Re: Section 22 of the Highway 407 Act

Getting back to you, I checked with the MTO this morning to confirm what I posted last night. Yes, unfortunately all the vehicles in your name will be barred from renewing their sticker, not just the one with the delinquent toll.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASIDE:

Appropriate, the pan monniker you suffixed to the 407 ETR name. Coincidently, it's the same analogy that I've been using all along.

In the world of nature, you'll see a small pack of wolves chasing down a heard of a 2000 caribou up north somewhere. I always wondered why it is that the poor caribou, while they're on their desperate run, never stop to think to themselves, "Hey, there's 2000 of us and only 8 of those little suckers - why are WE the ones running?" If they could do that, then they would turn around and start chasing the wolves. Well, of course, animals aren't capable of rational discursive thought, only instinct implanted and ordained to the cycle of nature.

But we humans are. So how is it that 6 million GTA residents allow ourselves, against all principle of social order and reason, to be subjected to and chased down by a consortium of foreign billionaires who hold one of our most vital assets hostage so they can gouge and gore us without accountability for 99 years?

Especially, when according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, we have paid for the highway 20 times over with our gas taxes. And now we, our children, our children's children and our children's children's chidren will continue to pay untiil the year 2097. But hey, Mike Harris told us we got a good deal and to be grateful.

This is a complete reversal of the principle of societal order in that the common good is being sacraficed to the private interests of a greedy few, That means, at some level, the order of society must be breaking down. The only answer as the business editor, Linda Leatherdale of the Toronto Sun, earlier suggested, is the galvanization of public opinion in society to force an expropriation with due compensation. Property rights assigned through contract law are not absolutely sacrosant. When they conflict with the greater need of society as a whole to have a viable transportation infrastructure, they must be subordinated to that greater need.

Ray

That's a good question which I haven't encountered before but I'm pretty sure the answer is that all your vehicles would be screwed when it comes time to renew any of their stickers. The reason is that refusal is made under Section 22 of the Highway 407 Act of 1998, a copy of which I include below.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failure to pay toll ? non-validation of vehicle permit

22. (1) If a toll, and the related fees and interest, are not paid within 90 days of the day a person receives a notice of failure to pay under section 16, the owner may notify the Registrar of Motor Vehicles of the failure to pay. 1998, c. 28, s. 22 (1).

Method of giving notice

(2) Any notice to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles under this section may be given in writing, by direct electronic transmission or by any other prescribed method. 1998, c. 28, s. 22 (2).

Notification

(3) The owner shall promptly inform the person who received notice of failure to pay under section 16 that notice has been given to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles under subsection (1). 1998, c. 28, s. 22 (3).

Registrar?s action

(4) If the Registrar of Motor Vehicles receives notice under subsection (1), he or she shall, at the next opportunity, refuse to validate the vehicle permit issued to the person who received the notice of failure to pay under section 16 and refuse to issue a vehicle permit to that person. 1998, c. 28, s. 22 (4).

Same, if dispute

(5) The Registrar of Motor Vehicles may act under subsection (4) even though the person who received the notice of failure to pay under section 16 has disputed his or her obligation to pay under section 17 or has appealed a decision of the owner under section 19. 1998, c. 28, s. 22 (5).

When toll is paid

(6) If notice has been given to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles under subsection (1) and the toll and related fees and interest are subsequently paid, the owner shall immediately notify the Registrar of the payment. 1998, c. 28, s. 22 (6).

Same

(7) If the Registrar of Motor Vehicles is notified by the owner that the toll, fees and interest have been paid or is notified by the dispute arbitrator that the person is not responsible for paying the toll, fees and interest, the Registrar shall,

(a) validate any vehicle permit that he or she refused to validate under subsection (4);

(b) issue a vehicle permit to a person if it was refused under subsection (4). 1998, c. 28, s. 22

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice in particular the wording of Section 22(4), especially the last clause where it says "and refuse to issue a vehicle permit to that person." which seems to apply to any vehicle that you may own, not just the one that tolls are due on. Fuddle Duddle!

I will check tomorrow but I'm probably right unfortunately.

Just think, all this because of a 2-1 judges' decision. One person controlling the fate of 6 million GTA residents. Talk about the tail wagging the dog.

Thank you for the information Raymond. While definitely not what I wanted to hear, it certainly answers my questions on recourse - or complete lack thereof.

Maybe you can answer this, however - if I have another car, with different plates, can they deny my plate renewal on this other license plate?

