407ETR MATTERS: Petition on 407ETR Issues‏

1
367

By Tammy Flores
September 25th, 2013 Edition

The group “Stop the 407ETR’s Abuse of Power” has refocused and started a new petition/campaign. http://www.change.org/en-CA/petitions/change-the-407act

The group wants the 407 Act changed so it is transparent & complies with other important public policies currently being ignored. This company doesn’t deserve any special treatment.

RE: INDEPENDENT ARBITRATORS
“The Fixer” Jack Lakey is very special to the group because he has done fantastic work exposing this issue. In 2010 Jack wrote an article that hit the nail on the head with respects to 407ETR issues.

Neither MTO nor 407ETR are transparent in informing you of this right to independent arbitration & the independent arbitrators are not easily accessible.

According to Jodie Parmar, Section 19 of 407 Act creates the legal obligation for 407ETR to pay fees & expenses of appointed dispute arbitrators.

When someone has a billing issue, they are pushed through 407ETR’s internal 3 tiered process. Which we all know gets you nowhere. The amounts are undocumented and 407 will not provide proof of charges i.e. they will not provide photographic evidence of tolls. When the public realizes they have been hoodwinked & finds out about these independent arbitrators they are told they missed their 30 day window of opportunity to exercise their right to independent arbitration. Also, that they have exhausted all avenues so CASE CLOSED!

Nobody in the group or anyone is known to have been successful in #1 accessing the independent arbitrators and #2 successfully appealing.

Section 9 of the Regulation requires 407 ETR to advise the Registrar at any time if a person ought not to have received a notice under s. 16 of the Act due to error, payment, or 407 ETR’s failure to comply with the Act and Regulation. At the same time, the owner must withdraw the s. 22 notice and request that the Registrar “not take the actions he or she would otherwise be required to take under subsection 22(4). The problem is MTO interprets this to mean that unless 407ETR withdraws, they will still act on Plate Denials.

In layman terms, the group says this is wrong for MTO to keep people in plate denial when 407ETR has issued a plate denial notice in error.

1 COMMENT

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here