Bylawpedia
Bylaw Notice
Introduction
Bylaw notices are one of the types of tickets used in bylaw enforcement in British Columbia[1], with the others being the municipal ticket information (or MTI) and the notice of bylaw infraction. Bylaw enforcement officers acting on behalf of local governments are authorized to issue bylaw notices by the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, but only after the local government in question has been granted approval by the provincial government (Government of British Columbia, 2022). Before any bylaw notices can be issued by its officers, the provincial government must add the name of the local government in question to a list found in Schedule 1 of the Bylaw Notice Enforcement Regulation (B.C. Reg 175/2004) and must also pass a bylaw which lists which bylaw violations it is possible to issue bylaw notices for and designate the fine amount for each of these violations (Union of British Columbia Municipalities, 2022).
History
The bylaw notice system was first introduced by the provincial government of BC in 2003, when it enacted the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act. The following year, three communities - the City of North Vancouver, District of North Vancouver and District of West Vancouver - began a pilot project to test out the system. In 2005, the provincial government then began accepting applications from other communities to be approved to use the bylaw notice, and in the years since then, many local governments have been authorized to use this form of ticketing (Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, n.d.; Union of British Columbia Municipalities, 2022).
The introduction of the bylaw notice system in 2003 was intended to respond to problems critics had pointed out with the existing options at the time, those being prosecutions in the traditional court system initiated either by municipal ticket informations (MTIs) or long form informations. Court prosecutions were perceived as being too slow and time consuming, as well as too expensive and having too many burdensome rules and procedures (Howieson, 2008, p. 12). By removing bylaw notices from the court system, and instead having them dealt with by quasi-judicial adjudication hearings run by adjudicators, it was intended to make the process cheaper, simpler and quicker. This is because the hearings would not be bogged down by having to hear other cases (as they would only hear bylaw disputes), they would not have to follow the same strict rules of procedure or evidence as a traditional court trial and it would no longer be necessary to have witnesses attend in person, as evidence could be received via written statements, by phone or videoconference (Union of British Columbia Municipalities, 2022).
Alternative Names
Bylaw notices are sometimes referred to by alternate names in some communities. For example, the City of Coquitlam and the City of Surrey both refer to a bylaw notice as a bylaw enforcement notice or BEN (City of Coquitlam, n.d.; City of Surrey, n.d.), while the City of Kelowna calls it a bylaw offence notice (City of Kelowna, n.d.) and the Islands Trust refers to one as a bylaw violation notice or BVN (Islands Trust, n.d.). Despite the different terms used, they are all referring to the same type of ticket, which is referred to in provincial legislation as a bylaw notice (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003).
Form and Contents
In addition to having different names in different communities, the appearance of bylaw notices will differ between the various communities of British Columbia as well. This can be seen in the example images posted on some local government websites, such as the City of Nanaimo and the City of Chilliwack (City of Chilliwack, n.d.; City of Nanaimo, n.d.). Under provincial law, each local government is allowed to design its own bylaw notices as it sees fit, provided they contain certain information required by the provincial legislation.
The mandatory information required on a bylaw notice includes a description of the bylaw violation that is sufficient for a person who receives the bylaw notice to be able to identify what the person is accused of doing, the amount of the fine (including any discounts that are available for early payment and any surcharges that may be applied for late payment), how to pay the fine and how to dispute the bylaw notice (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 4(4)). It must also include the name of the person to whom the bylaw notice is issued or, if it is being issued for a bylaw violation that involves a vehicle, it can include the licence plate number, permit number or vehicle identification number of the vehicle instead (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 4(7()).
Unlike with a municipal ticket information, it is not legally mandatory for a bylaw enforcement officer to sign a bylaw notice (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 4(6)).
Fines
Bylaw notices are used to impose monetary penalties on persons for committing bylaw violations. Technically, the term 'fine' is not used for these monetary penalties, and they are instead referred to simply as penalties throughout provincial legislation (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003; B.C. Reg 175/2004). However, these monetary penalties likely would meet the definition of a 'fine' that an average member of the public would use, and indeed they fit the definition found in the Merriam Webster dictionary (n.d.a). On top of that, some local governments even use the word 'fine' to refer to these penalties (District of Squamish, n.d.). Consequently, the word 'fine' will be used throughout this website to refer to bylaw notice penalties.
