Lambo seized after mechanic caught speeding

[littlered]

Originally Posted by flappist

Only rich people own lambos and rich people have access to good legal advice.

This will be interesting.....

I know the Doc - his brother is Lawyer... watch this space...

[ltd_on20s]

Originally Posted by littlered

I know the Doc - his brother is Lawyer... watch this space...

excellent.

[Kamshaaft]

Originally Posted by Gaz

Thus the floor's in the Law.

It CANNOT be returned unless the car was stolen, a hire car, or would cause extreme financial hardship to the owner (EG tow truck loses car, therefore work blah blah). Clearly the lambo owner doesn't fall into this last one.

However, hell hath no fury like a rich guy scorned. I hope we haven't heard the end of this.

I hope he uses his wealth to set a precedent or two. Then again, it would probably mean harsher penalites (is that even possible?) on 'hoon drivers'..

..which is something I could do without.

[merlin]

This is compltely unfair to the owner - he was not involved in the offence in any way, had not given his permission for the car to be driven at this speed ect.

If I had that sort of cash I would be immediatly suing the State Governmnet and claiming the daily depreciation of my asset (which would be quite large given its a lambo).

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by dsyfer

Probably the owner took it in and told the mechanic "mate it's got a bit of a miss at about 180kms, can you check it out"

Seriously i hope this guy takes them to the cleaners. Seriously FFS why should he be punished for the actions of a retard mechanic.

[Racecraft]

I'd hate to see the damage to the under carrage after being skull dragged onto a flat bed :(

[crispymk2]

The police minister was obviously rubbing his hands together with glee when he was gifted this media beat up. Great oportunity to appear tough on road safety despite a terrible holiday death toll...

Would be thinking "no one will care some rich doctor looses his lambo for a month and I'll get my mug on the telly again". We wouldnt have even heard about it if it was just a camry.

Surely this goes beyond the original intentions of the law?

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by crispymk2

Surely this goes beyond the original intentions of the law?

i would have thought it was within the original intentions. the idea of the law is to scare people into driving within the law. it seems that someone who felt he was above the law was caught. now he must explain his actions to his boss and the car owner

how many people trust their mechanics or dealerships not to cane their cars. the law might actually be making our pride and joys safer while they are in for service - and people still complain about it. mechanics thrashes our car - we complain. some moron mechanic gets what he deserves - we complain

[GS608]

Originally Posted by littlered

I know the Doc - his brother is Lawyer... watch this space...

they messed with the wrong doc this time

[b0son]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

the law might actually be making our pride and joys safer while they are in for service - and people still complain about it.

How does punishing the owner help the owner?

Of course, how could we ever expect anyone involved in the law to display an ounce of common sense. They cant see the forest for the trees.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Bobman

In Victoria, I think you get your car impounded for speeding if you are travelling at 30km/h over the posted limit. Drunk drivers don't get their cars impounded. Go figure!

Because a judge or politician is more likely to DUI. Simple. There i figured it out!

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by b0son

How does punishing the owner help the owner?

because if the mechanics etc. are forced to grow a brain under fear of losing their job/explaining to the owner etc. - when our cars are left with said mechanics, they may just treat our babies with more respect

it is very unfortunate for the owner, and if it was my car i would be very angry - angry with the mechanic though not the system


how many stories have we all heard about the mechanics taking a car out for a test drive and wrecking it - a monaro recently, an xw gt on the gtho urban legends thread just to name a couple

[ltd_on20s]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

because if the mechanics etc. are forced to grow a brain under fear of losing their job/explaining to the owner etc. - when our cars are left with said mechanics, they may just treat our babies with more respect

it is very unfortunate for the owner, and if it was my car i would be very angry - angry with the mechanic though not the system


how many stories have we all heard about the mechanics taking a car out for a test drive and wrecking it - a monaro recently, an xw gt on the gtho urban legends thread just to name a couple

come on man.

why should the owner suffer in any way?

