[sapere]

It is official.

Another civil forfeiture case against a vehicle for alleged speeding is underway, and this time the victim is no one else but myself. This has not gone to the media as of yet.

But believe it or not, here is my story:

On the night of Jan 7, I was driving home after dropping my friends off as usual. My route was from Highway #1 1st ave exit all the way to the Gaglardi exit and up Cariboo Hill where I live, which usually takes about 15-20 mins of driving pending traffics. There I was cruising along the highway at 3:30 am, virtually no one was around the highway.

All of a sudden out of nowhere, a black truck started to tailgate me from behind. Natural reaction told me to switch lanes and let it pass, so I did. It didn't bother to pass instead it continued to tailgate. The distance were very close, so I proceeded to speed up to gain a bit of distance for safety. That didn't help at all, the truck continued to tail me all the way till I got off at the exit, up the mountain, and about 1 block away from my house the red blue lights were flashing from the truck. Ahhhh....only took about 20 mins to identify me as a dangerous driver and finally decided to pull me over. Lovely, so much for prevention.

The undercover cop got off his truck, asked me why I was going so fast, what was I doing....etc. Standard questions. He claimed I was going at 190km/h but didn't show me any readings. He also threatened that I was going to lose my car. Then he said he didn't want to talk to me anymore (???). 5 mins later, a marked white RCMP cop came and started talking to the undercover cop. Didn't talk to me, then she simply left (??). Few mins later, a different RCMP cop came, and again, went to talk to the undercover first. Then he came to me and asked all the standard questions again.

He gave me an ASD, which I blew a 'WARN'. Then he proceeded to write me a ticket of excessive speeding and possession of opened alcohol in the vehicle (which really, was just an emptied can and I even told and showed him that). The excessive speeding alone also came with the newly implemented 7 days impoundment, so the tow truck came to take away my car. After which, they let me go with the impoundment notice and the 3 day driving prohibition notice for blowing a WARN for the very first time.

About 3 hours later at 7 am, cops came banging on my door and gave me the blue copy of the actual violation ticket.

7 days later, I went to the impounded lot to pick up my car. The staffs told me the car was gone already. Apparently, the civil forfeiture office took it around 2 days before the impoundment was over.

Ever since then, I've been fighting to get my car back. Had a chat with the crown's lawyer and told him that I had very little equity in the car as it was a fairly new leased car. If they auction it off, everything goes to the leasing company and they don't get a dime because the "interest" of the leasing company must be protected for being an uninvolved party, which then, leaves me to pay the difference between the auctioned price and how much I still owe.

I can assure you all that it will be in the 5 digits range. And no, I don't make 100k+ a year and I don't come from a wealthy family. The car is insured and registered strictly under my name, in other words, I pay the whole thing myself with my own legit hard working money.

Just to give you all an idea of the numbers, the car worths about 50k brand new and it currently worths about 30k according to the black book.

Also on the notice of civil action, they are claiming I was and also is likely to repeat including but not limited to:

1. Excessive speeding
2. Driving without consideration
3. Driving without due care
4. Driving in a manner dangerous to public in light of all conditions
5. Impaired by alcohol contrary to criminal code 253(1)(a)

Which could potentially cause serious bodily harm.

While on the actual violation ticket, I only got excessive speeding so wtf was all those made up bs? Might as well throw the whole MVA book at me. I am also not being criminally charged by the police for impaired driving. Fact is also I've got less than 3 speeding tickets over the course of 8 years of driving in my whole life. 2 of which were regulars and only 1 was excessive and with at least a year apart from each ticket....likely to repeat? :stfu:
And likely to cause serious bodily harm at 3:30 am in the morning on a ghost highway? :stfu: If there was anyone who was likely to cause serious bodily harm, it would have been the undercover cop for tailgating at high speed while not on an "official" chase with standard lights on.

Currently, they still have possession of my car after more than 3 months of the incident now. The case is still being fought at the moment. No trial date has been set yet. Pre-trial stuff should be happening in June and I have no intention of succumbing to the draconian forfeiture office.

Settlements have also been discussed. I should not disclose the exact details here but let's just say, their proposal to me was, to put it simply, "lose your car or lose your car", if you know what I mean.....even if they don't get anything out of it.

So yes, this civil forfeiture bs can and will happen to you even if you are only *alleged* of speeding. Obviously, I disputed the violation ticket and will have to deal with it a year later.

Thought you all might be interested in knowing how ridiculous these clowns can get, and if you are also one of their victims, know that you are not alone. Stay tuned as I update with more news as the trial draws closer.

[RevRav]

There I was cruising along the highway at 3:30 am, virtually no one was around the highway.

The undercover cop got off his truck, asked me why I was going so fast, what was I doing....etc. Standard questions. He claimed I was going at 190km/h but didn't show me any readings.

If there was anyone who was likely to cause serious bodily harm, it would have been the undercover cop for tailgating at high speed while not on an "official" chase with standard lights on.

So you admit it was at highspeed 'eh? :speechless:

[sapere]

So you admit it was at highspeed 'eh? :speechless:

I would think anything above 80km/h is high speed.

[!SG]

the issue comes with the "empty liquor bottle" and also blowing a warning.

that is whats biting you in the ass.

get a lawyer.

[jack3d]

I'd love to be on your side but its hard.. empty can and you blew a warning.. oh man, goodluck.

[10W-30]

I appreciate you sharing your experience online, and you've definitely warned me about the possible consequences.

But what's really bothering me is that you still think drinking & driving plus speeding is ok in the middle of the night on a highway that "virtually" no one is around. To me alcohol plus speeding is just a recipe for disaster, whether to your own body, your friends whom you dropped off, or just some regular joe who decides to use the highway and get caught up with you at the wrong place at the wrong time. Unless you got a breathalyzer with you how can you be sure you're below the limit everytime you drink and get behind the wheel? Just because nothing bad has happened yet doesn't mean everything is ok. Afterall it is a public highway, the safety of the general public (including your own) should be the priority.

It sucks to have your car taken away from you but the civil forfeiture office has certainly got its point across. Just by reading your post I would have second thoughts before flooring the pedal or hitting up a drink, let alone both.

Good luck with your case.

[Birchum]

GL.

[dangonay]

So you sau you've had "less than 3 tickets" then you say you've had 2 "regulars" and 1 "excessive". What were the conditions of those previous tickets (how fast were you going, where were you driving).

