Rican X7

DMV News Releases

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, July 2, 2007
Media Contact: Tia Freeman
Department of Motor Vehicles
(804) 367-6701

DMV Announces New Virginia Laws Effective July 1, 2007


Fee for Failure to Keep Scheduled CDL Test Appointment
The Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) will charge a $50 fee to applicants who fail to show up after scheduling a commercial driver's license (CDL) skills test. The new law is aimed at reducing the number of testing applicants who make appointments with commercial driver's license examiners, then miss that appointment without notice. A recent review of commercial driver's license appointments indicates a "no show" rate of 36 percent.

DMV encourages applicants to advise test examiners in advance if they are unable to keep an appointment. If applicants do not contact an examiner, DMV will bill the customer for the $50 fee. If the bill isn't paid after 31 days, the agency will add an additional $10 administrative fee. Any unpaid bills after that period will be subject to further collection efforts and may be reported to the Virginia Department of Taxation. No DMV-related transactions will be allowed until the "no show" fee is paid.

Abusive Driver Fees for Serious Driving Violation Convictions and Demerit Points
Abusive driver fees are one component of the comprehensive transportation and land use legislative compromise enacted earlier this year. Abusive driver fees have been under consideration by the General Assembly for three years. The goal of the fee is to promote traffic safety and other states who have adopted similar programs have seen improvements in overall driver safety.

Convictions-Related Fees
Drivers convicted of serious traffic offenses will be charged conviction-related abusive driver fees. These fees do not apply to the typical traffic violation such as failure to yield, or parking too near a fire hydrant, for example. Abusive driver fees will only apply when the person is convicted of reckless driving, driving on a suspended or revoked license, driving under the influence, or other serious traffic offenses that occur after July 1, 2007. The fees can be paid in installments over three years. The fees are based on the following schedule:

Driving on a suspended or revoked license - $250 each year for three years;
Reckless or aggressive driving - $350 each year for three years;
Driving while intoxicated - $750 each year for three years;
Other misdemeanor convictions for driving and/or motor vehicle-related offense -$300 each year for three years;
Any felony conviction for driving or motor vehicle-related offense - $1000 each year for three years.
Demerit Point Fees:
Drivers who accumulate 8 or more demerit points will be charged demerit-point-related abusive driver. These fees can not be imposed for demerit points related to offenses committed prior to July 1, 2007. No single traffic violation results in 8 demerits points and a person has the option of attending a driver improvement clinic to reduce the points on their record. Bad drivers who accumulate and keep 8 or more demerit points will be charged $100 and will be charged an additional $75 for each demerit point over eight up to a maximum of $700.
Vehicle Registration Fees
Registration fees for passenger vehicles and pick up trucks will increase $10 statewide. The increases are part of a wide-ranging transportation funding law passed by this year's General Assembly.

For most Virginians, the standard passenger vehicle registration will increase from $29.50 annually to $39.50 annually. Passenger vehicles weighing more than four thousand pounds will see a registration increase from $34.50 to $44.50. There are also several increases in registration fees for pick-up trucks and trailers, depending on weight. More fee information is available at www.dmvNOW.com.

Antique License Plates and Special Plates
Virginia motorists who own antique vehicles should be aware of several changes governing the use of antique license plates.

Applicants for antique license plates must show evidence of ownership or regular use of another passenger car or motorcycle.
Applicants must submit notarized certification that their antique vehicle meets safety equipment requirements for the model year in which it was manufactured.
Fees charged for registration and plate purchase changes from $10 annually to a one-time fee of $50.
Antique plates are available from DMV for vehicles with a model year that is more than 25 years old. New guidelines for these cars were prompted by concerns that many owners were registering older cars as antiques to avoid registration and safety inspection requirements.

Under the new law, if an antique vehicle owner is convicted of operating an antique vehicle determined to be unsafe or not properly equipped, DMV will suspend the owner's registration of the vehicle involved for five years.

Also beginning July 1, 2007, the authorization period begins for the following new special license plates approved by the 2007 session of the General Assembly: Fraternal Order of Police, Registered Nurses, United States Coast Guard, and Robert E. Lee. For each of the special plates authorized, DMV must receive 350 prepaid applications within 30 days beginning July 1, before moving forward with plate development.