Provincial law stipulates that the maximum fine that can be imposed by a bylaw notice is $500 (Government of British Columbia, 2022). However, it is possible that one person could be issued multiple bylaw notices for the same violation if it continues over multiple days, and these could add up to amounts far in excess of $500; this is because many bylaws declare that each day that a bylaw violation continues is a separate offence and subject to a separate fine [2].
A local government must set the fine amounts for each bylaw violation that it is possible to issue a bylaw notice for (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 6; Union of British Columbia Municipalities, 2022). It is not up to the bylaw enforcement officer who issues the bylaw notice to decide the fine amount. It is also not possible for an adjudicator at an adjudication hearing to adjust the fine amount (Howieson, 2008, p. 13; Union of British Columbia Municipalities, 2022).
Local governments have the option of varying the fines payable for bylaw notices depending on the time period the payment is made. The fines may be discounted if paid early or may be subject to surcharges if paid late (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 6).
Limitations
There are some limitations imposed by law on when, and to whom, bylaw notices may be issued. For one, there is a time limit for issuance of a bylaw notice set out by provincial law; a bylaw notice may not be issued for a violation which occurred more than 6 months in the past (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 5). As well, it is prohibited to issue a bylaw notice for a bylaw violation that relates to firearms or motor vehicle speed limits (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 28(2)(a), B.C. Reg 175/2004, s. 3)
Methods of Service
Bylaw enforcement officers have a number of options to serve a bylaw notice on a person alleged to have committed a bylaw violation. As with a municipal ticket information, the bylaw notice can be served personally on the alleged offender by directly handing it to the individual (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 7(1)(a)). It also can be served by mailing[3] it to the violator's actual or last known address and it will then be presumed to have been received and served 7 days after it was mailed[4] (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, ss. 7(1)(b) & 7(2)). Additionally, if the bylaw notice is being issued for a parking violation, it can be served by leaving it on the vehicle involved in the offence, and when that is done every person who is a registered owner of the vehicle is deemed to have been served with the bylaw notice on the day it is left there (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, ss. 7(1)(d) & 7(3)). Finally, the law also allows for a bylaw notice to, if it relates to a violation on a particular parcel of land, be served on anyone who happens to be on that land and appears to be at least 16 years old (B.C. Reg. 175/2004, s. 4(c)).
Some special methods of service are also available to serve a bylaw notice on a violator which is a corporation or business. Under the law, a bylaw enforcement officer may serve a bylaw notice on such an entity by sending it via mail[3] to the registered office or head office of the corporation or business as shown in the records of the British Columbia Registrar of Companies, in which case it is presumed to have been received and served 7 days after it is mailed[4] (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 7(1)(b)). In addition, the bylaw notice may be served on those entities by handing it or mailing[3] it to a director, manager or other executive officer of the corporation or business, or of any branch of the corporation or business; and again it will be presumed to have been received 7 days after it is mailed[4] (B.C. Reg 175/2004, s. 4(a)). In the case of an extraprovincial corporation - which is the name used for a corporation that is incorporated under the laws of a jurisdiction outside the province of British Columbia - it is also permissible to serve the bylaw notice by handing it or mailing[3] it to the lawyer for the corporation; and as with the other cases, if mailed, it is presumed received after 7 days[4] (B.C. Reg 175/2004, s. 4(b)).
Disputing a Bylaw Notice
Once a person receives a bylaw notice, there is then a time period where the person can choose to either pay or dispute the ticket. The local government must establish how long this dispute period is, but provincial law demands that is no shorter than 14 days (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 8(2)). If the individual chooses to dispute the notice, they need to submit a dispute of the bylaw notice the local government. Local governments are allowed to determine what process they wish to use for submitting disputes, but provincial law dictates that instructions on how to submit this dispute must be included on the bylaw notice (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 8(1)(b)).
Many local governments will provide a form that can be filled out and submitted if a person wishes to dispute a bylaw notice (City of New Westminster, n.d.). These forms can be paper or electronic, or both, at the discretion of the local government in question.