They're saying you are "likely" to commit further offences in the future. That usually only comes from having a history, otherwise they can't claim you are "inclined" to repeat.

I'd really like to know your whole driving record. For example, on your previous tickets how fast were you going and where? Were you only 10 km/h over the limit or were you at 39 km/h, or just barely under the excessive speed? How many issues have you had involving drinking and driving, like roadside 24hr suspensions which aren't classified as impaired driving?

I don't think we're getting the whole story here.

[firebird79_00]

Did anyone else notice that was his first post?

[InvisibleSoul]

There I was cruising along the highway at 3:30 am, virtually no one was around the highway.
So about how fast were you cruising at before the black truck showed up?

All of a sudden out of nowhere, a black truck started to tailgate me from behind. Natural reaction told me to switch lanes and let it pass, so I did. It didn't bother to pass instead it continued to tailgate. The distance were very close, so I proceeded to speed up to gain a bit of distance for safety. That didn't help at all, the truck continued to tail me all the way till I got off at the exit, up the mountain, and about 1 block away from my house the red blue lights were flashing from the truck. Ahhhh....only took about 20 mins to identify me as a dangerous driver and finally decided to pull me over. Lovely, so much for prevention.
So he followed you for 20 minutes? And during that time, because he was on your tail, you kept going faster and faster?

The undercover cop got off his truck, asked me why I was going so fast, what was I doing....etc. Standard questions. He claimed I was going at 190km/h but didn't show me any readings.
So how fast do you think you were going?

[originalhypa]

It is official.

Another civil forfeiture case against a vehicle for alleged speeding is underway, and this time the victim is no one else but myself. This has not gone to the media as of yet.

But believe it or not, here is my story:

On the night of Jan 7, I was driving home after dropping my friends off as usual. My route was from Highway #1 1st ave exit all the way to the Gaglardi exit and up Cariboo Hill where I live, which usually takes about 15-20 mins of driving pending traffics. There I was cruising along the highway at 3:30 am, virtually no one was around the highway.

All of a sudden out of nowhere, a black truck started to tailgate me from behind. Natural reaction told me to switch lanes and let it pass, so I did. It didn't bother to pass instead it continued to tailgate. The distance were very close, so I proceeded to speed up to gain a bit of distance for safety. That didn't help at all, the truck continued to tail me all the way till I got off at the exit, up the mountain, and about 1 block away from my house the red blue lights were flashing from the truck. Ahhhh....only took about 20 mins to identify me as a dangerous driver and finally decided to pull me over. Lovely, so much for prevention.

The undercover cop got off his truck, asked me why I was going so fast, what was I doing....etc. Standard questions. He claimed I was going at 190km/h but didn't show me any readings. He also threatened that I was going to lose my car. Then he said he didn't want to talk to me anymore (???). 5 mins later, a marked white RCMP cop came and started talking to the undercover cop. Didn't talk to me, then she simply left (??). Few mins later, a different RCMP cop came, and again, went to talk to the undercover first. Then he came to me and asked all the standard questions again.

He gave me an ASD, which I blew a 'WARN'. Then he proceeded to write me a ticket of excessive speeding and possession of opened alcohol in the vehicle (which really, was just an emptied can and I even told and showed him that). The excessive speeding alone also came with the newly implemented 7 days impoundment, so the tow truck came to take away my car. After which, they let me go with the impoundment notice and the 3 day driving prohibition notice for blowing a WARN for the very first time.

About 3 hours later at 7 am, cops came banging on my door and gave me the blue copy of the actual violation ticket.

7 days later, I went to the impounded lot to pick up my car. The staffs told me the car was gone already. Apparently, the civil forfeiture office took it around 2 days before the impoundment was over.

Ever since then, I've been fighting to get my car back. Had a chat with the crown's lawyer and told him that I had very little equity in the car as it was a fairly new leased car. If they auction it off, everything goes to the leasing company and they don't get a dime because the "interest" of the leasing company must be protected for being an uninvolved party, which then, leaves me to pay the difference between the auctioned price and how much I still owe.

I can assure you all that it will be in the 5 digits range. And no, I don't make 100k+ a year and I don't come from a wealthy family. The car is insured and registered strictly under my name, in other words, I pay the whole thing myself with my own legit hard working money.

Just to give you all an idea of the numbers, the car worths about 50k brand new and it currently worths about 30k according to the black book.

Also on the notice of civil action, they are claiming I was and also is likely to repeat including but not limited to:

1. Excessive speeding
2. Driving without consideration
3. Driving without due care
4. Driving in a manner dangerous to public in light of all conditions
5. Impaired by alcohol contrary to criminal code 253(1)(a)

Which could potentially cause serious bodily harm.

While on the actual violation ticket, I only got excessive speeding so wtf was all those made up bs? Might as well throw the whole MVA book at me. I am also not being criminally charged by the police for impaired driving. Fact is also I've got less than 3 speeding tickets over the course of 8 years of driving in my whole life. 2 of which were regulars and only 1 was excessive and with at least a year apart from each ticket....likely to repeat? :stfu:
And likely to cause serious bodily harm at 3:30 am in the morning on a ghost highway? :stfu: If there was anyone who was likely to cause serious bodily harm, it would have been the undercover cop for tailgating at high speed while not on an "official" chase with standard lights on.

Currently, they still have possession of my car after more than 3 months of the incident now. The case is still being fought at the moment. No trial date has been set yet. Pre-trial stuff should be happening in June and I have no intention of succumbing to the draconian forfeiture office.

Settlements have also been discussed. I should not disclose the exact details here but let's just say, their proposal to me was, to put it simply, "lose your car or lose your car", if you know what I mean.....even if they don't get anything out of it.

So yes, this civil forfeiture bs can and will happen to you even if you are only *alleged* of speeding. Obviously, I disputed the violation ticket and will have to deal with it a year later.

Thought you all might be interested in knowing how ridiculous these clowns can get, and if you are also one of their victims, know that you are not alone. Stay tuned as I update with more news as the trial draws closer.

quoted for posterity.

Also, good luck with this. Civil forfeiture is bullshit, but in this case you have an uphill battle based on your past record.

[CRS]

Just something to note for the future:

1. If there is no one to pass, stay on the RIGHT lane
2. If you are passing someone, move to the LEFT lane
3. After you have passed, move BACK to the RIGHT lane

I'm assuming you were on the left lane before the truck started to "tailgate you" and then you moved to the right lane? Because it would be absurd to do that backwards. However, if I had changed lanes and the person still tailgated me, I would have simply pulled over instead of speeding up because that person has showed that he/she has no intention of just passing me.

