Officer asked to look under the hood, is this a "search"

[zulutango]

Originally Posted by dutch

Does a road side inspection allow the officer to search the interior of the car? Or just the engine bay.

Abnything that is required by the MVA or Regs can be inspected. On an older car it would be reasonable to lift floor mats to see if the floor was rusted, you can sit inside to see the seat upholstery is OK, that the defroster and wipers worked OK, that the high beam indicator light worked, the horn worked, the vin was properly attached to the dash, the windows rolled up and down, the doors opened properly,brakes worked, the seat belts retracted and buckled properly, trunk can be checked under mats for rust if there was rust visible elsewhere...all sorts of things to be "inspected" inside the vehicle.

[zulutango]

[QUOTE=Bainne;6995659]Issuing a VI all relies on the initial assessment of non compliance; reasonable and probable grounds.


Nope...no such thing as RPGs in a vehicle inspection where the inspector has been given authority by the Govt to check vehicle compliance. If defects are discovered as part of the inspection ( how can I tell if your high and low beams work on a new car in daylight, unless I check them. Bulbs can burn out on new vehicles....or your brake fluid levels may be low? ), then a VT or N&O can be issued. The VT is not invalid because I have no RPGs. They are not needed. This is not the Criminal Code or other Federal Statute that requires them. I have checked thousands of vehicles over the years and you would be surprised how many times I found defects on new or newer vehicles.

[PK-EK]

Thank you for everyone's output on this!

Zulutango: can the officer make me go back to acura for a VI?
cuz in TypeRNammers case, he didn't and it seemed to be fine

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by zulutango

I have checked thousands of vehicles over the years and you would be surprised how many times I found defects on new or newer vehicles.

What sort of defects have you found on new vehicles?

I was following a BMW X5 the other day. The rear factory wheels/tires protruded out from the fender. What would you do in a case where a factory installed feature was a violation?

[Rich Sandor]

The officer may order you to a specific location so the officer may inspect the vehicle himself. The intent of this law is to provide the officer with a safer location to perform his inspection, other than by the side of a busy highway.

The officer does NOT have the right to tell you what business you must take your vehicle to for a VI. This is specifically not allowed. Richmond RCMP have been perpetuating this misinterpretation of the MVAR for years now. I know the 'reason' they are doing this is to force you to get the VI done at a shop that isn't going to pass an non-compliant vehicle - however despite the reasoning, it is still just as illegal, if not moreso, than running without a cat.

Please don't take this as an insult, but not knowing if your vehicle has a car or not, is ridiculous. If you play stupid, the cop will treat you stupid, and he did, by ordering you to go to Acura for the VI. If you're running without a cat, be a man, get it replaced and get the VI done. If you had a cat this whole time, try to get in touch with the officer and reason with him. Read the MVA and MVAR and understand the rules first. Do not tell the officer "my friend said..." or "i read online that..."

[Rich Sandor]

Originally Posted by sebberry

What sort of defects have you found on new vehicles?

I was following a BMW X5 the other day. The rear factory wheels/tires protruded out from the fender. What would you do in a case where a factory installed feature was a violation?

You have to draw a line between nit-picking and legitimate safety concerns. Sometimes police are busy enough with more pressing concerns, and sometimes they get bored and piss the rest of us off as a result with nit-picking. Maybe not the most eloquent way to put it, but it's accurate.

I've noticed the level of enforcement varies depending on the attitude of the person being pulled over. If you drive like a douche and act ignorant, you're gonna get slammed. Drive sane, be polite, and speak to the officer intelligently, and you get treated like an equal.

[ImportXxX]

i think you pissed him off when you ask if it was a search..so he probably made it personally. normall i would just agree with officers

[hchang]

What would you guys do in a case where the officer tells you specifically where to get your car checked?

If I was given a VI and told where that I had to go somewhere of his choice to get my car checked, I wouldn't know whether to point out that he's breaking the law, or just continue on and suck it up?

If I told him that he broke the law from something I read on a forum, I don't think he'll be taking the situation too kindly, but if I continue on and just take the VI... where would I go to get my car assessed somewhere else?

[PK-EK]

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

The officer may order you to a specific location so the officer may inspect the vehicle himself. The intent of this law is to provide the officer with a safer location to perform his inspection, other than by the side of a busy highway.

