View Single Post
Old 03-03-2015, 02:18 AM   #12 (permalink)
WD40
EcoMod Proof of Concept
 
WD40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chilliwack B.C. CANADA
Posts: 245

WD-40's Insight - '00 Honda Insight
Gen-1 Insights
Team Honda
90 day: 56.04 mpg (US)

WD-40's Mirage - '15 Mitsubushi Mirage ES
Mitsubishi
90 day: 46.05 mpg (US)

WD-40's Sonata Hybrid - '17 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid Limited
Thanks: 81
Thanked 85 Times in 45 Posts
The Motor vehicle Act section 25 ..
Notifications and orders

25.08 (1) Despite an inspection certificate being in force, the director or a peace officer may, on having reasonable and probable grounds to believe that a vehicle may not comply with the standards, notify the owner or operator of a vehicle to present it for inspection to a designated inspection facility within the period set out in the notification.

(2) The director or a peace officer may order the owner or operator of a vehicle, in respect of which no inspection certificate is in force, to surrender to either of them the vehicle licence or the number plates, or both, for that vehicle.

(3) The owner or operator must comply with a notification under subsection (1) and an order under subsection (2).

(4) After examining a vehicle presented to the designated inspection facility following a notification under subsection (1), an authorized person must revoke any unexpired certificate, issue an inspection report in the manner set out in section 25.13 and

(a) issue a new inspection certificate of approval under section 25.13 (2), or

(b) issue an interim inspection certificate under section 25.13 (3)

on being satisfied that the conditions for issuing those certificates have been met.

(5) A notification under subsection (1) may require the owner or operator to notify the director or peace officer of the result of the required inspection.

[en. B.C. Reg. 304/2001; am. B.C. Reg. 135/2003, s. 3.]

The way it reads I have no choice but to submit to the inspection or surrender the plates and the car maintains a HOLD.
I have read that you can not take this to court as the judges will not hear it, the police have the right to impose this to anyone if they feel somethings in question.
The other thing I read in the act is that the police can basically keep imposing a new inspection any time they please.
Bottom line they will always win we lose do to the fact we can't even take it to court.

As for the $109 fine ..
General maintenance Act

4.04 (1) Lighting devices required by this Division must be maintained in good working order.

(2) Lamps and reflectors required by this Division

(a) must be securely mounted on the vehicle,

(b) must not have any cracked, broken, missing or incorrectly installed lenses, and a lamp must not have bent or broken rims that allow water to enter the lamp, and

(c) must not be shielded, covered or obscured by any part of the vehicle or load or by dirt or other material.

[en. B.C. Reg. 476/98, s. 2.]

The act reads as it reads I cannot disagree even if its subject to interpretation.
__________________
2000 Insight MT 106K Citrus A/C
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to WD40 For This Useful Post:
aerohead (03-03-2015)