No More Using Cell Phones for Drivers under Age 18
Virginia drivers younger than 18 years of age may not operate a motor vehicle in Virginia while using a cellular telephone or other wireless communications devices. The new law prohibits the use of cell phones, even if they are considered to be hands-free. It also prohibits text-messaging while driving.

Except in a driver emergency or when the vehicle is lawfully parked or stopped, drivers 18 years and younger may not use a cellular telephone or other wireless telecommunications device. All Virginia drivers under the age of 18 are issued provisional driver's licenses. A provisional license carries other limitations as well, such as restrictions on the number of passengers and driver curfews. The ban on cell-phone usage while driving is considered a secondary violation, similar in Virginia to safety belt laws.

New Age Requirements for Vehicle Booster Seats
Children riding in motor vehicles will be required to be properly restrained in a booster seat until they reach eight years of age. Currently, the law requires a child safety seat for children through the age of five.

Additionally, the new law requires rear-facing child seats be placed only in the back seat of a vehicle. If the vehicle does not have a back seat, the device may be placed in the front passenger seat, provided the airbag has been deactivated, or there is no airbag equipment.

An exemption to the new law is permitted, if a child's physician determines the use of a restraint system to be impractical due to the child's weight, physical fitness or any other medical reason. In these cases, any person transporting that child would need to carry a signed written statement by the physician explaining the reason for the recommended exemption.

dgeesaman

iTrader: (7)

Wow. Quite aggressive.

I can see how some people in favor think this will help - there are people who will accept tickets on a regular basis and rely on traffic lawyers to keep their license valid. And it works for them, since my impression of the VA traffic courts is that they are corrupt. (Corrupt because a traffic lawyer will get a person off the hook when a person can say the exact same words and be ignored). So clearly, increasing the stakes of each offense just makes the traffic lawyer rates go up and the traffic court judges get more free beer and golf from the lawyers. By pinning the repeat offenders in another way it should discourage the people who repeatedly rack up minor/moderate speeding offenses. That does happen to be a number of people here, and I'm neither supporting it or disapproving of it. It's the picture I see.

Of course they'll say this pays for roads or something, when in fact the money will go to some special-interest project somewhere. They just did that in PA with slot machine gambling licenses - it was supposed to cut property taxes, but in reality they just created a gaming license board full of ex-legislators who get cushy salaries and their influence just drips with lobbyists. (Lobbyists = corruption in a suit)

Personally, I think people driving 65 in a 35 zone need to be punished in a way that they really remember. 35 zones where I live are residential areas with parked cars or tight blind corners, and going 65 is a seriously dangerous offense regardless of the outcome. Hopefully it will slow down the soccer moms and flying commuters who create traffic accidents and jams by trying to go too fast for conditions. (I've seen it happen many times - they go too fast, duck & weave and drive another vehicle into an accident, but the first person just disappears into the sunset).

But I'll never respect Va for the inequity in the laws. People with lawyers get off lightly, people from out-of-state will pay lower fines, etc, etc. What a joke.

Dave

RXtacy

iTrader: (7)

It's intersting that you bring up the lawyers rates increasing. This is because the delegate who put this bill through is from springfield virginia his name is Dave Albo. He just happens to be a traffic atterny and a partner in a major traffic attorney firm. Also these new "taxations or fees" will not stand up in court due to the fact that VA residents do not get equal protection under VA law. I am sure Albo is aware of this which is why he put it in simply to make himself and his firm more money.

Attila the Fun

iTrader: (1)

Thanks, Wargasm. You're interpretations are reasonable...so the cops probably won't use them. Seriously, I'm betting that the key issue in the "fail to stop" will be "stop line". Most people ignore the line painted on the roadway and stop as far forward as they can, so the can see oncoming traffic better. I'll bet you'll start seeing tickets written for people just because they didn't stop >behind< those lines.

As for the tires, you're suggestion is reasonable, so I have my doubts. f1bluerx7's suggestion would require that the officers think, so that one is out. Another possibility is one that is enforced in Germany (and, perhaps, other countries): Based on a car's advertised top speed, it is required to have the correctly rated tires. For example, if your RX-7 had an advertised top speed of 153, you would have to have Z-rated tires or get ticketed. (In Germany, the highway patrolman will escort you to the nearest "approved" tire retailer - usually the highest priced - and require you to purchase and have mounted the correctly rated tires. If you can't afford to do that, the car is impounded and you get free overnight accomodations in the local lockup.)