If a person intends to submit a bylaw notice dispute via mail then it is advisable to leave enough time to ensure it will be delivered to the local government before the dispute period ends, and if there is not enough time to ensure this, then it is advisable to hand deliver the dispute form to the local government office. Unlike disputes for some other forms of tickets, such as the municipal ticket information (Community Charter, 2003, s. 267(3)), the law does not automatically deem that the day a dispute form for a bylaw notice is mailed in shall be accepted as the date it was disputed. Instead, the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act is silent on the topic of calculating the submission date for mailed disputes, leaving it open for local governments to set their own rules; and most local government bylaws refer to the date that a dispute is delivered to the local government as being the relevant date, and make no reference to the date it is mailed (Burnaby Bylaw Notice Enforcement Bylaw 2009, s. 6(a)).
In the event that a dispute of a bylaw notice is received within the legally defined dispute period, then a dispute adjudication process will begin. Should the bylaw notice recipient does not dispute the ticket during the dispute period, then the law deems the person automatically responsible for the bylaw violation and the fine becomes due and payable (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 9).
Screening Officers
The provincial legislation allows local governments to appoint an official called a screening officer to review a disputed bylaw notice as a first step in the dispute process (Office of the Ombudsperson, 2015, p. 45; Union of British Columbia Municipalities, 2022), and most local governments have done this. The screening officer has authority to cancel a bylaw notice if the officer believes that the bylaw violation did not occur or if the bylaw notice doesn't contain the mandatory information required by law. As well, if a local government has established a policy that grants the screening officer additional grounds for cancelling a bylaw notice, then the screening officer can also cancel the ticket on any of those additional grounds. If the screening officer decides not to cancel the bylaw notice, then the officer may, if the local government has passed a bylaw authorizing compliance agreements, enter into a compliance agreement with the person who received the bylaw notice (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 10).
In the event that the screening officer doesn't cancel the bylaw notice or implement a compliance agreement, or if there is no screening officer, then the bylaw notice must be referred to an adjudicator for an adjudication hearing (Office of the Ombudsperson, 2015, p. 45).
Compliance Agreements
Local governments have the authority to, by enacting a bylaw, enable their screening officers to implement compliance agreements with persons who have been issued bylaw notices. This step can be taken by a screening officer after a person disputes their bylaw notice, as long as the recipient of the bylaw notice agrees. The compliance agreement is an instrument where the screening officer, acting on behalf of the local government, agrees to reduce the fine payable by a bylaw notice recipient in return for the individual admitting to committing the bylaw violation and thereby doing away with the necessity of having an adjudication hearing before an adjudicator. The agreements may also have other terms and conditions, such as a requirement for the bylaw notice recipient to take certain actions to correct the bylaw violation (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 11).
The local government can, through a bylaw that it passes, designate which bylaw violations are eligible for compliance agreements and which are not. If a certain bylaw violation is designated as not eligible, then a screening officer cannot implement a compliance agreement with a violator in respect of that particular violation. Also, if local governments decide to make compliance agreements an option for screening officers, they are required to establish a maximum duration for how long compliance agreements can last (up to a one year maximum stipulated by provincial law) and rules for calculating fine reductions to be used in such compliance agreements (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 2(3)).
Screening officers have authority to oversee the enforcement of a compliance agreement. If a screening officer decides that a bylaw notice recipient who signed a compliance agreement is not honouring their commitments (for example, by not making a required payment), they are empowered by provincial statute to rescind the agreement (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 12). A person who had a compliance agreement rescinded has 14 days from the time the person is notified of the screening officer's decision to dispute the decision and request the matter be referred to an adjudicator for a hearing. If no dispute is received within this 14 day period, then the full fine that was originally due for the bylaw notice is due and payable (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 13).
If a screening officer's decision to rescind a compliance agreement is sent to an adjudicator for a hearing, the only matter the adjudicator will consider is whether the bylaw notice recipient lived up to their obligations under the compliance agreement; i.e. did the person make the payments required and comply with any other terms or conditions. The adjudicator will not consider any claims that the person didn't commit the bylaw violation that led to the compliance agreement in the first place. The fact that a person entered into a compliance agreement is deemed conclusive proof the person committed the bylaw violation (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 11(1)).
