damn i was thinking of the same thing too..
imagine a FULLY STOCK FRS getting VI'd just because of some anime themed wrap (with the ICBC registration fully updated to say colour=multi)... that lawsuit would be interesting to see :smug::lol:moderated:

This one would still legitimately get a VI since the windshield banner extends too far down.

Distract them with Anime bewbs, that's a good trick!

Or even better, Anime p u s s a y!

http://66.media.tumblr.com/25c9241a4...0ayo1_1280.jpg

So I got another box 2 VI this morning (in front of the police station again, my fault I know, I got tired of taking the long way to work to avoid another VI), 2 months after passing my first. Cop was walking back to the station but got back on his motorcycle with his partner to pull me over.

I thought Cain was condescending but this guy was on a completely different level. He came up to my window and stated that my car can't be lowered, which isn't completely true but I replied "okay" and then he says "don't look at me like I don't know what I'm talking about". I literally just said okay to him and he was already provoking me. He asked me where I got the car done, which I wasn't sure if he was asking where I had it modified or where I passed my previous inspection. I asked what he meant so I replied at several different places over the past 3 years because I didn't think he wanted me to list every single shop I have brought my car into. He then rudely stated that I didn't answer his question. At this time his partner came up to the window and he immediately tells her that I'm not being compliant?

At this point I was at a loss for words, not only was this guy belligerent right off the bat, he was telling his partner that I wasn't cooperating when I was answering all of his questions. Also if I asked as question he would state "I'm the one asking the questions".

He began pushing down on the front of my car by my fender to show that I had "no suspension" because there was very little travel when he pushed. I told him yes I do, explaining my stiffer springs are why it's stiff. He did it a couple more times stating several times that I had "no suspension" because my car isn't wobbly when he pushes down. At this point I had to correct him because he was under the impression that lowering a car involves compressing the spring until there's no movement... and that's how lowered cars are achieved?

After I questioned his knowledge is when he began to threaten with me with a box 1 and stating that he can tow my car immediately, take my plates and impound it. I ended up getting a box 2 and near the end his partner came over telling me that by modifying my car after passing inspection is "showing complete disregard for what they do". In other words, treating me like a criminal because I have gold wheels that caught their eye and for having a lowered vehicle. I should also note that my car isn't even slammed or anything crazy, I have a 1" gap all around with my front right being maybe only half an inch because it's not even atm.

I just had to share my experience, thanks for reading.

What car do you have right now?

if you pass your box 2 with your car as is... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE file a complaint on this officer...
i know most officers are nice people, but it's officers like these that really need to get kicked out of the force, and to do that.. lots of complaints needed..

I'm sure some of us on here are happy to assist with giving ideas on how to word the complaint letter in a professional and truthful way.


heck even if you dont pass your box 2, this officer's behaviour alone can justify a complaint... so file that complaint either way!
you can word it in a way where you admit your "faults" with the car modifications (only if you dont pass the box 2), but that does not justify a uniformed police officer to act in a hostile, offensive, and unprofessional way.

What a bad experience. Need to be driving around with cameras and mic’s for when you get pulled over. Exposing this bad behaviour publicly may be what it takes to put an end to it.

What car do you have right now?

I have a 99 JDM Forester S/tb, a pic of it in its current state can be found if you click my profile and my post in the current pic thread.

I would like to try and pass the VI without raising the car up, but I feel like acceptable ride height modifications are still uncertain because some rules state that a 1" gap is required, another saying the lowest part of the body cannot exceed the bottom of the wheel, and another that suggests height can only be adjusted "this much" from oem specs. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

As for the complaint, I think I will do that because I am still baffled by how I was treated simply for having a lowered car.

If your car looks like it does in the pics, I can't see how it would fail a VI in its current form. I would only say that your lip gives a perception that the car is much lower than it sits. If it can pass the box2 with zero modifications, this would be a perfect example of these select officers being incapable of enforcing certain laws.

I am going to play the devil's advocate a bit, and point out that the officer is probably not satisfied with the answers you've provided him with. "Okay" and "Several different places" can easily be considered as vague and/or dismissive answers that don't really carry any meaning to them. So IMO, from his perspective, you were really being non-compliant / un-cooperative. Attempts to file a complaint on those grounds would probably be insufficient. At a minimum, I think it would be difficult to use that non-compliant accusation as grounds for complaint because it would simple degenerate into a he-says-you-says.

