If you received a 90-day IRP or ADP in the last 8 months, you might have thought that you were very lucky for having avoided being forced through the so-called remedial programs. After all, months went by and you probably didn’t receive a letter from the Office of the Superintendent telling you that you had to pay for the Responsible Drivers Program (RDP) course or get an Interlock (IIP) installed in your car. Unfortunately, there’s been a change of policy. And if you’re reading this, you probably know a little of what we’re talking about.
A really short history of the so-called remedial programs:
Before we brought our first challenge to the so-called remedial programs, everyone was automatically forced to take the RDP and get an Interlock if they ever wanted to drive again after receiving a 90-day IRP or ADP driving prohibition. This happened because the government didn’t properly follow the law.
The law says that if you receive one of these prohibitions, the Superintendent needs to look at your driving record to see if it’s appropriate to make you do the remedial requirements. However, the OSMV made no review of the driving records of anyone. In fact, it was so automatic that their computer system did it all for them.
What’s happening now:
In late July the OSMV started sending letters to everyone who received an ADP or IRP prohibition in the previous 7 months. The letter says that they’re sorry but there’s been a change in policy. You’ve served your punishment, paid your debt, made your mea cuplas for your egregious behaviour and now, often months later, the BC Government wants another pound of flesh. The Government is sorry about the delay, but now they’ve made the retro-active decision to send you to the RDP and have the people at Stroh make the determination as to whether you should be recommended for the Interlock.
This is the new process that was described by the former justice minister and in Government press releases as being designed to enhance fairness. (More about that later.) This is the change of policy referred to in that letter that’s keeping you up at night.
The new process:
The new process seems to be that a person has 21 days from the date of the OSMV letter to write in to explain why they should be exempt from the so-called remedial programs. Within a week or two a decision is sent to the person rejecting their argument in almost every case.
Our view of the new process:
We created the new process in our office in the autumn of 2012. We take the credit for inventing it. But in our process, people with good driving records would not have to participate in the so-called remedial programs. As far as we’re concerned, that’s the implication of the legislation.
The Motor Vehicle Act is clear that the fact of receiving an IRP or ADP will trigger the OSMV to review the person’s driving record. This review is to determine if the driving record demonstrates that it is appropriate to send the person to the so-called remedial programs.
If the elected officials wanted to send everybody or even most of the people who received 90-day driving prohibitions to the so-called remedial programs, they could have said that in the legislation. However, instead of doing that, they made it a trigger for a review of the driving record.
The new process is a two-step method of sending virtually everyone, regardless of their driving history, to the so-called remedial programs. In our view, that’s just wrong. So we’re making our own change of policy.
Our change of policy:
We’re going to take this on. If you have a good driving record with no history of any alcohol related offences, aside from the IRP or ADP, then we’re willing to write in to the OSMV to contest the referral to the so-called remedial programs. We are selecting a few test cases, like we’ve done in the past, and if the OSMV tribunal rejects the request for reconsideration, we will file petitions in BC Supreme Court to challenge this new process.
Because we know that the tribunal will reject the requests for reconsideration for nearly everybody, even if they have a perfect driving record, we’re not encouraging people to hire us to make these submissions. We’re happy to do the legal work. There is a review process. The problem is that, to date, even the most meritorious of applicants have been rejected. This is wrong in our view, which is why we’re challenging it.
So we are willing to make the submissions. And we’re taking test cases to court. That’s our change of policy.