Adjudicators
Local governments which choose to use bylaw notices as one of their enforcement tools are legally required to set up an adjudication system, known as a dispute adjudication registry, to deal with disputes over those tickets. They are required to pay the costs of these systems, but are authorized by provincial law to set up joint registries with other local governments in order to cost-share (Government of British Columbia, 2022).
These dispute adjudication registries serve as an alternative to the traditional court system. When a bylaw notice is disputed, and the dispute cannot be resolved by a screening officer either cancelling the bylaw notice or implementing a compliance agreement, then the dispute ends up being referred to an official in this system called an adjudicator, and this official will then hold an adjudication hearing and decide whether the alleged bylaw violation occurred or not (Government of British Columbia, 2022; Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003; Union of British Columbia Municipalities, 2022).
Although the local government must pay for adjudicators and the adjudication hearings (Government of British Columbia, 2022), these adjudicators do not work for the local governments. They are appointed by the Deputy Attorney General of British Columbia from amongst persons who have certain qualifications that are set out in provincial regulations, and these include, amongst other things, a requirement that an adjudicator has not been convicted of any offence under federal or provincial law for the last 10 years, does not have any outstanding ticket fines owed to a local government, has post-secondary education related to adjudicating disputes and has at least 1 year's experience in adjudicating disputes (B.C. Reg 175/2004, s. 6; Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 15(1)). Adjudicators are also required by provincial law not to be an employee or an officer of a local government, and not to have been so for at least 6 months (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 15(1)(b); B.C. Reg 175/2004, s. 6(c)) and they are forbidden from deciding any disputes if they have, or are reasonably apprehended to have, a bias or conflict of interest in relation to a dispute (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 17).
The Deputy Attorney General has the power to rescind an adjudicator's appointment for certain reasons, including if satisfied that the adjudicator has engaged in misconduct or neglect of duty or has ceased to have the necessary qualifications or become incapacitated (B.C. Reg 175/2004, s. 7).
Adjudication Hearings
At an adjudication hearing, the local government which issued a bylaw notice and the person who disputed the bylaw notice will both be given an opportunity to present their case to the adjudicator who has been assigned the dispute. The parties can appear in person or can present their cases through written submissions, by telephone or videoconference (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, ss. 18(1) & 18(2)). Similarly to trials, these hearings are required to be open to the public, and local governments are required to make the decisions reached at the hearings and materials submitted available to the public if they request them (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 19). Unlike trials, the procedures are far less strict, testimony does not need to be under oath and the adjudicator has the authority to allow anything to be admitted as evidence that the adjudicator deems appropriate, except for privileged information (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, ss. 18(5)(b) & 2o).
During an adjudication hearing, a person who is party to the proceedings can choose to be represented by a lawyer if the person wishes, although there is no requirement for this. Unlike with some criminal trials, persons in adjudication hearings are not legally entitled to have lawyers appointed to represent them free-of-charge if they can't afford them (Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre, n.d.; Legal Services Society, n.d.).
Another key difference between an adjudication hearing and a prosecution in a traditional court is the burden of proof. If a person accused of a bylaw violation is prosecuted in court then the criminal standard of proof applies, which is to say, the local government accusing the person must present proof beyond reasonable doubt that the person committed the bylaw violation. This is not the case in an adjudication hearing as they use the civil standard of proof instead (the standard that is used in civil lawsuits), which is known as the balance of probabilities (Bayda, n.d.; Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 21(1)). Put simply, this standard requires that the local government present enough evidence to show that the accused person probably committed the bylaw violation, but they don't need to have proof beyond reasonable doubt (Howieson, 2008, p. 12).
Adjudicators are also legally restricted in that they are not allowed to decide issues regarding the constitutionality of a bylaw, Aboriginal or treaty rights or a claim that a bylaw is legally invalid for some other reason. If someone brings up such an argument at an adjudication hearing, the adjudicator must set the issue aside and proceed as if it had not been raised (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 16).
After considering the cases presented by the two parties, the adjudicator will reach a decision as to whether the bylaw violation occurred as alleged in the bylaw notice. If the adjudicator is satisfied that the violation did occur, then the ticket will be upheld and the full fine will be due and payable; the adjudicator is not allowed to reduce the fine. However, if the adjudicator is not satisfied the violation occurred, then the ticket will be cancelled (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 21).
