To take part in discussions on talkSFU, please apply for membership (SFU email id required).
UBC REFUNDS FOR TOWING CHARGES
I haven't been around lately because of work/ christmas shopping but I had to show you guys this..
Class-action suit over UBC parking
Argument is that university has no authority to impose fines
you got nailed with a parking fine or a towing charge at the University of B.C. in the past 16 years, you may be entitled to a refund.
A judge has approved a class-action suit against UBC after a Vancouver chartered accountant sued the university, alleging its parking regulations are illegal.
If the judge agrees with Daniel Barbour's arguments, some 100,000 people who have paid nearly $4 million in fines and towing charges since 1990 would be eligible to receive a refund from the university.
"The class [action] has raised an arguable case as to the legality of the fines," said B.C. Supreme Court Justice Richard Goepel in granting approval.
Without a class-action suit, UBC's conduct will go unchallenged because individual claims won't have any impact, the judge said. Therefore, "a class action is the only realistic method of challenging the legality of the parking regulations and modifying UBC's behaviour if that behaviour is found to be unlawful," he said.
Barbour, who has been named the representative plaintiff in the case, filed suit after he was forced to pay $200 when his car was towed from a parking lot on Wesbrook Mall on March 26, 2004.
He was charged with assault after getting into a confrontation with a tow-truck driver, but the charge was dismissed by a judge who found the tow-truck driver was at fault. Barbour then turned his attention to UBC's parking regulations and found what he considers to be a serious flaw.
His argument is that UBC has tried to assume enforcement authority through the Motor Vehicle Act and the Highway Act when it appears to have no authority to do so. In addition, he says the regulations were not enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, contrary to requirements of the University Act.
Barbour's lawyer, Sharon Matthews, said yesterday Barbour will be thrilled with the ruling and added it's not the first time a Canadian university has been embroiled in a battle over its parking rules.
"It's not unique to UBC," said Matthews. "The same ruling was made for Memorial University in Newfoundland several years ago, that acting under similar provisions they did not have the authority to do what they were doing.
"That was an individual case, not a class action. They had to return the money collected from the individual. But the whole system was basically declared inoperative. In our case, the whole system will be looked at and the remedy for everybody affected will be addressed."
NOW IF ONLY WE HAD SOME LAWYERS AT SFU :TEETH:
Class-action suit over UBC parking
Argument is that university has no authority to impose fines
you got nailed with a parking fine or a towing charge at the University of B.C. in the past 16 years, you may be entitled to a refund.
A judge has approved a class-action suit against UBC after a Vancouver chartered accountant sued the university, alleging its parking regulations are illegal.
If the judge agrees with Daniel Barbour's arguments, some 100,000 people who have paid nearly $4 million in fines and towing charges since 1990 would be eligible to receive a refund from the university.
"The class [action] has raised an arguable case as to the legality of the fines," said B.C. Supreme Court Justice Richard Goepel in granting approval.
Without a class-action suit, UBC's conduct will go unchallenged because individual claims won't have any impact, the judge said. Therefore, "a class action is the only realistic method of challenging the legality of the parking regulations and modifying UBC's behaviour if that behaviour is found to be unlawful," he said.
Barbour, who has been named the representative plaintiff in the case, filed suit after he was forced to pay $200 when his car was towed from a parking lot on Wesbrook Mall on March 26, 2004.
He was charged with assault after getting into a confrontation with a tow-truck driver, but the charge was dismissed by a judge who found the tow-truck driver was at fault. Barbour then turned his attention to UBC's parking regulations and found what he considers to be a serious flaw.
His argument is that UBC has tried to assume enforcement authority through the Motor Vehicle Act and the Highway Act when it appears to have no authority to do so. In addition, he says the regulations were not enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, contrary to requirements of the University Act.
Barbour's lawyer, Sharon Matthews, said yesterday Barbour will be thrilled with the ruling and added it's not the first time a Canadian university has been embroiled in a battle over its parking rules.
"It's not unique to UBC," said Matthews. "The same ruling was made for Memorial University in Newfoundland several years ago, that acting under similar provisions they did not have the authority to do what they were doing.
"That was an individual case, not a class action. They had to return the money collected from the individual. But the whole system was basically declared inoperative. In our case, the whole system will be looked at and the remedy for everybody affected will be addressed."
NOW IF ONLY WE HAD SOME LAWYERS AT SFU :TEETH:
Comments