Licence Appeal Tribunal
FILE: 8182/MED
CASE NAME: 8182 v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles
Appeal under Section 50(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, from a Decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles pursuant to Section 47(1) of that Act - to Suspend a Licence
8182 Applicant
-and-
Registrar of Motor Vehicles Respondent
REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
ADJUDICATOR: D. Ian Turnbull, M.D., Member
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant: Self-represented
For the Respondent: Russell McKnight, Agent
Heard in Toronto: July 25, 2013
DECISION AND REASONS
This is an appeal to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) by the Applicant respecting a decision of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles (the “Registrar”) pursuant to Section 47(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act”).
Preliminary Matters
The applicant submitted a long term service diploma from a work-related organization and a commercial entity saying he has been a customer for 5 years; both items for information.
FACTS
- The Registrar received an unsolicited request from a police officer for a Driver’s Licence Review (Exhibit 3 tab 1), dated June 2, 2011. According to the “Appendix” the Applicant exhibited “severe mental health act issues” while attending a local police station. The Applicant advised police an unknown suspect was sewing his clothes either completely closed or lengthening them.
The police requested the Applicant’s driver’s licence be placed under review for the safety of the general public. The police found the Applicant had at least four driver’s licences; the Applicant says it was “more like ten.”
The 57-year-old Applicant had his driver’s licence suspended in a letter from the Registrar dated July 8, 2011 (Exhibit 1). The effective date of the suspension (Exhibit 3 – tab 13) was July 18, 2011. The Registrar asked the Applicant to provide medical information, satisfactory to the Registrar, for consideration of reinstatement of the Applicant’s driving privileges.
The Applicant had multiple hospital admissions for chronic schizophrenia (Exhibit 4 – tab 28) 20 years ago.
The Applicant’s driving privileges had been previously suspended (Exhibit 4 - tab 20) for a psychiatric condition, and subsequently reinstated (Exhibit 4 - tab 45) after the Applicant had provided the Registrar with requested medical information.
The Applicant no longer attends his long-time psychiatrist, and has discontinued anti-psychotic medication.
The Applicant filed a Notice of Appeal (Exhibit 2), dated June 27, 2013 citing
- this is a case of I.D. theft
- dispute over psychiatrist’s report to the Registrar
- an incident with his dentist, involving thyroiditis
- false power of attorney
- “endless list of stupidities, and I’m tired of them”
ISSUES
Should the decision of the Registrar to suspend the Applicant’s licence be confirmed, modified or set aside?
In particular:
Does the Applicant suffer from a mental, emotional, nervous or physical disability likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive a motor vehicle safely?
LAW
O. Reg. 340/94, Section 14 states:
(1) An applicant for or a holder of a driver’s licence must not,
(a) suffer from any mental, emotional, nervous or physical condition or disability likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely; or
(b) be addicted to the use of alcohol or a drug to an extent likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle safely.
(2) In determining whether an applicant for or a holder of a driver’s licence of any class meets the qualifications described in subsection (1), the Minister,
(a) may take into consideration the relevant medical standards for applicants or holders of that class of driver’s licence set out in the CCMTA Medical Standards for Drivers; and
(b) may require the applicant or holder to provide evidence satisfactory to the Minister that he or she is able to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely, including,
(i) any reports of examinations under section 15, and
(ii) any additional medical information.
Section 47(1) of the Act gives the Registrar the power to suspend or cancel a driver’s licence on the ground(s) set out in section 14 (1) of the Regulation set out above.
Section 50 of the Act states:
50 (1) Every person aggrieved by a decision of the Minister made under subsection 32(5) for which there is a right of appeal pursuant to a regulation made under clause 32 (14) (n) or a decision of the Registrar under section 17 or 47 may appeal the decision to the Tribunal.
(2) The Tribunal may confirm, modify or set aside the decision of the Minister or the Registrar.
APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO FACTS
The Registrar has made the case that the Applicant’s driving privileges should remain suspended until the Applicant provides the up-to-date psychiatric information requested in the initial letter of suspension, dated July 8, 2011.
The Registrar acted correctly in pursuing the police request for a Driver’s Licence Review following the Applicant’s behaviour at the police station on June 2, 2011.