I think that last one will be a nuisance citation, i.e., after you've been pulled over for something else. From reading this forum, I recall Virginia owners who, after having been pulled over for speeding, end up also getting a citation for illegal exhaust.

NewbernD

iTrader: (1)

This is a real pet peeve of mine so I hope that it finally does get some attention. Too bad it has to be attached to this ridiculous VA crap. There are so many basic traffic rules that have slowly eroded over time due to lack of enforcement and lousy driver attitudes. It seems like police don't care to ticket you for running a light any more because they have cameras for that. Since cameras don't work for running a light on a turn, I see a HUGE number of people blatantly running red left-hand turns.
/rant

RE Matsuda

That's the sort of thing I hate. They just look for the easiest target, you're more likely to get caught speeding on a deserted road just because its easy for them to single you out . Even though your being much safer than the douche in the M3 convertible thats weaving through heavy traffic, he'd probably only get caught if he cut-off a cop car.

fc3Sidewayz

im just glad i got my wreckless driving ticket back in march but another thing i disagree with is the under 18 cell phone law ...i pretty sure im not the only one that do 2 things at once sucessfully

cosmicbang

For all those VA residents unhappy with these laws, where were you during the legislative session when these bills were being considered? If you didn't make you views known to your legislators, DO NOT COMPLAIN. They are elected to work for YOU. Therefore they WILL listen. Try it some time. We even have some car enthusiasts in the state legislature and I can tell you first-hand they are very receptive to motor vehicle issues.

drivelikejehu

you guys voted for those representatives.

Attila the Fun

iTrader: (1)

First of all, let me say that I agree wholeheartedly that people who don't contact their representatives shouldn't complain. I'll add to that: People who don't vote have no right to complain.

With that said, my response to "They are elected to work for YOU" is "I love fairy tales. Please tell me another story."

Ideally, you're right, but we fall far short of the ideal. The grim reality is that they are elected to work for the fatcats, lobbyists and special interest groups. You and I are simply regarded as sheep to be sheared.

wvmgnut

I would like to know if these new "laws" are going to be enforced on the Beltway. If I remember correctly the speed limit is 55 but if you drive anything below 70 you run a very good chance of getting run over. Just a thought.

stickman

i really dont want to come home now

Attila the Fun

iTrader: (1)

Sure, they'll be enforced on the beltway. Virginia needs the money, and the harried commuters are a legitimate source of prey.

cosmicbang

With these new fines, the General Assembly was looking for any source of revenue to balance the budget. (Notwithstanding the alleged nefarious conspiricy plot by traffic attorneys ) The numbers looked good on paper, and there was no protest by--or on behalf of--those who will be the victims of the fines. In my opinion, it passed because no one was/is willing to stand up for and defend what are referred to as "bad drivers." I do think there are other ways of looking at the legislation and its impact and effects; and good arguments could be made against the fines, but no one has made the effort to do so.

It's easy to be cynical and find examples of graft, corruption, etc. But by and large, that's not the case. The claim that elected representatives work for "fatcats, lobbyists and special interest groups" is not without some truth, but not a complete explanation. Legislators have to find out about issues somehow, and they will listen to lobbyists, interest groups, and average citizens. In the case of U.S. senators and representatives, it's typically a young staff member just out of college who handles most of issues anyway. They listen, learn, make recommendations, and in many cases write the laws. Consider that those constituents and parties who make their views known are only a subset, who may only present one side of an issue, and distort or misrepresent the alternative. If the only input a legislator receives about a particular issue comes from a one particular lobby or "interest group," what else does he or she have on which to base a vote?

On occasion, I lobby on the Hill. One theme I hear consistently is the power of constituents to get an ear. A senate legislative director told me just last month that constituents always get priority in having their voices heard. He said "if you (from another state) come in here wanting to talk about the NASA budget, and a little old lady from (an isolated town in his state) comes in claiming the government is spying on her through her TV, I'm going to listen to the constituent."