Thanks again!

Here is the link for the class action lawsuit agaist the 407 launched back in 2003. As you can see, it's meaningless and worthless in its scope.

http://www.canadalegal.com/gosite.asp?s=4722

You can read my posts on Jan. 31, 2007 on this siite re the 407 as well as those by others that amply show that you have no rights for the next 91 years until their lease runs out. There's no point in appealing because thanks to the lassitude and apathy of voters, the dishonesty of the former Harris Government and the inertia of the present Liberal one, the foreign consortium ownership has taken Ontario residents hostage for 99 years. That's longer than the jihadists take them in .....well, you know.

The Ministry of Transportation referred to themselves as little more than a collection agency for the 407 who can charge you whatever they want whenever they want. As I said, they are accountable to no one outside themselves thanks to our soppy, weak kneed provincial government. And don't bother to complain to the ombudsman; she's just a recycled bill collector for the 407 who'll charge you an extra illegal [as per section 18(2)] $32.10 fee besides the 27% annual interest to appeal your bill (which in your case, would be too late anyway) Below are the 4 reasons under section 17(1) of the 407 Act that you could have appealed a toll invoice had it been less than 30 days old. A moot point because none of the 4 listed reasons apply to your case anyhow. Also notice the reverse onus provision of section 17(4).

They say people get the government they deserve, not the government they want. Happy license plate renewal. I wish I could be less gloomy, but there's no basis to be.

Ray

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dispute

17. (1) A person who receives notice under section 16 may dispute the alleged failure to pay a toll on any of the following grounds:

1. The toll was paid in full.

2. The amount of the toll is incorrect.

3. The vehicle, the numbered plate or the toll device registered to the person was lost or stolen at the time the toll was incurred.

4. The person is not the person responsible for the payment of the toll under subsection 13 (1). 1998, c. 28, s. 17 (1).

Notice of dispute

(2) A person who receives notice under section 16 may dispute the alleged failure to pay a toll if the person sends a notice of dispute, setting out the grounds on which the dispute is based, to the owner within 30 days of receiving the notice of failure to pay the toll under section 16. 1998, c. 28, s. 17 (2).

Payment without prejudice

(3) The payment of a toll and related fees and interest shall not prejudice the right of a person who receives notice under section 16 to dispute the alleged failure to pay the toll, fees and interest. 1998, c. 28, s. 17 (3).

Onus

(4) The onus of proving the grounds upon which a dispute under this section is based is on the person who sends notice of the dispute. 1998, c. 28, s. 17 (4).

Decision

(5) Within 30 days of receiving a notice of dispute from a person under subsection (2), the owner shall render a decision and shall send the person a copy of the decision, with or without reasons. 1998, c. 28, s. 17 (5).

Same

(6) If the dispute is unsuccessful, the owner shall, in writing together with the copy of the decision, inform the person who gave the notice of dispute of his or her right to appeal the decision to a dispute arbitrator and shall provide the address of the dispute arbitrator. 1998, c. 28, s. 17 (6).

Failure to give timely decision

(7) If the owner fails to send a copy of the decision to the person who sent the notice of dispute within the time period required under subsection (5), the tolls and the related fees and interest that were the subject of the dispute shall be deemed to be paid in full. 1998, c. 28, s. 17 (7).

Appointment of dispute arbitrator

18. (1) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may appoint a dispute arbitrator for the purposes of section 19. 1998, c. 28, s. 18 (1).

Fees and expenses

(2) The fees and expenses of the dispute arbitrator shall be paid by the owner. 1998, c. 28, s. 18 (2).

I am looking for some information regarding this "wonderful" service. I've moved around a lot over the past few years, and never received any ETR bills. Now that I've settled down, I received a bill that states that I have a balance owing with them for some $978! I can't get a straight answer from ETR, and every time I call, they say that they have no record of any previous calls that I made. Now, going back some 4 years, There was a small balance owing of less than $60, and the person who borrowed my car and incurred the charge told me they were going to pay it. I never followed up on the payment (my fault entirely) and now I get this notice. I have also been advised that I cannot renew my plates within the next month unless I pay off the balance, which as far as I can tell, is comprised mostly of interest charges.

I remeber hearing something about a current class action suit against the ETR for tolls charged incorrectly, but have not been able to find anything other than references and details on the suit resolved in 2003.

If anyone can provide any clarification, details or information, I would really appreciate it.