[Phat_R]

Driving at 3:30 AM you are just asking for trouble period

[gdoh]

the issue comes with the "empty liquor bottle" and also blowing a warning.

that is whats biting you in the ass.

get a lawyer.

/thread

[dark0821]

GL OP

it sucks to hear...but cops are known to do that.. I known a few friend, myself included where the cop will follow you for a LONG ass time b4 they lit their lights. I think the biggest blunder is the WARN and the opened liquor bottle as someone has mentioned above. Good Luck yo

[Skyline350gt]

But what's really bothering me is that you still think drinking & driving plus speeding is ok in the middle of the night on a highway that "virtually" no one is around. To me alcohol plus speeding is just a recipe for disaster, whether to your own body, your friends whom you dropped off, or just some regular joe who decides to use the highway and get caught up with you at the wrong place at the wrong time. Unless you got a breathalyzer with you how can you be sure you're below the limit everytime you drink and get behind the wheel? Just because nothing bad has happened yet doesn't mean everything is ok. Afterall it is a public highway, the safety of the general public (including your own) should be the priority.

It sucks to have your car taken away from you but the civil forfeiture office has certainly got its point across. Just by reading your post I would have second thoughts before flooring the pedal or hitting up a drink, let alone both.

Good luck with your case.

Man shit happens, got to live your life. Obviously he wasn't even buzzed blowing a warn, he just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong pig.

[cococly]

Can someone please advice me what is "blew a WARN"?

Also, if the undercover cop said the OP was doing about 190km/h,which was at least 80-90km/h above the speed limit. :speechless:

[TouringTeg]

Clearly you were drinking and driving and were also speeding. I doubt you want to post here how fast you were going but it sounds like it was over the limit.

We obviously aren't getting the whole story here.

[jaguar604]

It's 0330am with the road empty and it took him 20 minutes to get from 1st ave to the Gaglardi exit.

[TheNewGirl]

Only 3 tickets all at least 1 year apart? So you're saying for half your driving career you've been a shitty reckless driver culminating in driving around with empties in your car while above the provincial limit?

If that is your outlook towards what makes a "good" driver then this really was a forgone conclusion and I'd beg you to just not bother to try and get your license back. I don't want to share the road with you.

I've driven for 7 years and never had a ticket or even been pulled over. It's not hard.

[s300ae]

no pity party from me. you fucked up. deal with it

[MindBomber]

Given your past driving record and the facts that you admit about the evening, it sounds like the laws are doing exactly what they were designed to do, removing dangerous drivers from our roads.

[donjalapeno]

99.20% of the time cops dont bullshit, there not out in the world too fuck everyone over. if they say you were going fast then you were going fast and the alcohal thing made matters worse.

[Jgresch]

Remove the one part about him tailgating you, maybe he was just getting close to run your plate, and noticed you switched lanes so stayed behind you.... Then you take off, of course he's gonna follow you.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[GG]

99.20% of the time cops dont bullshit, there not out in the world too fuck everyone over. if they say you were going fast then you were going fast and the alcohal thing made matters worse.

actually i have been bullshitted by a pig 7 years ago, gave me a VI saying my car was lowered. Which in fact my suspension was absolutely STOCK

[CRS]

actually i have been bullshitted by a pig 7 years ago, gave me a VI saying my car was lowered. Which in fact my suspension was absolutely STOCK

There is a difference between bullshitting and being mistaken. Just because he thought you lowered your car doesn't mean that he knew full well that you had stock suspension and wanted to give you a ticket just for the hell of it.

[sapere]

So you sau you've had "less than 3 tickets" then you say you've had 2 "regulars" and 1 "excessive". What were the conditions of those previous tickets (how fast were you going, where were you driving).

They're saying you are "likely" to commit further offences in the future. That usually only comes from having a history, otherwise they can't claim you are "inclined" to repeat.

I'd really like to know your whole driving record. For example, on your previous tickets how fast were you going and where? Were you only 10 km/h over the limit or were you at 39 km/h, or just barely under the excessive speed? How many issues have you had involving drinking and driving, like roadside 24hr suspensions which aren't classified as impaired driving?

I don't think we're getting the whole story here.

To be more precise, the 2 regular tickets were dated in 2008. I was doing 80 in a 60 once. The other time the cop said I was following too close to the speeder up front but didn't actually get my speed. If you know the area just after you've got off the pattulo bridge in surrey, where the cops usually hide on the side, thats where I got it. Both happened during the day.

The excessive ticket was from last year. I hit 110 in an 70 on marine drive during the night.

And that's all the speeding tickets I've got for my whole driving record. I wouldn't say it is perfectly good, but definitely far from repeating.

Absolutely no drunk driving record prior to this incident.

Blowing a WARN means blood alcohol content (BAC) >= 0.05% and < 0.08%, which is another bs in itself. In my case, that meant couple beer. Put it simply, if the new drinking law didn't come in last year, I would have passed. 3 days prohibition to start for the first timer, which was what I got.

Blowing a FAIL means BAC >=0.08% and that is much more serious with a 30 days prohibition to start and a potential criminal record.

While I am not saying it is perfectly okay to drink and drive, taking my car away for the first offence is just ridiculous.

[sapere]

Just something to note for the future:

1. If there is no one to pass, stay on the RIGHT lane
2. If you are passing someone, move to the LEFT lane
3. After you have passed, move BACK to the RIGHT lane

I'm assuming you were on the left lane before the truck started to "tailgate you" and then you moved to the right lane? Because it would be absurd to do that backwards. However, if I had changed lanes and the person still tailgated me, I would have simply pulled over instead of speeding up because that person has showed that he/she has no intention of just passing me.

I was on the HOV lane actually. I switched from HOV all the way to the right lane, one lane at a time. I didn't think it was a good idea to brake or slow down at that instance. He was following dangerously close.

Keep in mind that it was a black truck in the middle of the night. I wouldn't need to be afraid to pull over if it was clearly a cop.

[Beardo85]

So how fast were you actually going? Why bother bitching if you're guilty?

