can't find it now) that states that your wheel can't protrude past the furthest point of the body (aka your wheels can't poke)

your wheels can be "tucked", but that usually means visible camber, therefore

The caster, camber or toe-in of a vehicle shall not be out of adjustment to the extent that it is apparent visually.

[GS8]

Geezus, over 18,000 views in 4 days.

Obviously, this thread has more than just the attention of RS itself. I'd suggest maybe not posting anything potentially self-incriminating because you never know who's reading and what side of the issue they're on.

I'm not a lawyer but I play one on Facebook.

[BIC_BAWS]

Originally Posted by GS8

Geezus, over 18,000 views in 4 days.

Obviously, this thread has more than just the attention of RS itself. I'd suggest maybe not posting anything potentially self-incriminating because you never know who's reading and what side of the issue they're on.

I'm not a lawyer but I play one on Facebook.

That's why I've always said "allegedly". And have tried to always present facts.

[mb_]

From what I've heard, that Civic in the video got pulled over for exhaust too loud

Originally Posted by Energy

Not sure how accurate or useful this is but I found this:

https://www.drivesmartbc.ca/enforcem...rder-questions

This is what I did when I got a box 2 years ago, got it successfully cancelled

[AzNightmare]

Originally Posted by - kT

"minimum clearance for all parts of it" also means that you don't rub fender or liner when turning or at full lock. there's another section in the MVA (can't find it now) that states that your wheel can't protrude past the furthest point of the body (aka your wheels can't poke)

your wheels can be "tucked", but that usually means visible camber, therefore

From my understanding, that code is specifically on ground clearance. All parts of your car cannot be lower than the lowest point of your rim.
Basically your car cannot be lower than the height of your tire sidewall.

Either way, if you have 1" fender gap or 1 finger gap or whatever, there's no MVA code against that...?

[SkunkWorks]

Am I the only one to catch the "anything on your car that is aftermarket, is illegal" statement made by the officers from both my experience and that of the cringe vlog posted earlier?

That is NOT true. Nowhere does it say in the MVA that anything not factory - be it exhaust, wheels, suspension, etc. - is not illegal. There are specific conditions that these parts must adhere to, but there is no blanket catch all.

So the issue is that the officers are giving out VIs based off that - which is unfair and unwarranted (slammed and mega cambered super loud cars notwithstanding).

Based off what they're saying, technically anyone with a bike rack or trailer hitch even can be pulled over. Has anyone noticed any trucks getting pulled? Knobby all-terrain tires that stick out past the fenders and bush bars and light bars are all 'illegal' according to the current VPD mantra.

I realize RS is sportscar-dominated but I know people in here frequent the 4x4 groups too.

This would be really interesting if it were only younger folk in sportscars that this anything-aftermarket-is-illegal campaign is targeting.

[- kT]

Originally Posted by AzNightmare

From my understanding, that code is specifically on ground clearance. All parts of your car cannot be lower than the lowest point of your rim.
Basically your car cannot be lower than the height of your tire sidewall.

Either way, if you have 1" fender gap or 1 finger gap or whatever, there's no MVA code against that...?

you're not wrong, there is no specific MVA section for finger gap per se, but the ground clearance code would have a direct tie in, no? - no finger gap means you're either gonna rub at lock, or rub all the time (fender liner), same would arguably apply to one finger gap (depending on alignment specs, wheel size + width, etc - all of which have their own set of MVA sections)

Originally Posted by SkunkWorks

Based off what they're saying, technically anyone with a bike rack or trailer hitch even can be pulled over. Has anyone noticed any trucks getting pulled? Knobby all-terrain tires that stick out past the fenders and bush bars and light bars are all 'illegal' according to the current VPD mantra.

I realize RS is sportscar-dominated but I know people in here frequent the 4x4 groups too.

This would be really interesting if it were only younger folk in sportscars that this anything-aftermarket-is-illegal campaign is targeting.

at this point it seems like it's not really coming down to what's true or not - especially given that people with stock but sportier from factory cars are getting VI'd. arguing with the officer roadside is going to do nothing, you could have a copy of the MVA with you at all times to reference and it still wouldn't do squat from the sounds of it. if this is as personal as it's been made to sound in various posts, he's (they've?) got a vendetta, and they have the power to exercise the full flex of the law - not a great combo. only solutions IMO are to fight back through voicing concern to the right people (including media), and laying low. knowing you're in the right isn't going to get you out of anything at this point, so it'd seem

that said, OP said in his first post that moniquesong's Jeep was VI'd (allegedly), so I don't think this blitz is contained to cars