-the owner had no control over it
-the owner is not responsible for the mechanics brain
-nor is the owner responsible for the forced outcome of this incident


what next? jailing the owner if the mechanic had caused an accident?

the owner of a car going to jail because you lent it to someone who committed a crime in it?

[irlewy86]

Originally Posted by littlered

I know the Doc - his brother is Lawyer... watch this space...

Thats great news, I feel for the guy who not only has had his car abused by a mechanic but then stolen by the WA police.

Hope he gets his car back in the same condition he dropped it off.

[DJL351]

This is not new here in WA.

Not long ago, they blitzed Great Eastern (I think) for unlicenced drivers.
A guy got caught, driving a work vehicle. The owner of the vehicle was not aware that one of his drivers was driving while under suspension - they car/van was still taken for 3 days.

It is clearly written in 'hoon' laws that the vehicle will be taken, no matter who the owner is. - I know of a guy that lost his car when his 17 year old son got done.... had to take the bus to work for the lfollowing 4 weeks.


Doesn't matter who this Doc knows; there is no chance of the car being returned.... and as mentioned, they are loving the coverage they are getting over it.
(some TV stations blocked out the vehicle rego - others didn't..... lol)

[ltd_on20s]

"It is clearly written in 'hoon' laws that the vehicle will be taken, no matter who the owner is. -"

that will get destroyed once it goes to court.

making the guy who has no control responsible for other peoples actions.

ridiculous.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by ltd_on20s

come on man.

why should the owner suffer in any way?

-the owner had no control over it
-the owner is not responsible for the mechanics brain
-nor is the owner responsible for the forced outcome of this incident


what next? jailing the owner if the mechanic had caused an accident?

the owner of a car going to jail because you lent it to someone who committed a crime in it?

point number 1 is that if the car is not impounded because of the mechanic, that gives mechanics a licence to drive how they want and risk lives and properties
point number 2 is simple as well - the owner of that monaro that was posted on aff in the last year lost his car permanently due to an idiot mechanic. if this type of case put fear into the minds of anybody testing someone elses vehicle, then maybe our vehicles will be treated with more respect (to late for the monaro owner and no doubt countless more over the years)
how else do you think that getting mechanics etc. to respect our cars is going to happen

your other examples have no logic at all. it is the driver of the vehicle that gets the prison sentence and gets the strike against his name. as for the owner, as long as the car comes back in one piece, then this will just be a story to tell at parties within a few months. sure it is an inconvenience, but maybe this inconvenience will start to ensure his cars and everyone else are treated with respect from now on

[FPV+fteT3]

Originally Posted by ltd_on20s

"It is clearly written in 'hoon' laws that the vehicle will be taken, no matter who the owner is. -"

that will get destroyed once it goes to court.

making the guy who has no control responsible for other peoples actions.

ridiculous.

One would hope so even blind freddy can see the law is wrong, poorly thought thru if at all, and very poorly written into the system that broadly defines hooning as almost any offence in a vehicle.

[DJL351]

Originally Posted by ltd_on20s

"It is clearly written in 'hoon' laws that the vehicle will be taken, no matter who the owner is. -"

that will get destroyed once it goes to court.

making the guy who has no control responsible for other peoples actions.

ridiculous.

It has been tried already. The vehicle was used to break the law and therefore, it is kept.

A bloke steals your gun and shoots at someone, the cops grab him... do you get the gun back straight away?


And as far as 'joe public' are concerned, taking the car is the best thing for our safety.


Oh and BTW - no one has stopped to think about the impound costs... technically, the owner of the vehicle must pay them before he can collect the vehicle. From memory its about $500-600 nwo for 28 days. (including the tow from where ever the car was collected)

The car is fine too - I know a couple of the drivers that get used on a regular basis. Damaging cars would result in them loosing the 'contract'... and as it is quite an easy (well paying) job.

