|
|
Traffic ticket "insurance"Sep 05 '00 Write an essay on this topic.Traffic ticket "insurance" sounds good but you'll still pay after you're written up for an infraction. I've been a Traffic School instructor in California for almost 7 years and here's my thinking on ticket insurance. Vachipep, in an earlier epinion said to check out the National Motorists Association (NMA), which I just did. There's some very good information there, a lot that I agree with, and also some opinion that I don't share, which is beside the point here. The NMA posts a disclaimer on their "Pre-Paid Traffic Ticket Program" page stating that the program is "not intended to be or implied to be insurance." From the NMA's website: "The NMA's Traffic Justice Program is intended to encourage you to fight unjust speeding tickets. If, as a continuing member after one year of membership, you receive a speeding ticket and plead not guilty but lose in court, NMA will pay your fine." Read carefully. If you want someone to pay your fine during your first year of membership (individual, 1 year: $29), you'll enroll in the Pre-Paid program (per month, from $5 to cover a $100 fine, to $50/$1000). As a member, if you want to go to court, you can also rent a "nine-pound package of knowledge" for your self-defense, for $40 ($30 rental, $10 shipping/handling, and a $155 deposit) or you can take advantage of NMA's "reduced rates on legal services," as Vachipep put it. The NMA looks like a good organization to support, because of how they're watching out for citizen rights, but if you just want to beat your ticket and save money, the NMA may not be the way to go. Let's look at the money first. In CA a typical ticket (illegal left, failure to yield, first-tier speeding, etc.) will cost between $76 to $103. Speeding ticket fines have three tiers. 1) 1 to 15 mph over the posted speed limit, 2 ) 16 to 25 mph, and 3) 26 mph and above. Ninety-five percent of the time an officer will drop the written speed down from the actual speed. It gives drivers an easy break, is good pr for the police agency, and it does save money. At tier one the fine is like any other infraction. At tier two, the fine is around $160, while tier three ends up about $250 or so. In some counties, a person under 18 years old will have their fine reduced to $35, with a day in traffic violator school (TVS). Sometimes the young person is required to write a short essay. The court administration fee for referral to TVS varies county to county in CA, but is usually between $24 and $35. The fee for TVS varies from $20 to $40 (my school charges $27.) Let's add it up, assuming you get the "normal" ticket: Infraction $76 to $103 Admin. fee 24 35 TVS 20 40 ----------------- $120 178 NMA membership, (Individual) 1 year 3 years $ 29 $ 70 $200-Fine protection (12 months) 120 360 Nine-pounder defense package 40 40 Legal services Optional................ -------------------------- $289 470 The NMA states that "If, as a continuing member after one year of membership, you receive a speeding ticket and plead not guilty but lose in court, NMA will pay your fine." So, let's assume that your first year passes and you drop your month to month Pre-paid fine protection, and you get the ticket. If you want NMA to pay the fine you have to plead not guilty. Suppose you're one of the average type speeders that come through my classroom. You were ticketed doing 78 mph on a road posted at 55. On the ticket the officer has written your actual speed and he's written you down, so you're charged with doing 68 mph; he's "saved" you fifty or sixty dollars, dropping your fine to around $103. You go to court to plead not guilty so NMA will pay that 103 smakerolas. Let's say you go to traffic court in Colusa County, like my chiropractor did, and after you wait with everyone else for a while, the judge enters and addresses you, the accused, and you hear what my chiropractor heard: "You're welcome to plead 'guilty with an explanation,' but if your explanation sounds silly, I want you to know I have the authority to double your fine." Now if the judge asks you if you were indeed driving at 68 mph in a 55, you can say "yes," which means you admit guilt, because in California the law says you can not drive faster than the maximum posted speed limit (55 in a 55, 65 in a 65, 70 in a 70) and therefore NMA will not pay your fine. If you plead "not guilty, your Honor," then the burden of proof falls upon you. In a democracy the accused is innocent until proven guilty. In traffic court it's just the opposite. You must prove you were the victim of a speed trap (the CA vehicle has two definitions; see CVC 40802) or you must perjure yourself, or use phrases like, "I don't recall," or "I'm not really sure but," in which case you look like an unreliable witness. But the upshot of your "not guilty" plea is that you must prove that the professional, the officer, who is more a friend of the court than you, is wrong. Good luck. Usually, too, in California counties that allow traffic court, if you plead not guilty and fight your ticket, you lose the opportunity to take traffic school, although if the judge says you can take TVS then DMV will accept the Certificate that masks the ticket. Say you chose to fight the ticket you got in Colusa County, and you went before my chiropractor's judge. Maybe you're hoping, as Vachipep suggested, that the officer might not show and you win by default. Things like that happen, but remember that the officer has received a summons to appear and he gets paid. Failure to obey a court order is a serious offense. Will the officer choose to spend the morning at Winchell's, or come to court? Assume the officer is there, so your case is not thrown out and you are going to defend yourself. If you can't prove you were caught in a vehicle-code-defined speed trap, you're basically out of luck. You can try to prove that you were driving safely, but the law does not recognize that argument at maximum speed limits; the law clearly states that you cannot drive faster than the posted max. If you were ticketed doing 46 in a prima facie 35 mph zone, you have some leeway to argue safety. Section 22351(b) of the Code provides for this, but you, the defendant, must present "competent evidence that the speed in excess of said limits" was not in violation of the basic speed law. And the judge is looking at the court papers and sees that you were clocked on radar at 78 mph, but the officer, being a good guy, only wrote you for 68. This is the judge who threatened to double the fine of anyone pleading "guilty with a silly explanation." Suppose the judge had a really bad night and is in a very crabby dictatorial mood and decides to teach you, and any other would-be defendant, a lesson. He triples your fine to $300, and tacks on a hideous fee to cover the expenses of the court, say another $80. Total: $380. NMA pays $200. Are all judges like this? Not at all. But I've heard enough stories from students to make me think you're basically in a coin-toss situation in traffic court, and the judge's verdict is final. No appeal. It ends there and you're stuck with it. And say the judge doesn't allow you to take traffic school. The point goes on your record, your insurance rates rise, and they will, in California. How much depends on your insurance company, your age, your record. But even a $5.00 increase per month, over three years, adds up $180. In California a person does not get "bonus points" as Vachipep suggests. And it isn't a good idea to take TVS until the court says it is okay to do so. You might find out that the court won't accept it, then you've out more time and money. The judge does not "dismiss" the ticket. The Certificate of Completion from the traffic school is the key that locks the point in a hiding place, so to speak. The ticket is hidden from the public record but remains on the private record. If you do have a case, invest in a copy of "Fight Your Ticket," by Brown, published by Nolo Press. The best book on the subject I've seen. The NMA has it right about many things, but your best bet is to drive by the book. Your chances of getting a ticket will decrease. Drive aware and alert. Your chances of becoming enmeshed in grief beyond comprehension will be lessened. For more info, check out my website, http://trafficschool.homestead.com CVC 22351. (a) The speed of any vehicle upon a highway not in excess of the limits specified in Section 22352 or established as authorized in this code is lawful unless clearly proved to be in violation of the basic speed law. (b) The speed of any vehicle upon a highway in excess of the prima facie speed limits in Section 22352 or established as authorized in this code is prima facie unlawful unless the defendant establishes by competent evidence that the speed in excess of said limits did not constitute a violation of the basic speed law at the time, place and under the conditions then existing.  |
| Write the first comment on this review! |
|