The officer does NOT have the right to tell you what business you must take your vehicle to for a VI. This is specifically not allowed. Richmond RCMP have been perpetuating this misinterpretation of the MVAR for years now. I know the 'reason' they are doing this is to force you to get the VI done at a shop that isn't going to pass an non-compliant vehicle - however despite the reasoning, it is still just as illegal, if not moreso, than running without a cat.

Please don't take this as an insult, but not knowing if your vehicle has a car or not, is ridiculous. If you play stupid, the cop will treat you stupid, and he did, by ordering you to go to Acura for the VI. If you're running without a cat, be a man, get it replaced and get the VI done. If you had a cat this whole time, try to get in touch with the officer and reason with him. Read the MVA and MVAR and understand the rules first. Do not tell the officer "my friend said..." or "i read online that..."

thank you, this is what i needed, i needed conformation that the officer did not have a right to tell me what business to go to for a VI

i have learned my lesson this time, and i will be getting a cat welded into my current manifold along with a low profile exhaust
thank you

Originally Posted by hchang

What would you guys do in a case where the officer tells you specifically where to get your car checked?

If I was given a VI and told where that I had to go somewhere of his choice to get my car checked, I wouldn't know whether to point out that he's breaking the law, or just continue on and suck it up?

If I told him that he broke the law from something I read on a forum, I don't think he'll be taking the situation too kindly, but if I continue on and just take the VI... where would I go to get my car assessed somewhere else?

also wondering about this:
cuz i know my car will be on high alert once it is back on the road.
i would guess that this is nothing that is NOT in the MVA or MVAR

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by hchang

What would you guys do in a case where the officer tells you specifically where to get your car checked?

If I was given a VI and told where that I had to go somewhere of his choice to get my car checked, I wouldn't know whether to point out that he's breaking the law, or just continue on and suck it up?

If I told him that he broke the law from something I read on a forum, I don't think he'll be taking the situation too kindly, but if I continue on and just take the VI... where would I go to get my car assessed somewhere else?

1) Take it to whatever designated inspection station you want
2) File complaint against officer

You could try and bribe the officer by offering to match whatever kickback he is receiving from the garage he insisted you take the car to, but I don't think that would fly too well.

But it does bring into question the validity of the reasons behind his inspection order, especially if he wrote the name of the facility on the ticket.

We have also read time and time again on this forum reports of officers issuing tickets for an action that was not actually an offense or ordering an inspection for a "defect" that was perfectly legal. Why these same officers authorized to carry out roadside inspections under the hood or body of the car is beyond me.

"Papers, please"

[G-spec]

just keep your mouth shut, nod along, yes sir away until you're free to go, your main objective when pulled over should be to leave as soon as possible, and achieve this by any means necessary, this doesn't include complaining or talking back and asking too many questions.... comply fully with what the officer is requesting and things will go a lot smoother.

there is absolutely nothing you can do to win an argument when you get pulled over even if you're 110% in the right.... it's just a law of nature, that cops can never be wrong and we all gotta live with it.

[PK-EK]

just like women
nod and agree

[wnderinguy]

(ii) to move a vehicle described in subparagraph (i) to a place designated by the peace officer and to allow the vehicle to be inspected there by the peace officer, or, at the expense of the person required, to present the vehicle for inspection by a person authorized under section 217, and

I'm thinking he forgot the "by the peace officer".

I read that as the Officer can direct you to a safe location ,so they can check your vehicle.He probably read that as he can tell you where to take it.

[Rich Sandor]

All this hassle can be avoided if you make sure that your vehicle modifications are MVA compliant BEFORE you mod your car.

[Amaru]

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

All this hassle can be avoided if you make sure that your vehicle modifications are MVA compliant BEFORE you mod your car.

With all due respect, what kind of a response is this? Are you his mother? I'm sure he was fully aware that his car would not pass a VI. He's asking for advice now that he's received a VI; I don't see him complaining about how he didn't deserve it or whining about how the world is out to get him. For all we know he might install a cat and leave it on forever so he never has this problem again.

If you make a post about how you got a ticket for jay-walking on a deserted one-way street, someone will still respond with, "you could've saved yourself a ton of trouble by just walking a block to the nearest crosswalk".

That type of response is not helpful at all, and most time the poster knows what they should've done to be compliant with the law.. they're simply looking for advice now that the situation has arisen.