[nstg8a]

i had the same thing hsppen to me back home, i was selling an old datsun 1600 i had done up as a moneymaker. cops loved it and pulled it over every time they saw it.

a guy came round to have a look and wanted to take it for a test drive, he showed me his license, left his keys for his car with his missus and kids in it, and i let him go.

a bit of time passed and he hadnt come back, went to his missus, and tried ringing him, no answer, cos he had left his cellphone in his car.
while im standing there stressing my phone rings and its the cops, they pulled him over for a rbt, ran a check on him and hello, no license. instant impound. i was gutted. i had to go in front of a judge and say why i needed it back. ended up getting it back, but i had to pay tow fees and storage costs, so at least i got it back.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

because if the mechanics etc. are forced to grow a brain under fear of losing their job/explaining to the owner etc. - when our cars are left with said mechanics, they may just treat our babies with more respect

regardless of whether a car is impounded or not, they would be under fear of losing their job/explaining to the owner etc

the only option the owner of the car now has is rent a car and then sue the driver for costs. given the total lack of common sense displayed by the magistrate, who's to say the owner wont be dudded again?

why should he even have to go through all this? HE'S DONE NOTHING WRONG.

if it was my car i would be very angry - angry with the mechanic though not the system

if someone punches you, are you angry at him, or angry at his mother for doing a crap job as a parent?

the problem is quite clearly with the system - its punishing the victim.

[ltd_on20s]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

your other examples have no logic at all. it is the driver of the vehicle that gets the prison sentence and gets the strike against his name. as for the owner, as long as the car comes back in one piece, then this will just be a story to tell at parties within a few months. sure it is an inconvenience, but maybe this inconvenience will start to ensure his cars and everyone else are treated with respect from now on

ill wait to see what you say when your "incovienenced" because the dude at the lights next to you takes off, cop coming down the road thinks your street racing, and impounds your car on "suspicion" of hooning.

who's to say the above scenario will never happen?

regardless of circs, the owner is in no way responsible for the actions of others.

therefore should not have his car taken. not even for even one day.

the driver was hooning. not the car. specific circumstances call for specific outcomes.

you think if we had an independant car lover up at federal level jumping up and down this owner would have his car back rather then government clowns parroting that he wont be?

[b0son]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

point number 1 is that if the car is not impounded because of the mechanic, that gives mechanics a licence to drive how they want and risk lives and properties

rubbish... they risk job loss, and if their action is so dangerous, the courts have the power to impose more serious dangerous driving charges. why not impound the driver's car?

as for the owner, as long as the car comes back in one piece, then this will just be a story to tell at parties within a few months. sure it is an inconvenience, but maybe this inconvenience will start to ensure his cars and everyone else are treated with respect from now on

you accuse someone else of having no logic, but your entire reasoning relies on faulty logic!

if someone is irresponsible enough to commit an offence, knowing full well if they get caught they will probably lose their job, cop a big fine or worse, and they still commit the act, they are NOT going to care about how much they inconvenience a third party. you would have to be berreft of a clue to think they would.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by DJL351

It has been tried already. The vehicle was used to break the law and therefore, it is kept.

why? there's no forensic evidence to be collected. the car is only kept as a punitive measure - how does punishing the owner impose a punishment on the driver?

its also a pretty long bow to draw when comparing a traffic matter with a criminal matter. different courts, different laws, etc...

[DJL351]

Originally Posted by b0son

HE'S DONE NOTHING WRONG.

Correct - but the vehicle was used in the act of breaking a law.

Hey I don't agree with it, but I can see the angle they (Police/Gov) are using.

Originally Posted by b0son

if someone punches you, are you angry at him, or angry at his mother for doing a crap job as a parent?

the problem is quite clearly with the system - its punishing the victim.

Both to be truthful.

The system has been punishing the victim in all regards for ages... this is nothing new.

