Man could lose car to civil forfeiture for evading port mann tolls

[6o4__boi]

Originally Posted by nabs

Guy driving a geo metro. Using a string and tape to flip up his plates . Poor guy is probably trying to get to work, he's obviously not well off by any means just trying to make living and save a buck where he can. This shit is fucked.

Holy fuck this mentality pisses me off so much...it's the reason why we have so many inbred morons waiting in line to take advantage of the system at every turn. Oh, poor him in his little metro. Poor guy was just doing this. Boo fucking hoo.

So somehow he's a victim now? The lazy fuck who kept using the same stupid method and got caught? Now they're taking away his $500 beater as punishment? Let me just find the world's smallest violin and see if i can stir some sort of inkling to even begin to feel bad for this guy.
The number of bleeding hearts here hurts.

This is abusing forfeiture laws
Judge scolds B.C. Civil Forfeiture Office in ?frivolous? case - The Globe and Mail

The moron in the metro had it coming. The more bleeding hearts I see here, the more I'm glad they're squashing asshats like these.

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by nabs

Guy driving a geo metro. Using a string and tape to flip up his plates . Poor guy is probably trying to get to work, he's obviously not well off by any means just trying to make living and save a buck where he can. This shit is fucked.

we has human beings may feel those well-endowed financially 'deserve it more' when they caught cheating the system...but I don't believe the law takes into account someone's socioecnomic status when they're being charged.

[white rocket]

Guy cheated, then got caught. CF on a car that's probably worth less then the fines he owes. Douche doing douche(yet creative) shit and gets busted. Perfect guy for the GOV to make an example of since the car ain't worth shit. If it was a $20K car they were seizing then we'd be up in arms.

Is that why peeps in here are upset? CF on a vehicle for fraudulent activities? Should there be another way?

[6o4__boi]

Don't get me wrong, the Civil Forfeiture Act is sketchy as shit. It operates behind shadows and is being a bitch about releasing employee names which says a lot on its own.

Here's the Act if anyone is interested in some quality TGIF reading:
Civil Forfeiture Act

The reality is that it exists now. Dumbass got crucified for it but you can't exactly sit here and say he didn't have it coming. Sure, the issue goes far beyond that. But within that issue itself (ie. getting his Metro conceded), I have no problem with how the Act was administered. Like flip said, the government hates being stolen from.

I don't like the CF Act. I don't like how it's worded, how its used and how its so well protected behind government shadows and policies. But this story just doesn't do it for me.

[Great68]

Originally Posted by dachinesedude

why dont they apply it to drunk driving and excessive speeding then?

the punishment doesnt suit the crime imo

Well they actually do.

Taking it away for drunk driving doesn't piss me off as much, as those people are endangering others.

But this guy wasn't endangering anyone, and therefore yes the punishment definitely doesn't suit the crime.

[604STIG]

I don't have a problem with the guy getting fined and everything, but I do take issue with Civil Forfeiture being used in this case.
When it was first proposed, it was to be used as a tool against the big gang war problems that were going on, many people said this was a slippery slope, but the RCMP played to the publics immediate fears and the general public went along with it. Here we are years later and the RCMP/government are completely abusing this power, which is exactly the fear that a lot of people had at the time of induction. This just goes to show you can't give carte blanche to the higher ups and assume they won't abuse that power for something else down the road.

[white rocket]

Drunk driving and excessive speeding fall under the CF category as well. Remember Mt. Seymour Parkway with the Ferrari and some other car? They were sold off by police at auction I believe.

A hefty fine plus repayment or perhaps a criminal charge then? I mean, it IS fraud. And that shit IS illegal.

LOL at people treating this guy as a victim. WTF? Yeah yeah, the GOV steals our money, yada, yada. Cry me a river. This dude tried to beat the system and got caught. Now the system is going to fuck him. Really not seeing an issue here :shrug:

It's like getting pulled over doing 100kph in a 60kph zone and the driver gets all up in arms about the punishment. Fuck man, you were doing 40kph over the limit and now the law is doing it's job. Don't want to do the time, don't do the fucking crime.

