Noise/Muffler/Environmental Tickets

[HunGJaI]

Lucky for my GF

got slap with 3 tickets (been driving the same car for 2 years now no issues until today)

HTA75(4) - Noise
HTA75(1) - Muffler
HTA22(3) - Environmental Protection act ??

Now I gotta find ways to fight them and waste time...

Well, I'm not sure what muffler is she has but it is aftermarket...but not really that loud compared to my 2bro...but yeah...

Gotta go get a DB test or something?

As for the enironmental act - wtf is that? (she did not remove her CAT from the car)

[jay-d]

HTA75(4)
Unnecessary noise
A person having the control or charge of a motor vehicle shall not sound any bell, horn or other signalling device so as to make an unreasonable noise, and a driver of any motor vehicle shall not permit any unreasonable amount of smoke to escape from the motor vehicle, nor shall the driver at any time cause the motor vehicle to make any unnecessary noise, but this subsection does not apply to a motor vehicle of a municipal fire department while proceeding to a fire or answering a fire alarm call. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 75 (4).

HTA75(1)
Every motor vehicle or motor assisted bicycle shall be equipped with a muffler in good working order and in constant operation to prevent excessive or unusual noise and excessive smoke, and no person shall use a muffler cut-out, straight exhaust, gutted muffler, hollywood muffler, by-pass or similar device upon a motor vehicle or motor assisted bicycle. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 75 (1).

HTA22(3)
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90h08_e.htm#BK50

I don't know what the hell that last one is

[HunGJaI]

Haha...me either...

But I will have to find out what her model of muffler is and go from there...

Well, I got 14 days to file a motion for trail...Ticket were in York.. faster trail

[Rob MacLennan]

Because she had the catalytic converter removed, when installing that aftermarket exhaust. It took me a while to find it, but....

http://www.search.e-laws.gov.on.ca/e...&context=#BK57

22. (1) No person shall sell, or offer, expose or advertise for sale, a motor or motor vehicle that does not comply with the regulations. Where system or device installed on motor vehicle
(2) Where a manufacturer installs on, attaches to or incorporates in any motor or motor vehicle, a system or device to prevent or lessen the discharge of any contaminant, no person shall sell, or offer, expose or advertise for sale, such motor or motor vehicle unless the motor or motor vehicle has such system or device so installed, attached or incorporated and such system or device, when the motor or motor vehicle is operating, complies with the regulations. R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19, s. 22 (1, 2).

Repair or replacement of system or device
(3) Where a manufacturer installs on, attaches to or incorporates in any motor or motor vehicle, a system or device to prevent or lessen the discharge of any contaminant, no person shall remove or cause or permit the removal of the system or device from the motor or motor vehicle, except as permitted by subsection (4).
Same
(4) A person may repair the system or device or replace the system or device by a system or device of the same type or of a type prescribed by the regulations. 1998, c. 35, s. 3.

[Smutty]

He said it was not removed...?

Because she had the catalytic converter removed, when installing that aftermarket exhaust. It took me a while to find it, but....

http://www.search.e-laws.gov.on.ca/e...&context=#BK57

22. (1) No person shall sell, or offer, expose or advertise for sale, a motor or motor vehicle that does not comply with the regulations. Where system or device installed on motor vehicle
(2) Where a manufacturer installs on, attaches to or incorporates in any motor or motor vehicle, a system or device to prevent or lessen the discharge of any contaminant, no person shall sell, or offer, expose or advertise for sale, such motor or motor vehicle unless the motor or motor vehicle has such system or device so installed, attached or incorporated and such system or device, when the motor or motor vehicle is operating, complies with the regulations. R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19, s. 22 (1, 2).

Repair or replacement of system or device
(3) Where a manufacturer installs on, attaches to or incorporates in any motor or motor vehicle, a system or device to prevent or lessen the discharge of any contaminant, no person shall remove or cause or permit the removal of the system or device from the motor or motor vehicle, except as permitted by subsection (4).
Same
(4) A person may repair the system or device or replace the system or device by a system or device of the same type or of a type prescribed by the regulations. 1998, c. 35, s. 3.

[HunGJaI]

Because she had the catalytic converter removed, when installing that aftermarket exhaust. It took me a while to find it, but....

http://www.search.e-laws.gov.on.ca/e...&context=#BK57

22. (1) No person shall sell, or offer, expose or advertise for sale, a motor or motor vehicle that does not comply with the regulations. Where system or device installed on motor vehicle
(2) Where a manufacturer installs on, attaches to or incorporates in any motor or motor vehicle, a system or device to prevent or lessen the discharge of any contaminant, no person shall sell, or offer, expose or advertise for sale, such motor or motor vehicle unless the motor or motor vehicle has such system or device so installed, attached or incorporated and such system or device, when the motor or motor vehicle is operating, complies with the regulations. R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19, s. 22 (1, 2).

Repair or replacement of system or device
(3) Where a manufacturer installs on, attaches to or incorporates in any motor or motor vehicle, a system or device to prevent or lessen the discharge of any contaminant, no person shall remove or cause or permit the removal of the system or device from the motor or motor vehicle, except as permitted by subsection (4).
Same
(4) A person may repair the system or device or replace the system or device by a system or device of the same type or of a type prescribed by the regulations. 1998, c. 35, s. 3.