[Grim]

most cops are ass hats. i was a passenger in my friends car, and he was pulled over cause his ep3 was lowered..
no joke. his ep3 only has tien suspension and work rims...

he GAVE ME a ticket for no seat belt when i clearly had it... he told me to come out of the car, then gave me a ticket afterwards... i had no way of proving i was wearing once i got out..

i ate that ticket like a dead cat..
since then i fucking hate rcmp/richmond police...

my friend felt so bad for me he offered to pay half of the ticket..

im not hiding anything in my story.. i had my seat belt. i got a ticket with no seatbelt.. cops are asshats.. end of story

[g_spyder91]

2 words: "LAWYER UP"

[Grim]

most cops are ass hats. i was a passenger in my friends car, and he was pulled over cause his ep3 was lowered..
no joke. his ep3 only has tien suspension and work rims...

he GAVE ME a ticket for no seat belt when i clearly had it... he told me to come out of the car, then gave me a ticket afterwards... i had no way of proving i was wearing once i got out..

i ate that ticket like a dead cat..
since then i fucking hate rcmp/richmond police...

my friend felt so bad for me he offered to pay half of the ticket..

im not hiding anything in my story.. i had my seat belt. i got a ticket with no seatbelt.. cops are asshats.. end of story

with that being said,
if u were excessively speeding and drinking, u deserve it
GL

[TheNewGirl]

Blowing a WARN means blood alcohol content (BAC) >= 0.05% and < 0.08%, which is another bs in itself. In my case, that meant couple beer. Put it simply, if the new drinking law didn't come in last year, I would have passed. 3 days prohibition to start for the first timer, which was what I got.

Blowing a FAIL means BAC >=0.08% and that is much more serious with a 30 days prohibition to start and a potential criminal record.

While I am not saying it is perfectly okay to drink and drive, taking my car away for the first offence is just ridiculous.

The LAW in BC is that if you blow above .05 you're impaired and get 1. a road side suspension and 2. your vehicle impounded.

You were impaired. You knew it, you had the empties IN YOUR CAR.

Because you were impaired your judgement of how things went down may not be entirely reliable. You MAY have been swerving a bit in the lane and that may have been why the officer was driving so close to you for example.

You broke the law. You knew the consequences and didn't care to heed them so now you have to face them.

Welcome to the grown up world.

[TypeRNammer]

Try getting accused of street racing when I was clearly cruising around 55km.

Yes I was aware that I was 5km above the speed limit, and ironicly other drivers around me were going faster.

Only in Richmond.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[TypeRNammer]

actually i have been bullshitted by a pig 7 years ago, gave me a VI saying my car was lowered. Which in fact my suspension was absolutely STOCK

That makes sense since it's around the fast and furious era when stock Subaru Sti's were getting shit for their stock muffler and the Honda s2000 for their stock projector headlights.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[iamed]

So how fast did he clock you going?

[sapere]

99.20% of the time cops dont bullshit, there not out in the world too fuck everyone over. if they say you were going fast then you were going fast and the alcohal thing made matters worse.

Sure, if the undercover didn't bs and I was indeed driving like a maniac on the highway, then pull me over on the highway.

Why the 20 mins of tailgating? Was he waiting for me to get into an accident first? If I really did get into an accident, would he not be liable for not taking reasonable preventive measures? He didn't pull me over because he knew I had total control of the car.

Then here I am, car taken away after being accused for driving like maniac, yet I still have my license. No license suspension or anything like that. Nothing is stopping me from getting another car to endanger the public again as they put it.

Suppose then, I did commit to all the accusations.
Did taking my car away without suspending my license solve the problem? No.
Are there incentives to them in taking away my car? Not in my case, but yes in general.
Will this make them look good to the public? Certainly.

Furthermore, if he had solid evidence of my crime, he wouldn't need to deter to using civil forfeiture to cheese his way out. He could and should have charged me criminally for dangerous driving, the car would be gone under criminal forfeiture instead and I would be ending up behind the bars. Problem solved.

Point being? He got nothing on me and that taking my car away does not solve anything. So yes, I am calling his bluff here because I wasn't driving like a maniac.

[Jgresch]

Answer everyones question. How fast were you going?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Soundy]

Also on the notice of civil action, they are claiming I was and also is likely to repeat including but not limited to:

1. Excessive speeding
2. Driving without consideration
3. Driving without due care
4. Driving in a manner dangerous to public in light of all conditions
5. Impaired by alcohol contrary to criminal code 253(1)(a)

Which could potentially cause serious bodily harm.

While on the actual violation ticket, I only got excessive speeding so wtf was all those made up bs? Might as well throw the whole MVA book at me. I am also not being criminally charged by the police for impaired driving.

http://randomoverload.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/ca2dc31a8dtector.jpg.jpg

[sapere]

The LAW in BC is that if you blow above .05 you're impaired and get 1. a road side suspension and 2. your vehicle impounded.

You were impaired. You knew it, you had the empties IN YOUR CAR.

Because you were impaired your judgement of how things went down may not be entirely reliable. You MAY have been swerving a bit in the lane and that may have been why the officer was driving so close to you for example.

You broke the law. You knew the consequences and didn't care to heed them so now you have to face them.

Welcome to the grown up world.

You talk as if you've seen the whole situation and known everything. Did I say I drank the empties? Or drinking WHILE driving?

Answer is No to both.

I knew about tickets and prohibitions, but forfeiture? I didn't think this country has shifted to communism, or did it now?

All these hypothetical MAYs and IFs need to meet their ends.

[Energy]

How fast were you going!?!?!?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[DHP 1]

faster than the speed of light


:fuckyea::alone:

[sapere]

Answer everyones question. How fast were you going?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

That is a rather meaningless question.
I drove at different speeds in different situations for different durations during the whole 20 mins incident.

He wasn't standing on the side to clock me with a radar, so there was no reading.

[Energy]

Did you reach a speed that was obviously way over the limit that you don't need any detector to tell that you over by a large amount?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[CharlieH]

he was obviously speeding, otherwise the cop wouldn't have even noticed him. way to own yourself, dumbass. and as for keeping a beer can in the car... bravo. :facepalm:

[gars]

Blowing a WARN means blood alcohol content (BAC) >= 0.05% and < 0.08%, which is another bs in itself. In my case, that meant couple beer. Put it simply, if the new drinking law didn't come in last year, I would have passed. 3 days prohibition to start for the first timer, which was what I got.

Blowing a FAIL means BAC >=0.08% and that is much more serious with a 30 days prohibition to start and a potential criminal record.

While I am not saying it is perfectly okay to drink and drive, taking my car away for the first offence is just ridiculous.

