T.H. v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 2018 CanLII 116994

Licence Appeal Tribunal

Date: 2018-10-19 File Number: 11622/MVIA

Appeal under subsection 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

Between:

T.H. Appellant

and

Registrar of Motor Vehicles Respondent

DECISION AND ORDER

Panel: Jacqueline Castel

Appearances:

For the Appellant: T.H., Self-Represented For the Respondent: Stella Velocci, Agent

Place and Date of Hearing: By Teleconference October 18, 2018

REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER

OVERVIEW:

1A teleconference hearing was held on October 18, 2018 to consider the appellant’s appeal of the 45 day impoundment of his 2017 Honda Accord (the “vehicle”). The vehicle was impounded on August 30, 2018 and was released to the appellant on October 14, 2018.

ISSUE:

2The issue to be determined is whether the impoundment will result in exceptional hardship.

CONCLUSION:

3On the evidence before me at the hearing, I find that the impoundment did not result in exceptional hardship within the meaning of s. 50.2(3)(d) of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act” or the “HTA”).

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

4The owner of a vehicle that has been impounded pursuant to s. 55.1 of the HTA, may pursuant to s. 50.2, appeal the impoundment and request an order that the Registrar release the vehicle.

5There are limited grounds on which an owner may appeal an impoundment as set out in section 50.2(3) of the HTA. The appellant in this case appealed on one ground: that the impoundment has caused him exceptional hardship.

Exceptional Hardship

6Section 10 of O. Reg.631/98 (the “Regulation”) sets out the criteria and factors that I must consider in determining whether exceptional hardship will result from an impoundment. In order to establish exceptional hardship, the first requirement set out in 10(1) of the Regulation is that there is no alternative to the impounded vehicle. If I find that there is an alternative to the impounded vehicle, then I need not consider any other requirements. I find that the appellant has not met this first requirement.

7The appellant is 71 years of age, retired and on a modest fixed income. He left his vehicle at his daughter’s residence while he went on a trip to another province. His daughter allowed her boyfriend, whose driver’s licence was under suspension, to drive the vehicle at the time it was detained by the police and impounded. The appellant’s daughter paid the fees to have her father’s car released from impoundment when the 45 days elapsed.

8The appellant resides in a rural community. There is no public transportation. The closest store and medical facility is approximately 25 kilometers from his residence. Taxis are available but would cost about $40 (each way) to go to the store or medical facility from his home.

9The appellant relied on neighbours to drive him to town to purchase groceries and attend two medical appointments. He did not miss any medical appointments during the period of impoundment.

10The appellant owns a second vehicle, a 2002 Ford truck. However, he only uses this vehicle around his property as it is old and has the potential of breaking down.

11There is no doubt that the appellant has been inconvenienced because of the impoundment. However, the evidence does not support exceptional hardship. To establish exceptional hardship, the appellant must prove, first of all, that there is no alternative to the impounded vehicle, and he has not done so. The appellant continued to receive his fixed income during the period of impoundment and, neighbours drove him to town for groceries and to attend medical appointments.

12I am sympathetic to the appellant’s situation and the inconvenience in which he found himself because of the impoundment. However, the appellant’s testimony does not support a finding of exceptional hardship. For this reason, I do not need to consider the other provisions of s. 10 of the regulation.

ORDER:

13Pursuant to subsection 50(2)(5) of the HTA, I deny the appeal and confirm the impoundment order.