Thanks...

but she told me it was not removed...(but I'm going to have to check it out either way...) Girl...what do they know about cars

[Hachi-Roku]

Can't see you getting out of HTA75(4) - Noise HTA75(1) - Muffler
since it's Clearly an Aftermarket Exhaust Labelled Off Road Use Only

As for HTA22(3) - Environmental Protection act There's a reason they call them CAT back Exhausts
So that one you may be able to show Pics and Argue

[Rob MacLennan]

Thanks...

but she told me it was not removed...(but I'm going to have to check it out either way...) Girl...what do they know about cars

Well it was either removed or the officer decided that he wasn't going to crawl under the car to find out, and to let her PROVE that it was still present.

[Griffin]

Well it was either removed or the officer decided that he wasn't going to crawl under the car to find out, and to let her PROVE that it was still present.

Except that the cop has to prove guilt; the defendant doesn't have to prove innocence. The cop will need to produce evidence as to why the exhaust was determined to not be legal. That should be available through disclosure. But, if the car has a loud *** aftermarket exhaust then the OP's GF is gonna be stuck with at least one guilty finding.

[HunGJaI]

Except that the cop has to prove guilt; the defendant doesn't have to prove innocence. The cop will need to produce evidence as to why the exhaust was determined to not be legal. That should be available through disclosure. But, if the car has a loud *** aftermarket exhaust then the OP's GF is gonna be stuck with at least one guilty finding.

+1

Ha...that ticket alone was $365...

I gotta find the by-law for DB levels for York Region... my GF exhaust is not THAT LOUD compared to other cans I'v heard...

Going to be fighting it...

Anyone know where I can get a cerifted DB test?

[Brian P]

Unfortunately, there is no dB level in HTA 75 and it is completely open to the officer's interpretation. It's got nothing to do with any regional by-laws that may or may not be in place.

Get the disclosure.

It might be worth having a Drive Clean test done. If you've had one done in the last year, you could possibly use that, but it would be even more helpful if the date on the Drive Clean is after the date of the ticket rather than before. A valid Drive Clean test ought to give the emissions-tampering charge the boot. Won't help with the noise situation and I don't know what others have done.

[Griffin]

You may want to wait until you have disclosure. There is no by-law in York Region regarding excessive noise from an exhaust. SHe was charged with HTA noise violation which I believe can be purely subjective by the cop. If that's the case your defense would need to show that the cop's evaluation that the noise was excessive is not correct. Just because a lot of other cars are noisier doesn't make her's okay; no different from the fact that other cars are speeding faster does not make it okay for her to speed.

[Brian P]

One other thing; there is a standard called SAE J1169 meant for light-duty vehicles that is analogous to the SAE J2825 test that recently came into effect for motorcycles. It's not legally binding and the lack of any dB levels specified in the HTA may *still* leave you out in the cold. But it might be worth finding out whether the vehicle complies with SAE J1169.

Get an Iphone, get a dBmeter application, set it on "A" scale "slow" response, just like with the motorcycle test. 20 inches away from the exhaust outlet at the same height as the exhaust outlet and 45 degree angle out from the centerline, just like the motorcycle test. You need to know the RPM at which the engine makes peak power (look up manufacturer's specs for the vehicle). With engine held steady at two-thirds of that RPM it's supposed to be less than 95 dB.

If it's less than that in this unofficial test then it might be worth paying for having it officially tested. If it's more than that in this unofficial test then your goose is probably cooked anyway ...

[Brian P]

There's another take-home message in this situation: Removal of a catalytic converter or a crankcase vent breathing system can trigger the anti-tampering law. If you have a motorcycle that originally came with a catalytic converter in the exhaust system, think about that anti-tampering law before you go put a full exhaust system on it ... It hasn't historically seen much enforcement on motorcycles but that doesn't mean they couldn't. (FWIW everything that I own that originally came with a catalytic converter, still has it. I have my doubts that the catalysts on motorcycles are designed for long term durability, I doubt if the one on my zx10r does anything any more, but it's still there ...)

[OpenGambit]

I would submit that showing that the car is within acceptable noise levels via industry guidelines or even laws of other jurisdictions would go a long way to show that the noise is not "excessive".

But I would also note that the "excessive" idea is obviously situational and partially to stop fast accelleration, not just noisy mufflers.

[Rob MacLennan]

Except that the cop has to prove guilt; the defendant doesn't have to prove innocence. The cop will need to produce evidence as to why the exhaust was determined to not be legal. That should be available through disclosure. But, if the car has a loud *** aftermarket exhaust then the OP's GF is gonna be stuck with at least one guilty finding.

If he was smart then he has a picture, that may well appear that the exhaust has been replaced to the headers. More cops are carrying pocket cameras with them, these days. If he states that it has been removed and she can't show, through knowledge or documentation that it hasn't been, she's done.

Time to dig up any written evidence that she might have, to the contrary.

[HunGJaI]

If he was smart then he has a picture, that may well appear that the exhaust has been replaced to the headers. More cops are carrying pocket cameras with them, these days. If he states that it has been removed and she can't show, through knowledge or documentation that it hasn't been, she's done.

Time to dig up any written evidence that she might have, to the contrary.

I guess time to spend some $ for a drive clean test? for the CAT problem...

The other problems...I will have to see...not sure if the cop took pictures or not...

I will have to see what disclosure the cop has...(would he provide pictures if taken?)

[Rob MacLennan]

I guess time to spend some $ for a drive clean test? for the CAT problem...

The other problems...I will have to see...not sure if the cop took pictures or not...

I will have to see what disclosure the cop has...(would he provide pictures if taken?)

Make sure that you include that in your disclosure request and you'll find out