A year ago, you would have still been slapped with a 24hr prohibition from driving and had your car towed away. They just increased it to 3 days recently. They never changed the BAC%, they just increased the severity of the punishment.

Since you seemed to know so much about the law, why did you still drink?

[gars]

That is a rather meaningless question.
I drove at different speeds in different situations for different durations during the whole 20 mins incident.

how is that a meaningless question?

Are you afraid that everyone is going to shit on you if you posted a ridiculously high speed?

[CorneringArtist]

I'll ask it too, and I'll type it in a way that it can be read slower and made easier to understand:

How. Fast. Were. You. GOING?

[CharlieH]

im gonna guess that the cop was pretty accurate with his "190km/h" reading. have fun paying off the lease with no car to drive bud (y)

[Groot]

That is a rather meaningless question.
I drove at different speeds in different situations for different durations during the whole 20 mins incident.

He wasn't standing on the side to clock me with a radar, so there was no reading.

alright. what were the different speeds in the different situations for the different durations during the whole 20 mins? :whistle: :troll:

[Jgresch]

That is a rather meaningless question.
I drove at different speeds in different situations for different durations during the whole 20 mins incident.

He wasn't standing on the side to clock me with a radar, so there was no reading.

Does your vehicle come equipt with a speedometer? What was the highest number the needle was pointing to during your trip.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Jgresch]

And he doesn't need to be standing to clock you. If he is driving 170 and he can't keep up, I think he has an idea of how fast you were going.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[quasi]

To be more precise, the 2 regular tickets were dated in 2008. I was doing 80 in a 60 once. The other time the cop said I was following too close to the speeder up front but didn't actually get my speed. If you know the area just after you've got off the pattulo bridge in surrey, where the cops usually hide on the side, thats where I got it. Both happened during the day.

The excessive ticket was from last year. I hit 110 in an 70 on marine drive during the night.

And that's all the speeding tickets I've got for my whole driving record. I wouldn't say it is perfectly good, but definitely far from repeating.

Absolutely no drunk driving record prior to this incident.

Blowing a WARN means blood alcohol content (BAC) >= 0.05% and < 0.08%, which is another bs in itself. In my case, that meant couple beer. Put it simply, if the new drinking law didn't come in last year, I would have passed. 3 days prohibition to start for the first timer, which was what I got.

Blowing a FAIL means BAC >=0.08% and that is much more serious with a 30 days prohibition to start and a potential criminal record.

While I am not saying it is perfectly okay to drink and drive, taking my car away for the first offence is just ridiculous.

BS or not everyone who drives know what the new drinking laws are it doesn't matter how the laws used to be. You lost all sympathy with the empty in the car, you were obviously at some point during that night (or another night) driving with open alcohol in the car thus no sympathy or benefit of the doubt.

It doesn't matter if it's night time or not if you're going to speed prepare to pay the piper. If you've had a couple drinks and then you speed that is a really poor decisiion. Forget 190, if you were driving 140+ with the new speeding laws you made a really poor decision and should know the repercussions of that act.

I'm not a saint, I've had more then my fair share of tickets and fines. Way less of them as I get older but I've always manned up and taken responsiblity for my actions. I can guarantee my car would never get towed because I blew .5 because I would never drink and drive, not worth it. It's a shitty place to be and I hope you get your car back and learned your lesson but at the end of the day you just have yourself to blame.

[RevRav]

OP: So what's your real username? Creating duplicate accounts is against the rules you know :troll:

[Soundy]

I'll ask it too, and I'll type it in a way that it can be read slower and made easier to understand:

How. Fast. Were. You. GOING?

Maybe he'll understand it better this way:

http://www2.moltenimage.com/photos/revscene/howfast.gif

[InvisibleSoul]

That is a rather meaningless question.
I drove at different speeds in different situations for different durations during the whole 20 mins incident.

He wasn't standing on the side to clock me with a radar, so there was no reading.

You're losing credibility extremely fast.

I mean, reading through your original post, it already had the distinct feel of having being written in a way to try and elicit the most empathy and clearly leaving out relevant, incriminating details.

Now that you have outright refused to say how fast you were going, it's clear you don't have a leg to stand on.

How is that possibly a meaningless question? It may very well be the MOST meaningful piece of information surrounding this entire situation.

You seem to be under the impression that the cop HAS to catch you on radar to determine your speed. That is just outright false. As Jgresch said, if he was following behind you and going 170kmph and you were still pulling away from him, it's not hard to come up with an estimate that you were going 190kmph. I believe this IS one of the court accepted methods of determining speed by an officer.

It's also very clear you're trying to use tailgating as the reason that you were going so fast, but given the circumstances, it just doesn't fly.

He may very well have been tailgating you or following you at a distance closer than you're comfortable with... but I'm willing to bet the reason you sped up and continued to accelerate to excessive speeds wasn't because you were scared. Maybe you even thought it was fun to try and out run this guy.

Bottom line is you screwed up big, and I don't think you're going to find much sympathy here.

[flagella]

guys, he was going 160avg 220max.

take the middle and it's 190km/h

[rageguy]

I mean, reading through your original post, it already had the distinct feel of having being written in a way to try and elicit the most empathy and clearly leaving out relevant, incriminating details.


Right here. The first post is missing a lot of information that the OP will not provide. Furthermore, the words were carefully chosen to reflect more on the innocence.

Unfortunately, it looks like you deserve the ticket and the consequences 100%.

[TheNewGirl]

You talk as if you've seen the whole situation and known everything. Did I say I drank the empties? Or drinking WHILE driving?

Answer is No to both.

I knew about tickets and prohibitions, but forfeiture? I didn't think this country has shifted to communism, or did it now?

All these hypothetical MAYs and IFs need to meet their ends.

It's against the law to have open alcohol containers in your car. Which I assume you know.

Having open alcohol containters in your car while having alcohol in your body can get you in big fucking shit. You are lucky you only blew a warn. You know that right? That you're actually getting off light in this situation?

The alternative is you could have been caught 20 minutes earlier when you may very well have blown a FAIL. Or... you know you could have killed someone.

[DsZ24]

It's against the law to have open alcohol containers in your car. Which I assume you know.

Having open alcohol containters in your car while having alcohol in your body can get you in big fucking shit. You are lucky you only blew a warn. You know that right? That you're actually getting off light in this situation?

The alternative is you could have been caught 20 minutes earlier when you may very well have blown a FAIL. Or... you know you could have killed someone.

