REVscene Automotive Forum - View Single Post

Traum · 03-18-2020, 03:29 PM

In the midst of the Wuhan coronavirus doom and gloom, I have some VI-related news to share.

I received the following letter from the OPCC yesterday, and I’d recommend anyone who is interested in the subject to read the OPCC letter first, before coming back to consider my personal assessment of the situation.

Page 1
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/gX...E=w699-h904-no

Page 2
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Rf...3=w699-h904-no

For the most part, I cannot determine whether this could be classified as good news or bad – at most, it is news, and exactly just that – news on the still-developing issue.

It is clear from the letter that the OPCC remains concerned whether the VPD has the legislated authority to direct a person to take their vehicle to a specific and police-indicated DIF (Designated Inspection Facility). I would even go as far as to say that the OPCC does not believe the VPD currently has this authority.

In light of that “lack of clarity”, the VPD is currently seeking a resolution from the provincial government to determine whether they have this authority. So the OPCC is asking CVSE to assist the Traffic Safety Committee of the BC Police Chiefs Association to interpret the MVAR and obtain this clarity.

Based on my previous correspondence/interactions with all the different bodies that are involved, my impressions are as follows:

- The CVSE absolutely do not want to get themselves into this legal mess. Having said that, I strongly believe they are an important stakeholder because the outcome of the decision will have a direct impact on the operations that they oversee. If the VPD (or any police, for that matter) is allowed to designate which DIF inspections are to be performed, it creates a huge inequality issue because non-dealership DIFs immediately become second class citizens even though in theory, their status as DIF should be the same as dealership DIFs.

- The BC Police Chiefs Association will obviously prefer to side with the police, and grant the authority to designate which DIF drivers are to go to upon receiving an N&O. Whether they can do that (ie. side with the police) is another question. Given what I have seen, I am very skeptical about what they will do. But maybe the OPCC’s position is enough to keep them honest.

I do not know what the outcome of this will be, but I sincerely hope that at least we would be able to eke out a small win on the freedom to choose our own shop to perform the inspection should we get issued with an N&O.

03-18-2020, 03:29 PM	#4434
Traum RS.net, helping ugly ppl have sex since 2001 Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Paradise, BC Posts: 8,382 Thanked 8,148 Times in 3,389 Posts Failed 262 Times in 148 Posts	In the midst of the Wuhan coronavirus doom and gloom, I have some VI-related news to share. I received the following letter from the OPCC yesterday, and I’d recommend anyone who is interested in the subject to read the OPCC letter first, before coming back to consider my personal assessment of the situation. Page 1 https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/gX...E=w699-h904-no Page 2 https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Rf...3=w699-h904-no For the most part, I cannot determine whether this could be classified as good news or bad – at most, it is news, and exactly just that – news on the still-developing issue. It is clear from the letter that the OPCC remains concerned whether the VPD has the legislated authority to direct a person to take their vehicle to a specific and police-indicated DIF (Designated Inspection Facility). I would even go as far as to say that the OPCC does not believe the VPD currently has this authority. In light of that “lack of clarity”, the VPD is currently seeking a resolution from the provincial government to determine whether they have this authority. So the OPCC is asking CVSE to assist the Traffic Safety Committee of the BC Police Chiefs Association to interpret the MVAR and obtain this clarity. Based on my previous correspondence/interactions with all the different bodies that are involved, my impressions are as follows: - The CVSE absolutely do not want to get themselves into this legal mess. Having said that, I strongly believe they are an important stakeholder because the outcome of the decision will have a direct impact on the operations that they oversee. If the VPD (or any police, for that matter) is allowed to designate which DIF inspections are to be performed, it creates a huge inequality issue because non-dealership DIFs immediately become second class citizens even though in theory, their status as DIF should be the same as dealership DIFs. - The BC Police Chiefs Association will obviously prefer to side with the police, and grant the authority to designate which DIF drivers are to go to upon receiving an N&O. Whether they can do that (ie. side with the police) is another question. Given what I have seen, I am very skeptical about what they will do. But maybe the OPCC’s position is enough to keep them honest. I do not know what the outcome of this will be, but I sincerely hope that at least we would be able to eke out a small win on the freedom to choose our own shop to perform the inspection should we get issued with an N&O.