Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 18442/MVIA
In the matter of an appeal under section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (the “Act”) from an impoundment of a motor vehicle under section 55.1 of the Act for driving while in contravention of a condition under s. 55.1(1)2 of the Act
Between:
Marjorie Taylor
Appellant
and
Registrar of Motor Vehicles
Respondent
DECISION
ADJUDICATOR:
L. Hodgson
APPEARANCES:
For the Appellant:
Marjorie Taylor, Self-represented
For the Respondent:
Martin He, Representative
HEARD: By Videoconference Tuesday, March 31, 2026
OVERVIEW
1Marjorie Taylor, (the “appellant”), appeals the impoundment of motor vehicle under section 50.2 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. H.8 (the “Act”). The appellant’s motor vehicle was impounded on Wednesday, March 18, 2026. At the time of the impoundment, her husband Rae Taylor was driving the vehicle with a suspended licence. A Notice of Impoundment was issued for a period of 45 days.
2The appellant appeals on the grounds that that the impoundment will cause exceptional hardship.
ISSUES
3The issue in dispute is:
i. pursuant to s. 50.2(3)(d) of the Act, whether that the impoundment will result in exceptional hardship.
RESULT
4For the reasons set out below the impoundment of the vehicle is confirmed.
ANALYSIS
5For the Tribunal to order the Registrar to release a vehicle that has been impounded pursuant to s. 55.1 the Act, an appellant must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that they satisfy one or more of the grounds for appeal set out in s. 50.2 of the Act. In all cases, the burden of proof lies with the appellant.
The impoundment will not cause exceptional hardship
6I am not satisfied that the impoundment will cause exceptional hardship as that term is defined under O. Reg. 631/98 under the Act (the “Regulation”).
7The Regulation sets out the criteria that the Tribunal is required to consider when determining whether the appellant has established that the impoundment will cause exceptional hardship under the Act. According to the Regulation, the Tribunal must first determine whether no alternative to the impounded vehicle is available. Subsection 10(4) states that in order to show that there is no alternative to the impounded vehicle:
[T]he owner must demonstrate that every reasonable option has been considered and inquired into that could eliminate or adequately mitigate any threat or loss to the person, including using another vehicle and making arrangements to do without any motor vehicle during the impound period.
8If the owner fails to prove that no alternative to the impounded vehicle is available, then the appeal on the basis of exceptional hardship will fail and the Tribunal need not consider the remaining factors set out in the Regulation related to exceptional hardship.
9If the owner establishes that there is no alternative available, the Tribunal must then consider whether the impoundment will result in a threat to the health or safety of any person ordinarily transported by the vehicle, a threat to public health and safety, or a threat to the environment or property of a community in whose service the vehicle is ordinarily used.
10The Tribunal is generally precluded by s. 10(2) from considering financial or economic loss, loss of employment or an employment opportunity, or loss of education or training or an opportunity for education or training. However, s. 10(3) provides that the Tribunal can consider these things if the owner demonstrates the following:
(a) no alternative to the impounded motor vehicle is available;
(b) the loss will be immediate, significant and lasting;
(c) the impact of the loss will be upon a person ordinarily transported by the motor vehicle; and
(d) the impact of the loss,
(i) will be upon a person other than the person whose driving while his or her driver’s licence was under suspension resulted in the impoundment of the motor vehicle, and
(ii) will not be a result of a loss by the suspended driver of the type set out in clause (2) (b), (c) or (d).
11The Tribunal can never consider whether the impoundment will result in inconvenience to a person.
Alternative to the impounded vehicle
12I am not satisfied that there is no alternative to the impounded vehicle.
13The appellant testified that she lives in a rural area. Her husband, her brother-in-law and her son all live on her property. The appellant requires the vehicle to take both her husband and her brother-in-law to medical appointments and to get groceries. The appellant acknowledged that she owns another vehicle but testified that her son uses this vehicle for his work and is sometimes on call. The appellant had not inquired into the cost of renting a vehicle but believed, from past experience, it would be expensive. The appellant currently works from home, but her husband and brother-in-law are retired.
14The appellant has an alternative vehicle available to her. While her son currently uses this other vehicle for his work, there was no evidence that he could not make other transportation arrangements or could not, when necessary, get groceries and take his father and uncle to medical appointments. The appellant also has the option of renting a vehicle when necessary. She is currently employed and did not establish that this option is unavailable to her.
15I find that the appellant has not established that there is no alternative to the impounded vehicle.
16Since the appellant has not established that there is no alternative to the impounded vehicle, exceptional hardship has not been established in accordance with the Act and the Regulation, and I need not consider the remaining factors for determining exceptional hardship.
17For the reasons set out above, I find that the appellant has not established that the impoundment will cause exceptional hardship as that term is defined in the Regulation.
Conclusion
18I find that:
i. the appellant has not established that the impoundment will result in exceptional hardship.
ORDER
19The Tribunal Orders that the impoundment of the vehicle is confirmed.
Released: April 8, 2026
_________________
Laura Hodgson
Adjudicator