If you're going to drink and drive (which you shouldn't be) don't be stupid enough to leave the empty's in your car. That's just asking for trouble:failed:

[Nlkko]

I'm not a fan of traffic cop either but man, blowing a warning with an opened can in the car and excessive speeding. They should have crushed your car on the spot. No sympathy here. You should realize you could have killed somebody and face worse consequences.

It's 2011 and people still think it's ok to drink and drive.

[optiblue]

well, I wish you best of luck, and you're definately going to need a good laywer. My best advice to you would be to stop posting on here for help as you're already on a slippery slope of disclosing more incriminating evidence against yourself. What you say on public fourms COULD be used against you in court. I don't think you'll get much more help from anyone other than a lawyer.

[Beardo85]

This guy is bitching because he got busted breaking the law. What a dumbass, one less tard on the road.

[twitchyzero]

damn tailgaters...i guess i have to speed up to 190kph now.
As xtc_6o4 mentions it, gotta be doing at least 1.5x the speed limit.

[jpark]

op = xtc604? :troll:

[achiam]

Fact is also I've got less than 3 speeding tickets over the course of 8 years of driving in my whole life. 2 of which were regulars and only 1 was excessive and with at least a year apart from each ticket....likely to repeat? :stfu:
And likely to cause serious bodily harm at 3:30 am in the morning on a ghost highway? :stfu: If there was anyone who was likely to cause serious bodily harm, it would have been the undercover cop for tailgating at high speed while not on an "official" chase with standard lights on.


http://www.dailyhaggis.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/o_rly.jpg

[Soundy]

op = xtc604? :troll:

op = bradford :noob:

[hk20000]

what kind of car is it? I'll bid it off auction and donate it to charity

in the form of "$5 per bash of the sledgehammer"

and the very meaningful cause will be to feed my face.

[El Bastardo]

This thread is going to be beautiful once it hits Fight Club

[RevRav]

what kind of car is it? I'll bid it off auction and donate it to charity

in the form of "$5 per bash of the sledgehammer"

and the very meaningful cause will be to feed my face.

His profile state its a 2010 TL

[tiger_handheld]

i would not have posted this on a public forum before seeking legal advise.

I think RS MGMT should cut the guy some slack and delete the posts.

[GabAlmighty]

That sucks man. You shoulda just brake checked the truck. Hell that's what I woulda done.

Why you would keep driving "fast" with someone continually tailgating you is beyond me. I can usually sniff out when a cop is tailing me.

I do feel for ya on the whole "he doesn't actually know how fast you were going". The thing I think is fucked is that if you go to court and win... Do they reimburse you for the wrongfully taken car? Or do they just send you a sorry letter?

[Mr.C]

See, the first thing i'd have done (granted, I never drive more than 20 over, and if it's 2 am I ALWAYS drive the limit, unless I'm in Brazil...), was to slow down to 80. You sped up? With a black truck? It's obvious it was an unmarked cop car.

And then you blow a warn. With an open container. Driving by yourself. And then cry on here? Really? Really?

Sorry for your loss, man, but get a lawyer. And don;t do stupid shit like this.

Edit: How fast were you going?

[jack3d]

He was traveling over 9000

[cococly]

Then here I am, car taken away after being accused for driving like maniac, yet I still have my license. No license suspension or anything like that. Nothing is stopping me from getting another car to endanger the public again as they put it.

http://www.sparkcaster.com/demotivational/images/tactical%20facepalm.jpg

[cococly]

That is a rather meaningless question.
I drove at different speeds in different situations for different durations during the whole 20 mins incident.

He wasn't standing on the side to clock me with a radar, so there was no reading.

The officer knew immediately how fast were you going because he tailgated you which indicated that he would be driving at the same speed. The officer did not need any electronic devices to record your speed.

http://www.gtfo.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/troll-physics-550x417.jpg

[Soundy]

I do feel for ya on the whole "he doesn't actually know how fast you were going".

That's retarded - of COURSE the cop knows how fast he was going - he has a speedometer too.

[baggdis300]

Can someone please advice me what is "blew a WARN"?

Also, if the undercover cop said the OP was doing about 190km/h,which was at least 80-90km/h above the speed limit. :speechless:

ITS NOT A FUCKING UNDERCOVER COP

ITS AN OFFICER OF THE LAW IN A UNMARKED POLICE CAR.

[hk20000]

here's an undercover cop for you.
http://www.manhairstyles.net/resimler/paul-walker-hair-styles-0.jpg

know the difference, it could save your life.

[GLOW]

Did anyone else notice that was his first post?

i wonder what's his normal account :troll:

[MWR34]

Better call Saul!

http://www.bettercallsaul.com/media/images/mainheader_b.jpg

[Shorn]

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2011/4/21/81b12e36-311f-41f8-98b3-93dcc01a78d3.jpg

[skylinergtr]

i'd really like to support you OP, but all signs are pointing to you being guilty.

i do agree that the law system here is outrageous. For one to loose his car and sell it off? come on be real...

I have had my share of bad cops and good. I understand that the concept of police officers are here to protect us, but from my experience there are quite a few bad apples over here in the lower mainland. Doesn't mean they are all bad though.

What you should have done in a situation like this, which you have the rights to. Black vehicle that is suspecious is tailgating you. You switch lanes and it still wont get off your ass. I've always been told that you have the rights to call 911 and report a suspecious vehicle following you. Would be hard to get the license plate if needed but otherwise you are able to do this.

Cops should not be following in unmarked cars at late at night, and tailgating to give anybody a heartattack. its simply wrong.

But also, not knowing your vehicle speeds, that you blew a warn, and evidence of liquior (aka cans). This will all come against you.

I wish you luck in your dispute.

[Ferra]

I actually don't quite get the vehicle forfeiture thing....

Is this what's happening?
1) The government gonna auction your car
2) Government pays the leasing company their remaining balance
3) If the auction proceed is more than the amount paid to the leasing company, government keeps it
4) If the auction proceed is less than amount paid to leasing company, you will have to pay the balance?

What if the car is owned?? What if it is someone else car?


FYI.....when a car speed up to your rear at night and doesn't pass you, 99.5% of the time it is a cop, the other 0.5% it is a serial killer trying to kill you.

[Meowjin]

dear god if its actually a TL, im scared taking mine past 130 0_o You have to try really really really hard to drive it past that actually.

[apple_cutie]

Hey, let me know if you need help ;)
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[dark0821]

I actually don't quite get the vehicle forfeiture thing....