[GG]

To me CF is absolutely pure fucking bullshit
i paid for it who the hell does the government think they are taking away ones property?
a grow up, illegal goods/drugs guns getting seize makes a lot of sense


Doing 140km 160km on the hwy at 4 am does not quality getting CF up ur ass.
A hefty fine? sure, towing away ones car is pure bs

U do NOT see this such BS getting implanted in the States.

the result of it is that cops are constantly trying to threaten and power trip using this power they have, lets face it we all seen the pigs turning on their cherry running red light or do illegal U turn than turn it off as soon as they finish crossing. Prime example

Why does a person deserves to get theiri vehicle sold when he was speeding? slap him a hefty fine and be done with it, u wonna give him points while u are at it? sure

but this whole civil forfeiture is seriously completely bullshit, whoever thinks its the rightful things to do u better get ur head checked. Clearly u been brain washed by the government


in this case, last time i check fraud is a criminal act. And usually fraud gets slapped with a fine and pay back watever he scammed. NOt sell off his car, might as well as sell his girlfriend while they are at it

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by GG

U do NOT see this such BS getting implanted in the States.

YouTube

http://jalopnik.com/5371967/feds-sei...-gt-rs-in-cali

[91civicZC]

If civil forfeiture was about taking something that could be proven to be purchased with funds that were a direct result of criminal activity proven in court, I’d probably be okay with it. Bought a new boat with the proceeds of crime? Sure, take it. But as the law stands, it’s pretty scary.

From the act:

"The Civil Forfeiture Act and Regulation allows the Director of Civil Forfeiture to initiate civil court proceedings against property believed to be the instruments or proceeds of unlawful activity."

That's way too vague. Basically anything then used in any type of unlawful activity could be taken away from you. The car going across the bridge is an excellent example of how this is going way too far in my opinion. The way this is worded, your car could be taken away for speeding.

These proceedings are not commenced in court, they are an administrative process. Whether proceedings are initiated in court or administratively, they are not reliant on criminal charges or convictions arising from the alleged unlawful activity.

That's really scary. I'm not sure I understand this portion correctly, but I believe it means that the taking of property is a process outside the court. The person would have to start court proceedings themselves to try and stop it.

[Ronin]

Just having the guy pay all the tolls he skipped wouldn't be much of a deterrent. That just means that he is at exactly the same place as he would be if he just paid in the first place. So if he never got caught, he would be way ahead.

That would be like a parking ticket being $6. Then no one would ever pay for parking.

[underscore]

Originally Posted by 91civicZC

From the act:

"The Civil Forfeiture Act and Regulation allows the Director of Civil Forfeiture to initiate civil court proceedings against property believed to be the instruments or proceeds of unlawful activity."

That's way too vague. Basically anything then used in any type of unlawful activity could be taken away from you. The car going across the bridge is an excellent example of how this is going way too far in my opinion. The way this is worded, your car could be taken away for speeding.

I think the problem is that because it's a car and the guy was caught while driving it, people are thinking this could apply to any vehicle. But this guy isn't being charged under the MVA, he's being charged with fraud, and he used his vehicle to commit said fraud.

[91civicZC]

Originally Posted by underscore

I think the problem is that because it's a car and the guy was caught while driving it, people are thinking this could apply to any vehicle. But this guy isn't being charged under the MVA, he's being charged with fraud, and he used his vehicle to commit said fraud.

I think “he deserves it” and “this works in the bigger picture” are two different things here.

Dude broke the law and is scamming the system while the rest of us pay. That’s bullshit and annoys the hell out of me. He deserves some kind punishment.

But to me this illustrates that the forfeiture law has too great of reach. I had never read the act until now, and the wording to me is pretty scary in how unfocused it is.

I also agree the guy should receive a pretty serious punishment, as he went well out of his way to avoid paying what the rest of have to, but I still don’t believe that big brother stepping in to take away property is the correct way to do it.

Big fines, community service, even garnishing wages if someone cannot pay all seem legit to me as they would be done through the a court proceeding.

If it’s the direct proceeds of crime then I understand it, if its simply related to an offence (or they think it is) I don't think it should give them the right to size and sell it through an administrative process.

[Ulic Qel-Droma]

would peoples opinions be different if he were driving a chromed out lambo?