Literally anyone can make an appointment with their member's office on the hill, or a local office, and speak with their representative or a staff member. On any given day, there are always groups of citizens walking through the house and senate office buildings, meeting about issues important to them. It's not because they believe in fairy tales.

State legislators are average people with regular day jobs. They don't have the time to consider in-depth implications of every bill. Sometimes a single person on a committee can push through an idiotic law simply because no one else sees anything wrong with it. However, with just a little organized effort, voters can "show them the light" and stop these bills. For example, a couple years ago I ran across a very nasty proposed motor vehicle bill in the on-line VA legislative information system. I immediately sent a few e-mails and made phone calls to my own representative, those on the transportation committee, and those legislators I know through other circles. I alerted the council of car clubs, and they began making calls/contacts. The bill was defeated.

Get to know your representatives ahead of time. (If you invite your elected officials to attend or speak at your social/professional/etc. functions, you can gain additional credibility.) Always try to make a logical, convincing business case, and keep in mind what motivates and is important to them. Pending Virginia legislation can be easily tracked at http://leg1.state.va.us/

Attila the Fun

iTrader: (1)

Jeez, cosmicbang, there ya go--bein' all fair and reasonable. That's just no fun. I much prefer to regard the legislators as rum-soaked representatives of depravity and greed. FWIW, you're right that concerted effort by citizens can affect the outcome of many votes.

With that admission, let me add that it means that we basically have to babysit the bastards, instead of being able to trust them to act on our behalf without constant oversight. That's the source of my rancor: IMNSHO, their default position on anything should be "Does it make George's life easier or harder?" If the answer is "harder", it should be voted down.

You very reasonably asked "what else does he or she have on which to base a vote?" My knee-jerk reaction is "common sense", but on sober reflection, that'll never happen in Congress. Seriously, though, anyone with an IQ above room temperature should be able to figure out that taking more money from beleagured citizens who are already overburdened with taxes and commuting expenses is not in their best interests.

fc3Sidewayz

well va should have plenty of money to do w/e they want to the roads in about 6 months

KhanArtisT

iTrader: (2)

http://www.petitiononline.com/va3202/petition.html

dgeesaman

iTrader: (7)

Of course they will, but we all know what government does with money that hasn't been put into a budget yet - they share it with each other's special interests instead of the reason that the people agreed to.

It's quite possibly the oldest trick in the government book. Once the people agree to pay, they forget to look where the money ends up.

Dave

Fd3BOOST

iTrader: (7)

Let me remind you we are a self governing country. It's not called babysitting. It's called governance by the people for the people. Sorry to hear the woes of current Virgina traffic laws. Hopefully you can get some new blood in there and get that overturned.

the other Dave

Attila the Fun

iTrader: (1)

I suppose you're right. "Babysitting" has a sort of benign connotation that really doesn't do justice to the malevolence and rapaciousness of the politicians. Perhaps "paranoid defensiveness" would be more accurate, since it captures the reality that they are out to get us.

Attila the Fun

iTrader: (1)

From Steve Eldridge's column in the Baltimore Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/a-822682~Cou...e_in_Md__.html

"These super fines already are in place in New York, New Jersey, Michigan and Texas and are admittedly a way to raise extra revenue at a time when the money available for transportation repairs and additions is becoming scarce.

The regular fines that apply to moving violations in Virginia will still go into a fund for school improvements, as they have been for years. In a sense, then, these new fines are a way to circumvent the old system and add new revenue."

and

"The thing that seems a little shady about this whole thing is that the Virginia legislator who proposed the law and got it passed is David Albo. Albo is a partner in one of Virginia’s largest law firms. Its specialty? Traffic cases."

Mr rx-7 tt

iTrader: (5)

One of the most prominent law firms in the area is going after this already. The head partner in the firm is also a Judge.

Mr rx-7 tt

iTrader: (5)

Ha! I hope Albo gets booted and sent him an e-mail letting him know in our previous discussions about this legislation a while back I was correct and he was wrong. I also told him I hope he gets booted! I sent him this link!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071601934.html

The Driver

iTrader: (4)

Quite rediculous, Like I said on A.F this is getting out of hand.

Aren't you on automotiveforums? ~ I'm Jcsaleen