Is this what's happening?
1) The government gonna auction your car
2) Government pays the leasing company their remaining balance
3) If the auction proceed is more than the amount paid to the leasing company, government keeps it
4) If the auction proceed is less than amount paid to leasing company, you will have to pay the balance?

What if the car is owned?? What if it is someone else car?


FYI.....when a car speed up to your rear at night and doesn't pass you, 99.5% of the time it is a cop, the other 0.5% it is a serial killer trying to kill you.

i believe if the car is owned, the govt keeps 100% of the money, its like the same concept as govt confiscating your gun because they have a good reason to believe you will cause harm doing it...

govt are starting to seizing houses too for grow-ups so you know.. =.= just a thought LOL.. nth is really yours yours anymore :D

[Ferra]

OP is a retard but so is this forfeiture law

I much rather see the government take a dangerous driver off the road for 5-10 years instead of taking away his car (not like he can't buy another one)

Plus this law is grossly unfair since it penalizes people who own a car much more than people who lease or borrowed the car when caught speeding...

[TheNewGirl]

OP is a retard but so is this forfeiture law

I much rather see the government take a dangerous driver off the road for 5-10 years instead of taking away his car (not like he can't buy another one)

Plus this law is grossly unfair since it penalizes people who own a car much more than people who lease or borrowed the car when caught speeding...

I will agree with you to that extent.

He should have had his license revoked for a long period of time.

[Klobbersaurus]

What you should have done in a situation like this, which you have the rights to. Black vehicle that is suspecious is tailgating you. You switch lanes and it still wont get off your ass. I've always been told that you have the rights to call 911 and report a suspecious vehicle following you. Would be hard to get the license plate if needed but otherwise you are able to do this.


would be funny if he slowed down to the proper speed limit then called 911 cause the SUV was following him then the cop pulls him over for talking on the cell :troll:

[dangonay]

License suspensions don't really work. What's to stop you from getting in a car and driving anyway? There's no penalty for driving without a license if you never get pulled over and checked.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[CharlieH]

License suspensions don't really work. What's to stop you from getting in a car and driving anyway? There's no penalty for driving without a license if you never get pulled over and checked.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

but you'll be royally fucked if you do get pulled over. driving while suspended/prohibited is a criminal charge LOL. however, driving without your license on you (left it at home or whatever) is a $96 ticket with no points.

[SumAznGuy]

but you'll be royally fucked if you do get pulled over. driving while suspended/prohibited is a criminal charge LOL. however, driving without your license on you (left it at home or whatever) is a $96 ticket with no points.

Most people who drive with a suspened/prohibited license isn't gonna care about the fine/pts/longer suspension or else they wouldn't be driving without a license.

And please show me where in the criminal code it says driving with a suspended/prohibited license is a criminal offense?

[Volvo-brickster]

Most people who drive with a suspened/prohibited license isn't gonna care about the fine/pts/longer suspension or else they wouldn't be driving without a license.

And please show me where in the criminal code it says driving with a suspended/prohibited license is a criminal offense?

I'd fail you if I could right now.
To drive, you need a license.
How does not having a valid license while driving not an offense ?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[CharlieH]

Most people who drive with a suspened/prohibited license isn't gonna care about the fine/pts/longer suspension or else they wouldn't be driving without a license.

And please show me where in the criminal code it says driving with a suspended/prohibited license is a criminal offense?


i looked into it and it turns out that you MAY be criminally charged at the judge's discretion for driving while prohibited. so technically, "driving while prohibited" is not a criminal charge, but depending on the severity of the situation in which a person is caught driving, he/she could be criminally charged and thrown in jail.

http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/osmv/publications/factsheets/no-valid-bc-licence.pdf

If you continue to operate a motor vehicle after
being prohibited from driving, you will be charged
with ‘Driving While Prohibited’ which is punishable by
a $500 fine and up to six months in jail for a first
offence.

[Guy_LikeWhoa]

he was obviously speeding, otherwise the cop wouldn't have even noticed him. way to own yourself, dumbass. and as for keeping a beer can in the car... bravo. :facepalm:

yea man, like, totally ditch that shit out the window as soon as you're done with it

[bcedhk]

the cops were on your ass because he was probably looking at your history to see if it was a stolen car( probably cause you drove it like you stole it). Also to check out what tickets you got in the past.

Then probably he took his time to prepare all the fines to give you.

OP, just pay the fines, and buy yourself a bus pass

[dangonay]

There have been lots of cases where people without licenses continued to drive and continued to get caught. They may face stiff fines, but it still isn't as bad as losing a car.

And again, it's only if you get caught.

In the 11 years I've lived in Vancouver I've gone through perhaps 20 roadblocks (drinking & driving checks) and never had an officer ask for my license - I just get waved through after the office asks you if you've been drinking. I've gone through 2 roadblocks where officers were specifically checking for licenses and/or proper insurance.

You could drive for years without a license if you weren't driving like an idiot every day.

[DasHooch]

i would not have posted this on a public forum before seeking legal advise.

I think RS MGMT should cut the guy some slack and delete the posts.

This guy should delete his own posts. I'm sure he's going to get raped in court either way. Having this on here is a really bad idea.

Imagine you just got charged with murder. You think it's a good idea to post details of your case online?

Does this forfeiture thing go ahead even if you dispute the ticket? Sounds like they grabbed the car in less than a month. What happens if you successfully dispute the ticket? Do they hand you the auction proceeds and say sorry?

[The_AK]

next time dont granny shift, instead double clutch and smoke the mofo






:troll:

[baggdis300]

dear god if its actually a TL, im scared taking mine past 130 0_o You have to try really really really hard to drive it past that actually.

your kidding right? 2010 TL has a 0-60 mph 5.2 seconds and a Quarter mile 13.7 @ 101 mph

thats pretty quick....

[cococly]

^I think he meant 130mph? :bowrofl:

[sho_bc]

And please show me where in the criminal code it says driving with a suspended/prohibited license is a criminal offense?

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-172.html

I'd fail you if I could right now.
To drive, you need a license.
How does not having a valid license while driving not an offense ?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)
Most people are prohibited from driving under the Motor Vehicle Act, thereby not a criminal offence. However, if you are disqualified by the courts under S. 259 of the Criminal Code (as linked above) and are caught driving, it will be a criminal offence.

i looked into it and it turns out that you MAY be criminally charged at the judge's discretion for driving while prohibited. so technically, "driving while prohibited" is not a criminal charge, but depending on the severity of the situation in which a person is caught driving, he/she could be criminally charged and thrown in jail.

http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/osmv/publications/factsheets/no-valid-bc-licence.pdf

If you are convicted of driving while prohibited (Motor Vehicle Act) twice, you get a mandatory 14 day sentence. Further convictions increase mandatory jail time and fine amounts.