If a person disputes a bylaw notice but fails to show up for the adjudication hearing, or to have a representative show up on the person's behalf, then the adjudicator is required to uphold the bylaw notice and the full fine immediately becomes due and payable (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 18(4)).
If a person disputes a bylaw notice and fails to win at an adjudication hearing, a local government is allowed to charge a small fee to help cover the cost of the hearing, which may not exceed $25. This is added on top of the fine (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, ss. 21(6) & 23(2)).
Judicial Review
Provincial legislation declares that the decisions of adjudicators are final and binding and there is no mechanism provided to appeal to a court. Despite this, a party who is dissatisfied with the outcome of an adjudication hearing - either the person who was issued a bylaw notice or the local government - does have one option open to them to challenge the decision. The law allows for a party to request a judicial review of the adjudicator's decision, as long as the request is made within 30 days of the decision (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 22).
A judicial review is a process where a court of law reviews an action or decision taken by an administrative official or administrative tribunal to determine whether the tribunal or official was acting within their lawful authority. On the surface it can appear somewhat similar to an appeal, but legally speaking it is not an appeal (Justice Education Society, n.d.d).
In British Columbia, judicial reviews of officials and tribunals under provincial jurisdiction are handled in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and this is where a judicial review of an adjudicator's decision will occur (Judicial Review Procedure Act, 1996; Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s.22).
When the Supreme Court conducts a judicial review they generally will not overturn an adjudicator's decision unless there is a very clear problem with it, such as if there is evidence the adjudicator exceeded their legal authority or acted in an unreasonable manner. The court is not interested in whether they agree with the adjudicator's decision, or whether the adjudicator might have gotten the decision wrong, only in whether it was a decision that a reasonable person could have come to. This is because the standard of review for an adjudicator's decision is reasonableness, not one of the other higher standards of review possible (Britton-Foster & Krusell, 2018).
If a party takes an adjudicator's decision to judicial review and is successful, the Supreme Court of British Columbia will overturn the decision. The party which loses a judicial review can also sometimes be ordered to pay the legal costs of the successful party (Justice Education Society, n.d.b).
Collection of Fines
Once a bylaw notice fine becomes due and payable, either because the recipient does not dispute it within the dispute period or because the person disputed the ticket but was unsuccessful at the adjudication hearing, the local government which issued the bylaw notice may begin the collection process.
In a case where a person was issued a bylaw notice by a method other than directly giving it to the person and that person never responded during the dispute period, the local government is required to send a warning notice before beginning the collection process. This notice is to warn the person in question that the fine is due and payable and must be paid and it may be served in the same manner as a bylaw notice can be; except it cannot be left on a vehicle (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, ss. 24(1) - 24(2)).
After this warning notice has been served, the person in question has 21 days to respond, during which time the person can notify the local government if it happens that the initial bylaw notice was never received. If that occurs, then the bylaw notice is considered null and void, the fine is no longer due and payable and the bylaw notice must be reissued and reserved on the person (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 25). If 28 days pass from the time a warning notice is served on the person in question and the person does not notify the local government that the bylaw notice was not received, then the local government is authorized to proceed with debt collection measures (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 24(3)).
The methods that a local government can use to collect a bylaw notice fine from an individual are wide ranging. They can use any of the methods that a private person could use to collect a debt. Examples include seeking court orders to garnish the debtor's wages or bank account or to seize the debtor's property and sell it auction (Justice Education Society, n.d.a). The debt can also be registered against the land title of any land the debtor owns, preventing the person from selling or mortgaging the property until the debt is paid (Justice Education Society, n.d.c).
One other useful legal tool that local governments have to collect bylaw notice fines is that, under the provincial legislation, once a fine becomes due and payable (and any warning notice required by section 24 of the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act has been served and no response has been received within 28 days), they can file a certificate with the Provincial Court. This certificate serves as legal proof that the person who received the bylaw notice owes a debt to the local government and does away with the need for any legal proceedings to prove the debt exists, such as a trial in BC Small Claims Court (which is a division of the Provincial Court of British Columbia) or a hearing before the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, ss. 24-26).
