Q&A - Overkill for a Broken Windshield?

Q&A ImageI got a Ticket for "Improperly Equipt Vehicle" under the MVA 219(1). For a Fine of $109. And a order to get my vehicle a Safety Inspection. I have a 2010 GMC Sierra that I keep in excellent shape in all respects. The Officer did not Specify any defects on my Ticket. How can I prepare a defenceman without notice of the law?

Also the Officer did not write his name on the ticket.

I Live approx 4h drive from the town in which the ticket was given, this making disclosure before the court date difficult especially not knowing the exact legal options I have.

Do officers Haft to be DOT trained in order to give tickets under 219(1) ?

Also said officer allowed me to drive my vehicle back to my town 4h for a "prompt" inspection. If I allegedly violated mva 219(1) I believe I should've have been allowed to travel if true, suggesting he is unsure of his allegations.

Also when I questioned him on the exact offences I was being charged with he was very unsure of himself and said that is why I am having the vehicle inspected by a trained authorized inspector.

My vehicle has now passed a full safety inspection, like I knew it would. I have a mechanical background and have worked along side CVSE authorized inspectors.

Now during the oral conversation with the officer I had under distress for multiple reasons, the officer said he was "unsure of my marker lights" and the fog light wiring. My fog lights are wired according to section mvar 4.11 about fog lights. The officer was under the belief that a fog light couldnt stay on with high beams. There is no such regulation that I could find.

Also he said my windshield needed replacement, not saying exactly why. I had acquired a rock chip on friday night, the day before my ticket. I believe It did not effect my visability and yet was going to replace my windshield promptly anyways because I like my truck in excellent shape. I believe I should have been given a fair treatment to get my windshield fixed.

I would not have driven my vehicle if I thought it would be unsafe in any respect. I believe I was ticketed due to the fact I was from 4h away and I was vocal about my understanding of the law he alleged I violated. He knew it would cost me more in gas approx. $150 and a day off work to fight said ticket. Vehicle had went thru the same roadblock as I that odviouslessy would not pass an inspection.

Also he said he didn't like my clear license plate cover. Which is designed to protect my limited edition plates. It is Not tinted, was clean, and not designed to beat and photo tickets of make the plate harder to read. I believe you must prove that a specific cover does violate the law, not just said "it could" therefore it does. Almost every vehicle "could" speed, that doesnt mean your quilty.

What happened to proof beyond a reasonable doubt? They Must prove a foreign material of a specific plate cover doesnt allow the numbers and letters on it to be plainly visible at all times...etc. that's the Law. It must be proven not to meet the requirement to be a violation. Also vehicles sold in BC must be legal according to our laws. Yet dealerships sell vehicles with plate covers with dealership info regularly.

Also many government workers including the police, especially the fire departments and other organizations have vehicles equipped with unit numbers or detachment info mounted above the plate thru the same holes obscuring the top of said plate, which is more of a violation than a clear cover.

Where does the law stop? Heavy rain or snow or fog can obscure a plate thru the air. So we can't drive unless conditions allow the plate to be seen?

BC government needs equality of the law and how its implimented. Along with clear and decisive definitions. Either way I was not charged with mvar 3.03 so that doesnt apply to this situation.

My main Issue is how can I defend myself without proper notice of the law? My only concreate evidence is my vehicle passed a full vehicle safety inspection without a single issue. That said how can I look up case law for traffic violations to defend myself? I have tried and it thus far has proved to be impossible for a everyday civilian to find these needed resources.

I believe laws should be amended accordingly to case law so everyday citizens can easily abide to them. the windshields chip was in the centre so not directly in my vision. It was a brand new chip that my vehicle had just received the day before as well. I was going to replace the windshield anyways. So when I went to book the inspection and windshield in.

The windshield place fit me in within a week and inspector wasn't available until the following monday. So the only thing done was the windshield replacement, no other repairs. It passed without any other repairs or corrections.

That said, the cop sited multiple things that were incorrect, like "checking the wiring" on a off road lamp that was covered properly. stating a "off road only lamp thats covered needs to be wired into the high beams." I caught him stating 3-4 "laws" that were evidently false.

Isn't there a reasonable amount of time from a rock chip is received until it can be fixed, like within a week of 2, Given said chip wasn't impairing my vision and wasn't severe. I mean the cop said I could drive 3h home and get it inspected there.... And once again Never sited the windshield on the ticket. Just said Improperly Equip Vehicle.

Don't I have the right to know which law I violated? Doesn't it speak volumes that the cop deemed it alright that i drove it home and gave me up to 30 days to complete a inspection.

I believe he was on a power trip and didn't like it when I corrected him about the laws, and he figured I wouldn't fight the ticket because it would cost me far more in gas to fight the ticket than the ticket is worth.

I also worked in a licensed inspection facility and everyone that I know including licensed mechanics and licensed inspectors while say I keep my vehicle in excellent condition.

Comments

Answer

There are a few questions and a number of statements here that have been dealt with on the site already, some more than once. As I mention in my guidelines for questions, you may be invited to use search to relieve me of repetitious answers.

1) If there is no defect specified on the Violation Ticket, only saying improperly equipped vehicle or something of that nature, it is defective. The ticket is required to give you sufficient information to know what you are charged with. Here are my thoughts on how to deal with a traffic ticket.

2) No, officers do not have to have specific training to write tickets for vehicle defects. They do need the experience to know when something is a defect and whether there is something in the MVA or MVAR that makes it improper to operate a vehicle with that defect.

3) Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is still required in traffic court.

4) It appears from this that you passed inspection after replacing your windshield, which suggests to me that there was a defect present when the officer examined your vehicle

5) Case law searches can be done on this site and the provincial court sites. You can also attend a courthouse library and request assistance from the librarian.

6) According to the MVAR, when a vehicle ceases to be properly equipped, you are required to repair it immediately or remove it from the road. Practically, the police will not apply that to minor defects but anything dangerous can be expected to provoke a response up to and including calling a tow truck to take you home.

Finally, there are a number of articles already on the site dealing with having an inspection order rescinded and making complaints about an officer's actions.

Google Ads