[twitchyzero]

You could drive for years without a license if you weren't driving like an idiot every day.

Accidents happens to the best of us...what happens then? AFAIK your insurance are voided even if you did not cause the accidents.

[dangonay]

^ People who drive without licenses (and there are a lot that do) don;t think about or care about insurance or consequences. If they did, then you'd never see people driving while prohibited.

[Meowjin]

your kidding right? 2010 TL has a 0-60 mph 5.2 seconds and a Quarter mile 13.7 @ 101 mph

thats pretty quick....

I'm saying that I'm not comfertable driving past 130km/h.

Going the fast on a public road is horrifying.

[bloodmack]

I admit I've had my tickets but I haven't had a ticket for a couple of years now. (last one was no N). But for me I get pulled over at least once a month just because the cop is "suspicious". I'm a big EI guy in a sporty car. Profiling at its best. Those of you who claim that your SOOOO good at driving cause you haven't got a ticket yet doesn't mean your actually good at driving. Just lucky.

OP feel sorry for ya. But, its true the open can + blowing a warn is pretty obvious.

edit: 130mph is 209kph not hard for a TL to achieve :p

[achiam]

TIME TO CALL THE TOP GUN DUI LAWYER OF THEM ALL.
He's only based in California, just thought it'd be funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHv0TBN-F-Q

[Death2Theft]

Seriously cops that pull that tailgating highbeam bullshit pisses me off. Personally i'd slam on the brakes lock them up and let insurance figure out the rest since he will be 100% at fault.

[Death2Theft]

If you drove it like you stole it only to get caught and tailgated by a giant SUV. You need to learn how to drive.
the cops were on your ass because he was probably looking at your history to see if it was a stolen car( probably cause you drove it like you stole it). Also to check out what tickets you got in the past.

Then probably he took his time to prepare all the fines to give you.

OP, just pay the fines, and buy yourself a bus pass

[baggdis300]

Seriously cops that pull that tailgating highbeam bullshit pisses me off. Personally i'd slam on the brakes lock them up and let insurance figure out the rest since he will be 100% at fault.

lol in his case insurance would be void because he would have been breaking the MVA as be blew over .05%
I'm saying that I'm not comfertable driving past 130km/h.

Going the fast on a public road is horrifying.

lol, ok that makes sense...

[quasi]

OP didn't get the support he hoped for and abandoned ship days ago. He's obviously back to posting under his usual alias as this one was made to test the waters and see if people would actually feel for him.

[cococly]

^He still hasn't tell us how fast he went, lol

[dfo-mpo]

CONTACT INFORMATION

For more information on Civil Forfeiture,
please contact us at:
Civil Forfeiture Office
PO Box 9234 Station Provincial Government
Victoria, British Columbia V8W 9J1
or
CivilFO@gov.bc.ca

[Marco911]

You deserve to get charged for your offences and have your day in court if you wish to dispute them.

You do not deserve to get your vehicle forfeited under the civil forfeiture act, which IMO is trampling on your constitutional rights of private property ownership.

From my research, every vehicle that has been forfeited by the CFO office due to "violations that could potentially endanger the public interest" were a result of a SETTLEMENT, not a judgement of the court. I conjecture that the office does not want to bring speeding type offences to the court because if it gets thrown out, it will set a precedent where they will not be able to forfeit any more vehicles where no damage has been done to society.

I am not a lawyer. But I would like you to PM me and let me know what options they have given you regarding settlement vs. court options.

[tubbs]

i feel sorry for you dude lawyer up asap !

[dfo-mpo]

^He still hasn't tell us how fast he went, lol

200+

[Soundy]

You do not deserve to get your vehicle forfeited under the civil forfeiture act, which IMO is trampling on your constitutional rights of private property ownership.

Does that apply to seizure of drug-trafficking assets as well, then?

[Marco911]

^^The civil forfeiture office's budget is completely tied to the amount of forfeitures they make. They're essentially like parasites. They may have had an initial impact in the beginning, but most high rolling drug dealers know not to have any assets in their personal name. For the CFO office to survive, they have to go about trampling on the rights of normal citizens. We already have sufficient punitive penalties for excessive speeding. Since when does it become OK for the government to seize and sell someone's property before he has even been CONVICTED of a crime?

[dangonay]

^ So you say you've been doing "research" on all the cases and they have all been settlements. How many cases have you "investigated" and what are the details on them for you to make such a claim?

[UFO]

FWIW, it takes just under 15 minutes driving on Hwy 1 at a steady 80km/h amidst similarly flowing traffic during the day from E.1st onramp, Gaglardi exit, then up to Caribou Hill area.

If it took 20 mins at 3am to travel the same stretch, you must have been going 60km/h, or alternating between 190km/h and 0?

I feel for getting your car seized, but I too feel that there is a second side to this story

[Marco911]

^ So you say you've been doing "research" on all the cases and they have all been settlements. How many cases have you "investigated" and what are the details on them for you to make such a claim?

It's all in the Civil Forfeiture office's annual report which they publish online.

[dangonay]

It's all in the Civil Forfeiture office's annual report which they publish online.

Ah, Marco. Still the same after all these years. Instead of posting the link so other RS'ers can read it for themselves you mention something exists and leave everyone hanging.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Mancini]

Seriously cops that pull that tailgating highbeam bullshit pisses me off. Personally i'd slam on the brakes lock them up and let insurance figure out the rest since he will be 100% at fault.

Except, slamming on your brakes without cause will revert blame back to you. At least, partially.

[Marco911]

Ah, Marco. Still the same after all these years. Instead of posting the link so other RS'ers can read it for themselves you mention something exists and leave everyone hanging.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

It's the 2nd result on google:

http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/subjects/docs/civilforfeitureoffice.pdf

[bigzz786786]

can the civil forfeitures actually seized the car while it was impounded for the week? without telling the owner??

[Presto]

He's only based in California, just thought it'd be funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHv0TBN-F-Q

That guy doesn't deserve the title of Top Gun. Check it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-eZvyFBRb8