If you are thinking about whether you should be disputing a Warn IRP, or whether you made a mistake by not disputing a Warn IRP, we have some stats for you to consider.
Back in January of this year we made a Freedom of Information request for stats that the OSMV had collected concerning the Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP) scheme. We knew that they had this information right in front of them in some computer program, but because we did not identify the specific documents, they decided to not respond to us in the usual course. You can understand why we are suspicious of the BC Government when it says it is an “open government.”
In any event, they finally got around to mailing us this information on August 27, 2012. We felt that it was information that the Court should have had back in spring. And it was certainly information that the public should have had when the changes to the IRP legislation were rushed through a few weeks before the end of the spring legislative session. But the Government is tricky and there were strategic decisions that they made, such as to release the stats in August when the reporters are out of town, and to do it a few days before the long weekend when nobody is paying attention.
Enough complaining. Here’s what you wanted to know about disputing a Warn IRP:
For a 15-months period beginning October 2010 when the disputes started to come before the OSMV, 9280 people were given IRPs for blowing Warn on an ASD.
Of the 9280 people who received these IRPs, only 2% applied to dispute the prohibition.
Remember the dispute provisions at the time did not allow you to claim that you did not blow a Warn. They did not allow you to challenge the accuracy of the device. The defences, in short, were purely technical. Your odds of success on appeal did not arise from whether you may have been guilty or not, but only on whether there was a technicality found by your lawyer or the tribunal, or you weren’t driving.
Of the 2% of people who applied for a review of their Warn IRP, approximately 12.4% were successful on review. This number, although disturbingly low, has important implications for people who make the decision not to seek a review.
As we have noted, most of the defences on IRPs are purely technical. For example, we have found some police detachments are providing false evidence concerning their Approved Screening Devices. It doesn’t speak to whether our client is innocent. But when we succeed, it is usually as a result of identifying some obscure technical deficiency in the disclosure.
With this in mind, and knowing the percentage of people who succeeded in challenging their Warn IRP, you can extrapolate the number of people who may have had their IRPs lifted had they challenged them. Approximately 1100 people in BC may have had their Warn IRPs revoked had they disputed them based on a 12.4% rate of lifting Warn IRPs during this period.
If you didn’t investigate whether you had a chance of success on your Warn IRP, you may be kicking yourself now. Your chances were better than 1 in 10 of having it revoked. Although the odds are not great, it certainly makes sense to in get us to take a look at your case before you make the decision to file for review.
If you just received a Warn IRP, the lesson here is that you should not simply walk away from it. Get us or another law firm to obtain and review the police disclosure. Ensure that you are making an informed decision before you challenge the prohibition or accept it. Remember that 3 alcohol related incidents in 5 years will trigger the interlock and RDP requirements.
A final note: ICBC driving records last forever. People don’t know this because ICBC will only disclose a 5-year record to most people or organizations. But they keep this information for forever, and if you are ever in trouble and need to go to court, the entire thing — we’ve seen them going back to 1978, will be used there to decide your fate.