IMO, the "I'm the one asking the questions" issue might provide better grounds to file a complaint on. Officers are supposed to be professionals, not dicks with a ticket book and a gun. Even if we were to assume that you are guilty of violating the MVA, there is no place for the officer to go on a power trip the way he did. It is unnecessary and escalates the tension instead of de-escalating it. In other words, it is completely unprofessional. The lack of professionalism while on duty is something you can certainly complaint on.

The lack of automotive knowledge might also be something that would result in a meaningful and admissible complaint. I don't expect officers to be auto mechanics, but when they are issuing you a citation on the mechanical functionality of your vehicle, I think it is fair to at least expect a basic level of mechanical knowledge as you have pointed out. "There is no suspension" is a wholly inaccurate and non-factual statement to make, and while I am not surprised by officers making false accusations towards potential suspects, it can again be used as something to challenge the officer on for his lack of professionalism while on duty.

Lastly, the threatening with Box 1 & tow could again be used (by you) as grounds to complaint about his power tripping tendencies -- as in, how he is once again losing his cool and his professionalism when he has been challenged and proven wrong (by you regarding his weak automotive knowledge). The obvious counter argument he can make here is that he is simply stating to you that he has the legal authority to issue those citations, and he is not wrong in that regard.

Good luck with your re-inspection as well as your complaint. I hope you would pursue with the complaint even though it is a draining and labourious process that might well be fruitless. But if we were to hope for any chance to end this (or at least see some meaninful change), I think the automotive community has to push back as much as we can.

I'm an idiot and can't find the pic for your car. But I agree with SpeedStars that if your car can pass a CVSE inspection as is, that would provide further grounds for you to file your complaint on about the incompetency of the cops. Essentially, it would be further proof that they know nothing about the laws they are supposed to enforce.

My only concern is having to pay for another inspection by failing the first, my first VI took 3 inspections and costed me over $500 in inspection fees. But if there's reasonable hope for me to pass as is, then the risk may be worth having an example car that got VIed unfairly. And yes my car currently sits as it does in the picture.

Thanks for the suggestions, I appreciate your input. As for your counter argument about our initial encounter, I feel like me saying "okay" isn't being dismissive, It was simply an acknowledgement of what he just said. Also he kept asking me where my car was done but never clarified what he meant even after I asked. I understand that it may be obvious to most as to what he was asking, but in the moment I wasn't sure if it was that or if he was asking who passed my previous VI. I can't recall if this is the moment that he said "he was the one asking the questions" when I asked for clarification.

Here's a link

https://www.revscene.net/forums/7157...ml#post8945974

So now driving a car that's modified is getting the same attitude from VPD as being busted for a DUI. What have they come to to get this pissy about it? Has it reached the point of profiling based on how a car looks?

And how does this officer expect one to respond? Like a caricature of a slave, going "Yessuh, nosuh"?

Do you think that will pass? I think the rule is 1inch from tire to fender? Looks pretty tight in the pics.

Just measure it before you go. It looks like it would be more, depending on how its measured. If its from the top of the tire to bottom of fender, in the sense of the imaginary line that is equal with the tire, directly down from the fender without considering depth maybe not, but the proper way to measure would be from closest part of fender to closest part of tire whether straight up and down or at an angle, as offset is considered in part of equation.

I agree with both of these suggestions.

As far as the 1" clearance is concerned, I personally believe that the clearance requirement should only be applicable to the front wheels, but not the rear. As I understand it, the clause comes from Section 4 -- Steering of the CVSE inspection manual, under item #2b. That item reads:

Given the turning steering wheel requirement, I cannot see how it would be applicable to the rear wheels. There may be other sections in the CVSE manual that prohibits the wheel & tire package from having less than a 1" clearance to the frame, fender, or other parts, but I have not come across a clause like that on my cursory skimming of the manual. Since no measuring method is described in the section, I would also assume you simply take the closest distance between the tire and vehicle body part to see whether there is a 1" clearance to meet the CVSE requirement.

As far as the (front) lip is concern, the lowest part of that lip needs to be higher than the lowest part of your wheel. I cannot tell from the picture whether that is the case, but it looks close.

Why did it take 3 inspections to pass the first time? Have you changed anything at all since it passed?

Anyone have more details on this? Cain issued a VI in Langley??



https://i.imgur.com/4uEBYll.jpg

'rear bumper cut/jagged'

we need pics

Happened to an e30 group member earlier.

IRSU: Integrated Road Safety Unit. Cops from all of BC join to do traffic enforcement provincial wide.

Bumper is cut exposing an SS muffler. Car looks rough but I've seen worse.Attachment 30730