FILE NUMBER:

HEARING DATE: November 30, and December 20, 2007 and February 6, 2008

IN THE MATTER OF THE MOTOR DEALER ACT R.S.B.C.1996 C.316 AND
THE BUSINESS PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT S.B.C. 2004 c.2

COMPLAINANT: SATINDER, JASVINDER AND BALWINDER GILL AND MONICA PIRVULESCU AND TRENT MARTENS

MOTOR DEALER and/or SALESPERSON: PARKWOOD AUTO SALES LIMITED (Dealer #10342) AND ROB HAWES (Salesperson 105748)

ISSUE:

• Dealership was called to a hearing before the Registrar of Motor Dealers for infractions under the Motor Dealer Act and the BPCPA.
• Continuation of November 30, 2007 hearing was held on December 20, 2007.
• Continuation of December 20, 2007 hearing was held on February 6, 2008.

OUTCOME:

• Registrar’s decision at the November 30, 2007 hearing was that Mr. Rob Hawes (Salesperson #105748) attends the Salesperson Licensing Course within 90 days. Registrar’s decision regarding Parkwood Auto Sales Limited was reserved until the next hearing.
• Registrar reserved his decision at the February 6, 2008 hearing with a written decision to follow.
• Registrar’s written decision found in favor of the Gills and Ms. Pirvulescu. In the case of Mr. Martens, the Registrar found no evidence that Parkwood Auto Sales Limited did anything improper.
• Registrar’s written decision pursuant to Section 164 of the BPCPA, that Parkwood Auto Sales Limited should pay an administrative penalty of $5000 plus all investigation and hearing costs in the Gill and Pirvulescu matters.
• Registrar’s written decision under the Motor Dealer Act that Parkwood Auto Sales Limited’s Motor Dealer Licence should have two conditions attached to it; first a complete prohibition on consignment sales; and the second, Mr. Beune, dealer principle for Parkwood Auto Sales Limited shall take the Salesperson Certification Program at his expense, no later than 3 months from the date of this decision.

COMPLETE DECISION: File Hearing Decision File Gill & Pirvulescu & Martens v Parkwood Auto Sales Ltd. April 23, 2008

NOTE: This decision was set aside by the B.C. Supreme Court. See details here.

Top