Licence Tribunal
Appeal d'appel en Tribunal matière de permis
DATE: 2013-04-05
FILE: 7974/MVIA
CASE NAME: 7974 v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles
Appeal under Section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 from an Impoundment Pursuant to Section 55.1(3) of the Act.
Applicant Applicant
-and-
Registrar of Motor Vehicles Respondent
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
ADJUDICATOR: Mary Ann Spencer, Member
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant: Self-represented
For the Respondent: Victoria Sim and Sonia De Santis, Agents
Heard in Toronto: April 2, 2013
REASONS FOR DECISION
A hearing was held on April 2, 2013, at Toronto, Ontario, in person, to consider the Applicant’s appeal pursuant to section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O., 1990, c. H.8 (the “HTA” or the “Act”).
THE TRIBUNAL RULED TO CONFIRM THE IMPOUNDMENT pursuant to section 55.1(3) of the HTA. As a result, the Applicant’s motor vehicle will remain detained at the impound facility for 45 days.
BACKGROUND
A motor vehicle was impounded pursuant to section 55.1 of the Act and the impoundment was appealed by the owner. The owner, motor vehicle, and date of appeal in this matter are as follows:
Owner: The Applicant
Motor Vehicle: 2009 Honda UCS (the “vehicle”)
Date of Appeal: March 5, 2013
ISSUES
As set out in the Applicant’s request for hearing (Exhibit #1), the owner appeals on the basis that the loss of the vehicle will result in exceptional hardship, as provided in section 50.2(3)(d) of the Act.
Should the Tribunal order the Registrar to release the motor vehicle on the basis that the impoundment will result in exceptional hardship?
FACTS
Evidence for the Applicant
A summary of the Applicant’s evidence follows.
At the time of the impoundment of the vehicle, it was owned and being driven by the Applicant’s son, the suspended driver in this case. As part of an arrangement made with Crown Counsel by the Applicant’s son’s lawyer, an undertaking was made that the ownership of the vehicle would be transferred to the Applicant. That transfer took place on March 15, 2013.
The Applicant testified that the vehicle was originally purchased by a family trust for his son and the trust holds a lien of approximately $20,000 on the vehicle. The Applicant is both a director and a beneficiary of the trust. Other family members are also trust beneficiaries. At the time of the impoundment, the Applicant’s son was not making any payments to the trust with respect to the amount owed on the vehicle. However, the Applicant testified that there was some expectation that the son, given his recent employment, would commence payments.
The Applicant testified that it is his intention to dispose of the vehicle. There is a current offer to purchase the vehicle which he fears will be lost should the vehicle remain impounded. Should the vehicle not be released, not only would the Applicant incur the costs charged by the impoundment facility but both he and the other beneficiaries of the trust would lose the expected proceeds of the purchase. The Tribunal member asked the Applicant to estimate the losses he himself would incur and he indicated that he expected these would total approximately $4,000 with respect to the impoundment fees and approximately $5,000 with respect to the loss of the sale.
The Applicant testified that he owns other vehicles for his own use.
Evidence for the Registrar
A summary of the Registrar’s evidence follows.
The documents tendered by the Registrar and admitted into the record on consent of the Applicant were as follows:
Copy of the Ministry of Transportation records indicating that, among other things, the impounded motor vehicle is registered in the name of the Applicant as owner ;
A copy of the notice prepared by the officer who detained the impounded motor vehicle indicating, among