END NOTES:
[1] It may be argued by some that the bylaw notice is not an actual ticket, since it does not use the word 'ticket' in its name, but if one looks to the dictionary definitions for the word 'ticket', a bylaw notice would likely qualify. The Wordnik online dictionary has a list of multiple meanings for the word 'ticket', one of those being: "A legal notice to a person charged with a violation of law, especially a minor violation" (Wordnik, n.d.). The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines a ticket as having multiple different meanings, including "a summons or warning issued to a traffic-law violator" (Merriam-Webster, n.d.b). It does not mention bylaw violations or any type of law violation other than a traffic law, but I would argue that from the the context it can be implied that the word 'ticket' is applicable to other law violations.
Additionally, multiple local governments refer to bylaw notices as tickets on their own websites (City of Coquitlam, n.d.; Township of Langley, n.d.; City of Nanaimo, n.d.). For these reasons, when the word 'ticket' is used on this website, it can be presumed to include a bylaw notice.
[2] The ability of bylaw notice fines to accumulate into large amounts due to repeated and/or continuing violations committed by the same violator is demonstrated in the case of Yard Investment Inc. v Langley (Township). In that case, bylaw enforcement officers working for the Township of Langley issued a series of bylaw notices over 4 months to Yard Investment Inc. in relation to a marihuana dispensary operating on its property that contravened the township's Zoning Bylaw. In the aggregate, the total fines from all the bylaw notices amounted to $96,250. Yard Investment Inc. challenged these fines on various legal and factual grounds, petitioning the Supreme Court of British Columbia to have them declared null and void, but they were unsuccessful and their petition was dismissed (Yard Investment Inc. v Langley (Township), 2018).
[3] The references to serving bylaw notices by mail in the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act and the Bylaw Notice Enforcement Regulation do not specify what form of mail needs to be used to serve them. The clauses simply state that they may be served by 'mail' (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 7(1)(b); B.C. Reg 175/2004, s. 4). Therefore, as per the definition of 'mail' found in the Interpretation Act, it is not required to use registered mail and ordinary mail is sufficient (Interpretation Act, 1996, s. 29). However, despite this, some local governments may choose to use registered mail as it creates a record of delivery.
[4] Both the Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act and the Bylaw Notice Enforcement Regulation stipulate that, if a bylaw notice is served by mail, it is presumed to have been received and served 7 days after it is mailed (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 7(2); B.C. Reg 175/2004, s. 4). However, there is an opportunity to rebut this presumption in the circumstances described in section 25 of the Act. (Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, 2003, s. 25).
REFERENCES:
Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre. (n.d.). Access to Justice as a Right. Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre. Retrieved March 23, 2024 from https://www.aclrc.com/new-page
Bayda, A. (n.d.). What does proof on a balance of probabilities mean? Bayda Disability Law Firm. Retrieved February 27, 2024 from https://www.disabilitylaw.ca/about/proof-on-balance-of-probabilities
B.C. Reg. 175/2004. https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/175_2004
Britton-Foster, A. & Krusell, J. (2018, November 18). Right or Reasonable: Judicial Review of the Decisions of Bylaw Adjudicators. Stewart McDannold Stuart. Retrieved February 27, 2024 from https://www.sms.bc.ca/2018/11/right-or-reasonable-judicial-review-of-the-decisions-of-bylaw-adjudicators/
Burnaby Bylaw Notice Enforcement Bylaw 2009. https://bylaws.burnaby.ca/media/Consolidated/12657C.pdf
City of Chilliwack. (n.d.). Bylaw Adjudication. City of Chilliwack. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.chilliwack.com/main/page.cfm?id=2479
City of Coquitlam. (n.d.). Bylaw enforcement notices, dispute & adjudication. City of Coquitlam. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.coquitlam.ca/555/Bylaw-Enforcement-Notices-Dispute-Adjudi