[twitchyzero]

Originally Posted by 91civicZC

If it’s the direct proceeds of crime then I understand it, if its simply related to an offence (or they think it is) I don't think it should give them the right to size and sell it through an administrative process.

sure not direct proceeds but I can probably guess that his crime probably saved him enough to buy himself another Geo Metro or three.

Garnishing wages, are there any laws that allow for that in Canada?

[91civicZC]

Originally Posted by twitchyzero

sure not direct proceeds but I can probably guess that his crime probably saved him enough to buy himself another Geo Metro or three.

Garnishing wages, are there any laws that allow for that in Canada?

I assumed there was, but maybe not?

[DragonChi]

Originally Posted by Ulic Qel-Droma

would peoples opinions be different if he were driving a chromed out lambo?

Yeah, If a guy in a lambo did it, WTF is he stealing from the rest of us for? But taking it away would be even more ridiculous.

Originally Posted by 91civicZC

I assumed there was, but maybe not?

I think wages can be garnished by family law, and bankrupcy. I don't know if there are any others.

[MR_BIGGS]

Just get an Alberta plate. They do not provide TReO with access to personal information so they can't be billed.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by dachinesedude

why dont they apply it to drunk driving and excessive speeding then?

They've threatened to - people got all pissed about that too.

Stupid thing with all this self-righteous whingeing is that it hasn't actually happened yet. The gov't had applied for it... courts haven't approved it and probably won't. But even the THREAT of it is, as SP says, a strong deterrent.

Anyway, the point of this isn't the big tolls that aren't being paid, it's that the guy is intentionally defrauding the system to avoid them.

There's also the fact that he might never have been caught if he didn't do it RIGHT IN FRONT OF A COP. I'd vote for CF just because the guy is stupid as fuck.

[Mikoyan]

Originally Posted by DragonChi

Yeah, If a guy in a lambo did it, WTF is he stealing from the rest of us for? But taking it away would be even more ridiculous.

I think wages can be garnished by family law, and bankrupcy. I don't know if there are any others.

Back Taxes.

[Marco911]

Originally Posted by underscore

I think the problem is that because it's a car and the guy was caught while driving it, people are thinking this could apply to any vehicle. But this guy isn't being charged under the MVA, he's being charged with fraud, and he used his vehicle to commit said fraud.

Don't let a little thing like 'innocent till proven guilty' fuck up your argument.

[Marco911]

Years ago, this is what I said would happen with civil forfeiture being applied to lesser and lesser offences. If TREO wants to run after this individual they can pursue him through civil courts and apply a court judgement to garnish his wages. Confiscating his property before he has been charged or convicted of any crime, much less a minor offence is outrageous.

IMO, the whole fraud charge is pushing it. It's fraud if he was impersonating another vehicle, causing them to receive the toll charge.. Removing his plates is failure to display valid plates.

[Marco911]

Originally Posted by 6o4__boi

Holy fuck this mentality pisses me off so much...it's the reason why we have so many inbred morons waiting in line to take advantage of the system at every turn. Oh, poor him in his little metro. Poor guy was just doing this. Boo fucking hoo.

So somehow he's a victim now? The lazy fuck who kept using the same stupid method and got caught? Now they're taking away his $500 beater as punishment? Let me just find the world's smallest violin and see if i can stir some sort of inkling to even begin to feel bad for this guy.
The number of bleeding hearts here hurts.

The moron in the metro had it coming. The more bleeding hearts I see here, the more I'm glad they're squashing asshats like these.

This is not about one individual or one case. This is about the type of justice we are entitled to in a civil society. Concepts such as a balance of power between people and a state, independent courts, and innocent till proven guilty are important legal foundations of a civil society.

The concept of private property is sacrosanct. The government and courts should only be allowed to confiscate private property in the most egregious circumstances. There are far better avenues to pursue punishment and justice than civil forfeiture for minor offences.

[fliptuner]

CF is retarded in this case.

Charge him with fraud and fine him 10-20X what his tolls should be (if he has to cross the bridge for work, should be easy to figure out). He can't get insurance til his tolls are paid off anyways and the fine well exceeds any amount they'd get for his car.

[underscore]

If they're going to fine him based on the number of tolls he's skipped out on wouldn't they have to accurately come up with a number for that? Which is easier said than done given that he hid the plate.