(Rich, not trying to single you out, I know your intentions were benevolent. Just ranting about the motherly responses in general.)

[Rich Sandor]

Hey, nagging does work, eventually.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by Amaru

With all due respect, what kind of a response is this? Are you his mother? I'm sure he was fully aware that his car would not pass a VI.
....
That type of response is not helpful at all, and most time the poster knows what they should've done to be compliant with the law.. they're simply looking for advice now that the situation has arisen.

With all due respect, did you READ the original post? The OP didn't even know IF his car had a cat, let alone whether it would pass a VI.

The OP is a dork. This is NOT "most times".

[Amaru]

Originally Posted by Soundy

With all due respect, did you READ the original post? The OP didn't even know IF his car had a cat, let alone whether it would pass a VI.

The OP is a dork. This is NOT "most times".

That's what he told the police officer who pulled him over. I assumed that this meant he was "playing dumb" and he didn't want to admit guilt. Not sure why the OP is a dork (aside from his inability to search the forum for info before posting).

Even if the OP truly didn't know whether or not he had a cat installed, it shouldn't be too surprising. Ignorance does not necessarily indicate stupidity. Many, many people have no idea what a "catalytic converter" is or what it's for. If he simply walked into a tuning shop and said, "please install a header and exhaust so my car is faster" he could truly have no idea whether or not he has one, let alone what it's purpose is.

I won't defend the OP too rigorously, because a person should probably be aware of what he has (or doesn't have) installed on his vehicle... but in either case, he made a mistake and it doesn't make him a "dork". Posts that say "you shouldn't have done that!1!1!" aren't going to help him get his car back on the road. I'm sure he's learned his lesson, and I highly doubt he posted here so that he could hear about what he should or could have done differently.

IMO, if you want to use the OP as an example of "what not to do," that's fine... but nagging, insulting, or treating him like an idiot when all he did was ask a simple question is not really constructive or helpful.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by Amaru

Ignorance does not necessarily indicate stupidity.

Ignorance is no excuse for the law.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by Amaru

I assumed that this meant he was "playing dumb" and he didn't want to admit guilt.

IMO, if you want to use the OP as an example of "what not to do," that's fine... but nagging, insulting, or treating him like an idiot when all he did was ask a simple question is not really constructive or helpful.

We assume, like you, that he is playing dumb. Thus we are treating him as being dumb.

His question is in no means helpful or constructive to our hobby. I don't want to be pulled over more often cause the police decide to do a blitz due to too many guys like him playing dumb about their mods.

[PK-EK]

I was just playing dumb,
i am fully aware my car will not pass a VI
i'm actually an auto apprentice
LOL
i will seriously look into geting a hi flow cat (or maybe a pipe with a heat sheild on it)
I am also in the process of getting a stock exhaust (that will be kept on my car)

but yeah, i'm pretty much fucked
there is nothing i can do
the only thing that i can do that i feel better about is not go to Acura for a VI
being an auto apprentice i know some ppl that can help me

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by PK-EK

I was just playing dumb,
i am fully aware my car will not pass a VI
i'm actually an auto apprentice

I take it back then: you're not a dork, you're a complete tool.

[skidmark]

Originally Posted by PK-EK

he asks me to open the hood, I ask him if this is a search, because I am not allowing him to search my car. his answer was that he is not searching my car but checking my car. and that i must open it for him, so i didn't want to make a big deal out of it, so i opened it for him.

Wow! This thread grew quickly. I'm not going to read it all and just in case it has not been answered, will throw this in:

Yes, it is a search. Yes, you do have to allow him to do it as the MVA requires you to when he is inspecting your vehicle for mechanical fitness.

[PK-EK]

Originally Posted by skidmark

Wow! This thread grew quickly. I'm not going to read it all and just in case it has not been answered, will throw this in:

Yes, it is a search. Yes, you do have to allow him to do it as the MVA requires you to when he is inspecting your vehicle for mechanical fitness.

are you 100% sure?
cuz if so, i'm going to file a complaint
what section would this be under? do you have anything to back it up? so i can back myself up?

how about the fact that he made me go to Richmond Acura for a VI?
can he do this?

[skidmark]

Yeah, I'm 100% sure. I used section 219 MVA to do this for 25 years....

http://www.drivesmartbc.ca/police/police-powers