Vancouver Criminal Law

OUR LOCATIONS:

Vancouver: 604 685 8889
Richmond: 604 370 3050
Surrey: 604 593 8580
Victoria: 250 384 0100
Kelowna: 250 860 2766
Fort McMurray: 780 750 7588

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2016 Acumen Law Corporation.
All Rights Reserved.

Call 24 Hrs

604 685 8889

Call Us For Free Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Locations
 

Notice of Intent to Prohibit Case Results

Notice of Intent to Prohibit Case ResultsIf you receive a Notice of Intent to Prohibit you from driving from the Ministry of Justice RoadSafetyBC, you have only 21 days from the date of the Notice to put together your submission package. Call now for a free consultation. We deal with RoadSafetyBC prohibition letters. We know how to protect your drivers license. Read some of our Notice of Intent to Prohibit Case Results below.

 

Re: 4-Month RoadSafetyBC Driving Prohibition (Client 2549)

 

Lawyer: Paul Doroshenko

Client received a Notice of Intent to Prohibit indicating that the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles was to prohibit the client from driving for 4 months.

 

CASE FACTS:

The client was issued a 24-hour prohibition and a ticket for driving without due care and attention. The client was placed on probation, but the probation letter never arrived in the mail. Client then got two speeding tickets and was sent a Notice of Intent to prohibit from driving for 4 months.

 

ARGUMENT:

“Client did not know he was on probation. The Violation Ticket for driving without due care and attention should never have been issued. Client required his vehicle for work and to support his family. He completed an online safe driving course. The threat of the prohibition was enough to convince the client to drive more safely in the future.”

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION LIFTED

“I have reviewed your driving record and your legal counsel’s submission. I am satisfied that you have had time to assess your poor driving behavior, and I am remitting your prohibition effective this date.” PROHIBITION CANCELLED

RE: 8-Month RoadSafetyBC Driving Prohibition (Client 2218)

 

Lawyer: Paul Doroshenko

Client received a Notice of Intent to Prohibit from RoadSafetyBC indicating that the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles was to prohibit the client from driving for 8 months.

 

CASE FACTS:

Following a significant motor vehicle accident, the driver provided breath samples over .08 mg%. The investigating officer then wrote to the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles to request that the Superintendent suspend the client’s driving privileges.

 

ARGUMENT:

“The evidence does not support the officer’s opinion. The officer has attempted to utilize the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles to facilitate an abuse of process by conscripting the Superintendent to usurp the duties of the criminal justice system. The officer violated the client’s rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Office of the Superintendent is not assigned the task of punishing people whom the court views as innocent.”

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION LIFTED

“I have considered your lawyer’s written submissions and reviewed your driving record. Your lawyer feels that the Constable intended to use the Superintendent to facilitate an abuse of process. Although I do have concerns as to your driving on this evening, I have not been provided with sufficient evidence that you were involved in a street race or that you were speeding. I have decided to cancel you prohibition from driving.” PROHIBITION CANCELLED

RE: 5-Month RoadSafetyBC Driving Prohibition Suspension (Client 2878)

 

Lawyer: Sarah Leamon

Client received a Notice of Intent to Prohibition from RoadSafetyBC indicating that the Superintendent of Motor Vehicles was to prohibit the client from driving for a period of five months.

 

CASE FACTS:

The client received six significant violation tickets over 4 years. Three of these tickets were for speeding, including one excessive speeding ticket, and one was for driving without consideration. The client had received a warning letter in the past.

 

ARGUMENT:

Considering the client’s personal circumstances, a five month driving prohibition would be unduly harsh. The client understands and accepts the consequences of his past actions. Client agreed to take part in an online defensive driving course in order to address his unsatisfactory driving record.

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION REDUCED

“I have considered your lawyer’s written submission and reviewed your driving record. While I cannot ignore your recent driving behavior, I have given some weight to your personal circumstances; therefore, I have decided to reduce the term of your prohibition from driving from five months to two months.” PROHIBITION REDUCED

RE: 3-Month RoadSafetyBC Driving Prohibition (Client 2362)

 

Lawyer: Kyla Lee

Client was sent a letter indicating that he would be prohibited from driving for three months.

 

CASE FACTS:

The client was issued two 24-hour prohibitions for drugs in a short time period. He received a Notice of Intent to prohibit his license for 3 months. Client wrote in himself and requested the prohibition be cancelled. The Superintendent denied his request and continued to uphold the prohibition.

 

ARGUMENT:

Client had learned his lesson after serving part of the prohibition. The consequences associated with a driving prohibition were severe. Client agreed to take an online defensive driving course to rehabilitate his driving record.

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION REDUCED

RoadSafetyBC agreed that the client had taken steps to address the problems in his driving behavior. The three month prohibition was reduced to one month and client was able to start driving again. PROHIBITION REDUCED

RE: 4-Month Ministry of Justice Driving Prohibition (Client 2371)

 

Lawyer: Sarah Leamon

Client received a Notice of Intent to Prohibit indicating that the Ministry of Justice RoadSafetyBC office was to prohibit the client from driving for a period of 4 months due to an unsatisfactory driving record.

 

CASE FACTS:

The client is an ‘N’ driver. The client was issued three tickets in the last 14 months. These tickets were for excessive speeding, regular speeding and driving contrary to restrictions. The client received a Notice of Intent to Prohibit from driving for 4 months.

 

ARGUMENT:

“Considering the client’s personal circumstances and overall driving record, a four month driving prohibition would be unduly harsh. It is not necessary to address the public interest or to sanction my client.”

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION REDUCED

“I have considered your lawyer’s written submissions. I have decided to reduce the term of your prohibition from driving from four months to two months.” PROHIBITION REDUCED

RE: 4-Month RoadSafetyBC Driving Suspension (Client 2410)

 

Lawyer: Kyla Lee

Client was sent a letter indicating that he would be sent a driving suspension of three months.

 

CASE FACTS:

The client was issued several violation tickets in a short time period. The client was an N driver. RoadSafetyBC decided it was in the public interest to suspend him from driving for a period of three months. The client served a three month prohibition and at the end of the prohibition was issued another letter suspending him for a further three months.

 

ARGUMENT:

Client had learned his lesson after serving the first prohibition. There were no further infractions on the record to warrant a second suspension from driving. It was inappropriate to suspend the client again without giving him an opportunity to prove himself. Additionally, the client required his vehicle to work so he could save money for school. A driving suspension would result in him losing his job.

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION CANCELLED

The RoadSafetyBC agreed that a further prohibition from driving was neither necessary nor in the public interest. RoadSafetyBC agreed to remit the prohibition back to the date of the first prohibition and the client was permitted to continue driving. PROHIBITION REVOKED

RE: 1-Month RoadSafetyBC Driving Prohibition (Client 2319)

 

Lawyer: Kyla Lee

Client was sent a letter indicating that she would be prohibited from driving for one month.

 

CASE FACTS:

The client was issued a 24-hour prohibition for alcohol and a ticket for having too many passengers in the vehicle. The Superintendent of Motor Vehicles sent her a letter deciding to prohibit her license for a period of one month.

 

ARGUMENT:

Client required her vehicle for employment reasons. The consequences of a prohibition would result in the client losing her job. The prohibition was not warranted given the client’s limited driving record. Client agreed to take a safe driving program to demonstrate she was dedicated to being a safer driver.

 

CASE RESULTS: PROHIBITION CANCELLED

The prohibition from driving was no longer warranted. The client had participated in rehabilitation and no longer posed a risk to the public. PROHIBITION REVOKED

Call us at 604-685-8889 for a free consultation and learn how we can successfully help you.