The medical information supplied by the Applicant is a report from a mental health facility dated March 3, 2012 (Exhibit 3 tab 9) states “current risk is low” re Emergency Crisis Services and “no safety concerns or change in behaviour from baseline”.
The Applicant returned the Registrar’s Mental Health Assessment Form (Exhibit 3 – tab 11b) dated December 14, 2012 with all the pages “X-ed out”. The Applicant wrote over the Registrar’s letter “who stole my I.D., and what was it used for”, and repeatedly referred to the “Koo-koo, Roo-koo”.
Asked for clarification of this term by the Tribunal, the Applicant said it referred to the rooster, and it was meant as a “wake up call” for all parties.
The Registrar refers to the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administration (CCMTA) guidelines (draft 12, Sept 2012) – Chapter 14, Psychiatric Disorders.
The Tribunal focuses on “the role of insight”, on page 213 and believes the Applicant lacks insight into his chronic mental condition. The Applicant is currently noncompliant with therapy.
Of particular concern to the Tribunal is that the Applicant’s mind is preoccupied with conspiracies, who stole his I.D. and being suspicions of cell phone users. The Tribunal believes these thoughts may significantly distract the Applicant while driving.
The Applicant’s summary statement is primarily concerned with “who stole my ID and what are they using it for?”
The Applicant repeatedly refers to the Request for Driver’s Licence Review Form. He claims there is no such file because the Police Event/Occurrence Number is blank, therefore the Registrar should not have sent the letter of suspension, dated July 8, 2011.
The Tribunal believes the Applicant’s demographic information, including driver’s licence number plus the signatures of both the police officer and detective are valid, as is the attached “Appendix”, describing the Applicant’s behaviour at the police station.
The Applicant rails against his dentist and complains about his long-time psychiatrist, who he believed reported him to the Registrar.
A College of Physician’s and Surgeon’s (CPSO) investigation stated the psychiatrist had not reported the Applicant to the Registrar (Exhibit 3 – tab 11c).
The Applicant accuses his landlord of changing the outside door on his apartment balcony so that his unit could be more easily broken into by “them”.
Evidently, there is an inheritance involved, and allegations of a false power-of-attorney. The Applicant states “this” is “all over money”, and “they” are trying to destroy him.
The Applicant does not spare the Registrar in his Notice of Appeal, testimony, and correspondence with the Tribunal.
- “you do not have a file!”
- “all lies and hot air”
- basically all lies, “do what you want”
- “this has been going on since 1984, and I want it to end”
The Applicant showed little respect for the hearing process and the Registrar’s agent.
The Tribunal acknowledges that many schizophrenics have driving privileges. Two years ago this Applicant had support from two family physicians stating he was fit to drive, (Exhibit 3 – tab 3) dated June 2, 2011 and (Exhibit 3 – tab 3c) dated July 28, 2011.
The Tribunal notes the Applicant is not currently in the care of a psychiatrist, and has stopped taking his antipsychotic medication. The Tribunal believes the Applicant is currently so distracted with conspiracies, and “who stole my I.D.” that his concentration on other matters is impaired as is his judgment and insight into his mental state. Ironically, the Applicant never says why he needs his driving privileges reinstated.
In considering the entirety of the evidence, testimony, and submissions of the Registrar and Applicant, the Tribunal is mindful of the safety of both the Applicant and the motoring public. The Tribunal supports the reasonable request of the Registrar to have the Applicant provide an up-to-date psychiatric assessment to the Medical Review Section before consideration of restoration of his driving privileges.
O. Reg. 340/94, Section 14 states:
(1) An applicant for or a holder of a driver’s licence must not,
(a) suffer from any mental, emotional, nervous or physical condition or disability likely to significantly interfere with his or her ability to drive a motor vehicle of the applicable class safely;
Weighing the evidence on a balance of probabilities, the Tribunal finds the Applicant may suffer from a condition which is likely to significantly interfere with his ability to operate a motor vehicle safely.
DECISION
Upon the application by the Applicant to appeal the decision dated July 8, 2011 to suspend his driver’s licence pursuant to section 47(1) of the Act and having considered the evidence filed with the Tribunal and the submissions of the Registrar and Applicant;
IT IS THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL pursuant to the authority vested in it under Section 50(2) of the Act that the decision of the Registrar be confirmed.
LICENCE APPEAL TRIBUNAL
D. Ian Turnbull, M.D., Member
Released: July 31, 2013