# Charged with "projection in excess of 1m from front bumper".



## bodaggin (Sep 23, 2011)

So the Vehicle inspection unit charged me with having "a projection beyond 1 meter from the front bumper" (IE my plow). I'm preparing my defence already but would like your experience:

-has anyone been charged with a law similar to this?
-have you successfully defended the charge, if so how/what defence?
-Does anyone on this site have a plow or know of one that DOESN'T extend at least 1 meter (3.3 feet) beyond the front bumper OR the front wheels?

Your responses are appreciated.


----------



## 1olddogtwo (Aug 6, 2007)

just take your snow plow off and get re inspected


----------



## JoeCool (Oct 29, 2009)

Get Pics and measurements from a bunch of MIT units and City of Winnipeg ones. Talk with Fort Garry Industries about specs they follow. I suspect charges will be quickly dropped only issue to cover still would be vehicle class as the rules may not apply to heavier trucks. FGI can help with that.


----------



## Mr.Markus (Jan 7, 2010)

Put a red flag on it and your good...


----------



## grandview (Oct 9, 2005)

Mr.Markus;1728101 said:


> Put a red flag on it and your good...


Better yet, paint on the the the plow ,road killer remover.


----------



## JoeCool (Oct 29, 2009)

The city of winnipeg's viu can't outlaw all snowplows the province/city/contractors use, judge will toss it.


----------



## bodaggin (Sep 23, 2011)

JoeCool to clarify my plow is a private vehicle, not used for plowing on behalf of the "traffic authority". There is a provision in the law that exempts "any vehicle operated on behalf of a traffic authority" from this law. Talk about double standard. So a guy uses the same truck for a gov't contract and he's legal, and the guy uses that truck privately is illegal. 

Obviously I'll have to plead "not guilty" or "guilty with explanation", and I have a few good arguments for "not guilty" already. Any more insight would be of great help. Thanks guys.


----------



## JoeCool (Oct 29, 2009)

bodaggin;1728252 said:


> JoeCool to clarify my plow is a private vehicle, not used for plowing on behalf of the "traffic authority". There is a provision in the law that exempts "any vehicle operated on behalf of a traffic authority" from this law. Talk about double standard. So a guy uses the same truck for a gov't contract and he's legal, and the guy uses that truck privately is illegal.
> 
> Obviously I'll have to plead "not guilty" or "guilty with explanation", and I have a few good arguments for "not guilty" already. Any more insight would be of great help. Thanks guys.


Understood. The double standard isn't a surprise but might be a tough fight. I will ask a customer of mine tomorrow when I am there. I am in also in Winnipeg. What is the GVW of your truck?


----------



## stone74 (Nov 15, 2013)

bodaggin;1728012 said:


> So the Vehicle inspection unit charged me with having "a projection beyond 1 meter from the front bumper" (IE my plow). I'm preparing my defence already but would like your experience:
> 
> -has anyone been charged with a law similar to this?
> -have you successfully defended the charge, if so how/what defence?
> ...


I'm from Wpg as well what is the measurement rule, from the bumper or front of front tires?

Was your plow angled or straight when you got stopped? V plow or straight plow?


----------



## bodaggin (Sep 23, 2011)

JoeCool it's actually a Jeep with a plow on it. Snoway 22 series straight blade. Good for asking GVWR because he got me overweight on the front axle by 130kg to the vehicle manufacturer weight rating (which it makes no mention of in the law and I will confidently argue in court). 

Stone74 the plow was straight when I was stopped. He charged me with part B of the law which is "1m beyond the front bumper", however part A does exist as well, "1m beyond the front tires". Since we're all in Winnipeg I guess it's good to know they're out there being weasels about this because again, I'm not sure I've ever seen a plow of any kind that isn't in violation of these laws. Not sure why I keep making that point, because that is the argument for a "guilty with explanation" plea.

Right now I'll be pleading "not guilty", as the definition of a bumper in the highway traffic act is "a device designed to be affixed to the front and rear of a motor vehicle of the passenger car type and capable of minimizing or reducing damage to other parts of the motor vehicle".

Well, my plow blade is:

-designed to be affixed to the front of a motor vehicle.
-my Jeep is "of the passenger car type".
and most importantly
-the blade is very "CAPABLE" of minimizing or preventing damage to other parts of the motor vehicle. In fact it's more capable than any other bumper on any other car as it's designed to take the beating of hitting snow and ice all day!

So I will argue that under the definition of the highway traffic act--the act I am charged under--my plow blade is the bumper when attached. Therefore the officer measured from the wrong bumper, and there is in fact no projection beyond the bumper--my plow blade--when attached.

Let me know your thoughts though. Court date isn't for a while so I'd like to have as much ammo as possible. If the arguments work I'll let you all know as I think we'll all have the risk of the VIU trying to collect our money on that one.


----------



## JoeCool (Oct 29, 2009)

They also cracked down a few years back on the plows on 1/2 tons making it over the front axle GVW, you can't beat that one. Your only solution to that would be a lighter blade. I agree with the blade effectively becoming the bumper. Hopefully you get a reasonable magistrate... I know there are some because I have had one in the no so distant past. Good luck.


----------



## bodaggin (Sep 23, 2011)

I actually think I can beat the overweight one because in the full law says:

"No person shall drive or operate on a
highway a vehicle or combination of vehicles where
(a) the gross axle weight on an axle unit exceeds
the axle, suspension or brake manufacturer's
rating of that component"

This law doesn't ask for the "VEHICLE" manufacturer's rating. Further, it SPECIFICALLY mentions the manufacturer of the axle, suspension, and brake COMPONENT. I will ask the officer to present these manufacturers, and if he checked the part numbers on the vehicle to prove it. Next I will ask what the rating is set out by these manufacturers--which are not Jeep. For instance, my axle component is manufactured by Dana Corp, and Dana Corp--the manufacturer of the axle component as asked by the law--sets the weight rating of 1360kg, of which I am 130kg UNDER the maximum weight.

I'm going to get letters from Jeep and Dana to confirm this legally. If the officer answers that "Jeep makes the axle", I am going to use these letters to prove he is not a credible source as he is presenting information to the court that he either knows is not true, or does not know of in the first place. Furthermore, I will use this information to show that he hasn't proven my guilt, because he hasn't proven the manufacturer of the COMPONENT, let alone what that manufacturer rates those components. 

Therefore he has measured a weight which is fine and dandy, but he hasn't compared it against the yardstick that the law asks him compare it against. So he has simply provided a weight, and hasn't fulfilled his legal obligation to prove that I broke the conditions set out in the law he is charging me with.

Thanks a bunch for your guys comments so far though. Either way it will be night plowing only from now on when these guys don't work.


----------



## stone74 (Nov 15, 2013)

bodaggin;1728528 said:


> I actually think I can beat the overweight one because in the full law says:
> 
> "No person shall drive or operate on a
> highway a vehicle or combination of vehicles where
> ...


I agree with the plow almost replacing the bumper, bet it is even stronger than a real bumper. Best of luck fighting this, I hope you win. My thought is with all the snow we have had so far this winter at least myself don't have any cash to be paying fines etc.....gonna be a tough rest of the season if this keeps up.


----------



## bodaggin (Sep 23, 2011)

haha agreed there, and if one more person says "Oh a snow removal company, well I hope it snow lots for you!", I'm going to shove a pineapple up their rear end.


----------



## TLB (Jan 19, 2007)

Talk about picking on the little guy.


----------

