Quote:
Originally Posted by Traum
In a previous CTV article about the VI issue, a traffic lawyer has recommended that a challenge to have the VI dismissed will likely have to begin at the BC Supreme Court level. The registration fee alone starts at $200. And then there are lawyer fees. Nobody is gonna do that.
The VPD investigation report to my complaint has also indicated that should a driver believe he has been wronfully issued an N&O, the appropriate recourse is civil litigation. It is not obvious to me whether that means you sue at the provincial court level, the Supreme Court level, or whether it would just be a small claims court / Civil Resolution Tribunal type of thing.
The point is, there is no dispute mechanism like there is on a speeding ticket. This is why the VI mechanism is such BS.
|
The appropriate court for the case (At least for civil litigation) is largely determined by the dollar value of the claim.
My suspicion is that despite the dollar value of a VI related claim likely being < $5,001 the CRT would not hear the case and would direct the claimant to file with Small Claims court.
Although the CRT or Small Claims court would potentially provide you with a favorable outcome (Assuming you've been wrongfully VI'd), it would likely do very little in terms of establishing meaningful case law that would potentially benefit others.
Assuming the a case of being "wrongful VI'd" made it to the Supreme Court of BC, and assuming that the court ruled in favor of the claimant, the decision would generate meaningful case law. However, the Province has the ability to amend or revise legislation (IE: The MVA) at any time, and a SC decision that is viewed as unfavorable to legislators would likely stimulate unfavorable revisions or amendments to the MVA to address what would essentially be viewed as existing flawed legislation.
The above is a gross simplification, and there are really two separate types of cases being discussed in this thread;
1. Where vehicles have not been modified (IE: 100% OEM vehicles with loud factory exhausts, this is what I've referred to as "wrongfully VI'd")
2. Where vehicles have been modified (IE: Modified vehicles with aftermarket exhausts)
My assumption is the example 1 would likely be successful with a civil claim and would be awarded damages... example 2 would not be successful with a civil claim and would not be awarded damages.
Having said all that, some people in this thread really enjoy "muddying the waters" attempting to confuse examples 1 and 2 for their benefit. Even if the VPD have "wrongfully" issued one N&O for VI to a 100% OEM vehicle it does not render their issuance of N&Os for VI to all vehicles as invalid (Especially those that are modified, even just a little...).