[DJL351]

WA Traffic Act

Check out section 79 onwards.

ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1974 - SECT 79
79 . Impounding of vehicles for racing etc.
(1) A member of the Police Force may impound a vehicle if the member reasonably suspects that —


(a) the driver of the vehicle has committed an impounding offence (driving); and


(b) the vehicle was used in the commission of the offence

There it is - in black and white.


As for this topic - lock it now, I can see it is going to get ugly.

[ltd_on20s]

plus some of you are forgetting this can be used retroactively as well

if you are caught by speed camera,regardless of how little over the speed limit you are they can send u the fine in the mail AND if they feel like it come around and impound your car.

even if you were not driving it.

and the reason the do it DJL?

"Hey I don't agree with it, but I can see the angle they (Police/Gov) are using."
"The system has been punishing the victim in all regards for ages... this is nothing new"

because all we do is waive a fist around saying we dont agree with it.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

point number 1 is that if the car is not impounded because of the mechanic, that gives mechanics a licence to drive how they want and risk lives and properties

Again though .... why inconvenience the owner? Only thing he did wrong was pick the wrong mechanic. Why not go back to the shop and ask the mechanic "Which is your car cos' we are taking it")

Saw this on the news last night as was dumb founded. The Doctor has become a victim of crime .... can he get compo for that? His car was used in an illegal activity, unbeknown to him, and he is now being victimized.

AND that smug WA police spokesman ......
"If he (the doctor) can afford one of those cars, surely he can afford a hirer car for the next 28 days .... " HUH? He did nothing wrong but lost his car and needs to spend more?

WTF is going on here? Stupidity running riot ...... all this is so out of control its nonsensical.



| [/url] |

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by auslandau

Again though .... why inconvenience the owner? Only thing he did wrong was pick the wrong mechanic. Why not go back to the shop and ask the mechanic "Which is your car cos' we are taking it")

i see your point, but the rules have been in place for a long time now. i know them, you probably know them, the mechanic and the doctor would have known them. i cannot change the rules and like most others here, i have no interest in trying. unlike most others i will not complain about them, because someone did something idiotic. i try to find postive things out most situations, not bag the crap out of our rules in the hope that someone else will do something

imagine dave, if you took your landau to a mechanic and he wrapped it around a pole, being silly. now (of course it is hypothetical, because there is no meaningful facts to back it up one way or the other), if the attitudes of mechanics changed throughout the country and they suddenly started respecting cars (how many threads/posts have we had about mechanics not respecting cars???), then the chances of your car being written off have been greatly reduced. that could be a good thing - not that anyone here can see that point

[Big Mike]

I would be ropeable if my car was impounded for something some stouge was doing in it, obviously not my fault, just like the Doc and his Lamborghini. But some of you mob refuse to see the point that the law - regardless its dictatorial methodology - is intended to scare people into driving safely. Now I will argue strongly that fear is the wrong way to go about getting people to do something, as is violence and any other pathetic juvenial rubbish.

However - that's the intention of the law - and some moron mechanic, or off duty cop, or anyone else thinks they're above the law and can go for a HOON in someone else's car, then they damned well deserve to stand before me, or that Doc, and explain why we haven't got our cars; What if the law allowed it to get crushed? The HOON mechanic can replace it at whatever cost that is to his financial future and mental health. EXACTLY the same if he wrote it off and wasn't covered under insurance - EXACTLY THE SAME people!


EDIT - I will add however just because someone spends a huge amount of money buying a car, or leasing a car, does not suggest they can afford to maintain or replace said car. I assume this is not the sole Aussie Lamborghini authorised service centre either, so my point is supported. And that smug cop has a lot to learn about people skills. The mechanic was the hoon, and this needs to rest back on him - not on the Doc, for happening to own a nice car or a fast car or whatever. So while it is a clear cut thing of who is the victim and who is the moron hoon - the media beat up and police ranting doesn't help anyone.