B.C.’s office of civil forfeiture has again been slammed for its lack of discretion in aggressively pursuing cases that may be outside its mandate.

In a stinging decision over the seizure of a woman’s pickup truck in Kelowna, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Douglas Thompson lambasted the agency created to fight serious criminals but which has instead been going after minor offenders.

“I am not satisfied that the Director’s case is better than frivolous,” Thompson scolded, dismissing the application to keep the 2006 vehicle. “Regrettably, this appears to be a case where the Office of the Director of Civil Forfeiture has taken zealous measures outside the proper bounds of its home statute with the unfortunate effect of depriving a citizen of lawful possession and use of her property, and putting that citizen to what I suspect is considerable expense and inconvenience to retrieve her property.”

Many people have complained about the forfeiture office’s heavy-handedness and capriciousness, but so far the government has yet to rein it in.

In this case, Roberta Allwright’s truck was seized after it was stopped on July 1 allegedly being driven by an impaired man, Clifford Robinson, Allwright’s housemate.

He failed the roadside breath-screening test — Allwright, who was with him, passed — and her pickup was impounded.

On July 25, the forfeiture office filed a civil claim alleging the truck “is an instrument of unlawful activity and therefore liable to be forfeited.”

It gained possession July 30.

The government argued it had a right to the vehicle because it had been used in illegal activity (drinking and driving) that was likely to cause harm to a person.

There was no harm here, Thompson said dismissively. “On the basis of the evidence before me, I conclude that it cannot be seriously contended that the manner of use of the pickup truck on 1 July 2014 was likely to cause serious bodily harm. There is no serious question to be tried in this respect.”

He also brushed aside the government’s follow up that even though Allwright, who owns the truck, is unlikely to engage in any crime, Robinson might use the truck again in future to engage in unlawful activity that might cause serious harm.

The judge all but scoffed, pointing out that since the incident Allwright has not permitted Robinson to operate any of her other vehicles.

She has expressly told him that he is not allowed to operate any of them again until he is legally licensed and permitted to drive, the judge said.

As well, he noted, a police officer lives directly across the street.

“Ms. Allwright has pledged that if the pickup truck is returned to her, she will not allow Mr. Robinson to drive it until such time that he is legally permitted to operate a vehicle, has a valid driver’s license on his person, and he demonstrates to her that he has consumed no alcohol within the previous 24 hours,” Thompson said.

“In my view, there is no serious question to be tried as to whether Mr. Robinson is likely to use the pickup truck to engage in unlawful activity. On the basis of the evidence before me, I cannot conceive of even a remote possibility of a finding at trial that Mr. Robinson will likely use the pickup truck in the future to engage in unlawful activity.”

imulgrew@vancouversun.com