City of Kelowna. (n.d.). Disputing bylaw offence notices. City of Kelowna. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.kelowna.ca/city-hall/bylaws/bylaw-services/disputing-bylaw-offence-notices
City of Nanaimo. (n.d.). Pay a Bylaw Offence Notice Ticket. City of Nanaimo. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.nanaimo.ca/your-government/city-bylaws/bylaw-tickets/pay-parking-ticket
City of New Westminster. (n.d.). Bylaw Offence Notice Dispute Form. New Westminster. Retrieved March 2, 2024 from https://www.newwestcity.ca/services/online-forms/bylaw-offence-notice-dispute-form
City of Surrey. (n.d.). Bylaw enforcement notice (BEN). City of Surrey. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.surrey.ca/city-government/bylaws/bylaw-enforcement-notice-ben
Community Charter, SBC 2003, c. 26. https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/03026_00
District of Squamish. (n.d.). Frequently Asked Questions. Squamish. Retrieved February 26, 2024 from https://squamish.ca/our-services/bylaws-and-enforcement/bylaw-faq/
Government of British Columbia. (2022, December 7). Local government bylaw notices. Province of British Columbia. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/local-governments/governance-powers/bylaws/bylaw-enforcement/bylaw-notices
Howieson, D. (2008, November 28). Investigating and Enforcing Bylaws [Seminar Paper]. Young, Anderson Barristers & Solicitors. https://www.younganderson.ca/images/seminar_blogs/Investigating_and_Enforcing_Bylaws.pdf
Interpretation Act, RSBC 1996, c. 238. https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96238_01
Islands Trust. (n.d.). Bylaw Enforcement Notice and Dispute Adjudication. Islands Trust. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://islandstrust.bc.ca/island-planning/general-resources/bylaw-compliance-and-enforcement/bylaw-enforcement-notice-and-dispute-adjudication/
Judicial Review Procedure Act, RSBC 1996, c. 241. https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96241_01
Justice Education Society. (n.d.a). Garnishing and Seizing. Small Claims BC : Online Help Guide. Retrieved February 27, 2024 from https://smallclaimsbc.ca/after-trial/garnishing-and-seizing
Justice Education Society. (n.d.b). Judicial Review Basics. Supreme Court BC : Online Help Guide. Retrieved February 27, 2024 from https://supremecourtbc.ca/civil-law/getting-started/jr-basics
Justice Education Society. (n.d.c). Register Against Land. Supreme Court BC : Online Help Guide. Retrieved February 27, 2024 from https://supremecourtbc.ca/civil-law/after-trial/register-against-land
Justice Education Society. (n.d.d). What is Judicial Review? Supreme Court BC : Online Help Guide. Retrieved February 27, 2024 from https://supremecourtbc.ca/civil-law/getting-started/what-is-jr
Legal Services Society. (n.d.). Legal representation by a lawyer. Legal Aid BC. Retrieved March 21, 2024 from https://legalaid.bc.ca/services/legal-representation
Local Government Bylaw Notice Enforcement Act, SBC 2003, c. 60. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/03060_01
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.a) Fine. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved February 26, 2024 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fine
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.b). Ticket. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ticket
Office of the Ombudsperson. (2015). Bylaw Enforcement: Best Practices Guide for Local Governments (Special Report No. 36). https://bcombudsperson.ca/assets/media/Special-Report-No-36-Bylaw-Enforcement-Best-Practices-Guide-for-Local-Governments.pdf
Squamish-Lilloeet Regional District. (n.d.). Backgrounder: SLRD Bylaw Notice Enforcement and Dispute Adjudication System [Fact sheet]. Squamish-Lillooet Regional District. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.slrd.bc.ca/sites/default/files/pdfs/bylaw_enforcement/Communications%20Materials%20-%20Backgrounder.pdf
Township of Langley. (n.d.). Pay a Bylaw Notice. Township of Langley. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.tol.ca/en/services/pay-a-bylaw-notice.aspx
Union of British Columbia Municipalities. (2022, September). Fact Sheet #28: Bylaw Adjudication [Fact sheet]. Union of British Columbia Municipalities. https://www.ubcm.ca/sites/default/files/2022-12/28%20BYLAW%20ADJUDICATION.pdf
Wordnik. (n.d.) Ticket. In Wordnik dictionary. Retrieved February 24, 2024 from https://www.wordnik.com/words/ticket
Yard Investment Inc. v Langley (Township), 2018 BCSC 1658 (CanLII). https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1658/2018bcsc1658.html