I'm not sure I've ever written up a summary of what we do in our firm. We cover a few areas of law.
Personal Injury Lawyer
We handle a small number of personal injury cases, usually from car accidents and motorcycle accidents along with a few other areas.
Most of these cases are in or near the Albany area, but we do take some further away. We keep the number small by only accepting cases where the injuries are serious.
Criminal Defense
We handle a broad variety of criminal cases. The two most common areas we see are from drunk driving (DWI and DWAI) and marijuana possession.
Other cases we see include:
Petit Larceny (usually shoplifting)
Grand Larceny (mostly alleged employee theft or contractor disputes - both usually strong cases for the defense)
Aggravated Harassment (typically when someone keeps calling, e-mailing or texting their ex)
Criminal Possession of a Weapon (often in the Albany Airport)
Federal Criminal Defense (border-related offenses and drugs)
Our criminal defense practice is almost entirely within the greater Albany area (within about 100 miles). We do handle some cases further away, especially minor marijuana offenses. But for more serious cases, it becomes too expensive for most clients to pay us to travel.
Traffic Lawyer
We handle speeding tickets and other traffic offenses across most of New York State, covering almost every court north of New York City. We don't handle New York City or Long Island.
In addition to simple traffic tickets we see some criminal traffic cases involving aggravated unlicensed operation and reckless driving. We usually get these reduced to non-criminal violations.
Showing posts with label speeding tickets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label speeding tickets. Show all posts
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Friday, December 04, 2009
Adrian Peterson: Speeding and Knowing Your Speed
The hot traffic court story of the week is Vikings running back Adrian Peterson ticketed for going 109 mph in a 55 zone. See the story on ESPN.
My favorite quote from the story is this from Peterson: I need to be more aware of the speed I was going ....
I should add this to my speeding ticket excuses post, because I've heard it before. "I didn't realize I was going that fast."
Maybe this excuse makes sense when you're ticketed for 80 in a 55. But if you're going over 100 mph, you really should know. I had one guy ticketed for ... I'm not kidding ... 125 mph. He said he didn't realize he was going that fast.
Look, if you're going to drive at speeds that high, please be aware of what you're doing. While it may be dangerous to drive at such speeds in general, it's definitely more dangerous if you're not paying attention.
My favorite quote from the story is this from Peterson: I need to be more aware of the speed I was going ....
I should add this to my speeding ticket excuses post, because I've heard it before. "I didn't realize I was going that fast."
Maybe this excuse makes sense when you're ticketed for 80 in a 55. But if you're going over 100 mph, you really should know. I had one guy ticketed for ... I'm not kidding ... 125 mph. He said he didn't realize he was going that fast.
Look, if you're going to drive at speeds that high, please be aware of what you're doing. While it may be dangerous to drive at such speeds in general, it's definitely more dangerous if you're not paying attention.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
NY Tickets and NJ Insurance
We spoke recently with a NJ insurance agent. He had received a ticket in NY which was an 1110a. This was a "road-side writedown" where the cop was giving him a break from a speed.
The agent told us that an 1110a would increase insurance rates by as much $900 per year for three years. He said he wished the cop had written him for a low speed because ...
NJ insurance companies treat a first-time low speed essentially as a free pass. While it does count for points on a NJ record, it does not impact insurance rates.
The agent said that for anything out-of-state 15 mph or above, even though it's only 2 points, the insurance companies do raise rates based on the speed and not just the points. He also verified that the 2-point deal we get for NJ clients in NY does not count for points in NJ and does not affect insurance rates.
The agent told us that an 1110a would increase insurance rates by as much $900 per year for three years. He said he wished the cop had written him for a low speed because ...
NJ insurance companies treat a first-time low speed essentially as a free pass. While it does count for points on a NJ record, it does not impact insurance rates.
The agent said that for anything out-of-state 15 mph or above, even though it's only 2 points, the insurance companies do raise rates based on the speed and not just the points. He also verified that the 2-point deal we get for NJ clients in NY does not count for points in NJ and does not affect insurance rates.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Do Points Transfer? Out-of-state tickets are not that simple ...
If you have a ticket in New York, please check out our New York Traffic Lawyer page.
This is one of the most common questions we get: Do points transfer? Or: "Will the points transfer to my home state?"
The short and misleading answer is No. The points themselves do not transfer to other states.
So what does happen? In most situations, the state where you got the ticket will report any conviction to your home state. Your home state might then assign points to the violation according to its own rules.
Example: You are an Ontario driver and you get a speeding ticket in New York State, for going 85 mph in a 65 mph zone.
If you plead guilty or are convicted at trial of the 85/65, it will count for 4 points against you in NY. NY will report to Ontario. Ontario will count it against you per the Ontario system. 20 mph over the limit is about 32 km over the limit. In Ontario, 31-45 km over is 4 points.
If it had been 80/65, then it would still be 4 points in NY, but only 3 points in Ontario.
If your lawyer (yes, that's a hint) gets the ticket reduced to something less, there's a good chance it won't count for points against you in Ontario. A speed of 15 km (9 mph) or less in Ontario is no points, even though it would be 3 points in NY.
Different states handle tickets from other places differently. Quebec and Ontario recognize NY tickets and maybe tickets from a couple other states. Most other Canadian provinces do not recognize NY tickets. Maybe BC recognizes WA tickets?
New Jersey recognizes out-of-state tickets, and they generally count for 2 points there, no matter how many points they are in the state where you got the ticket. Could be a 3-point or 11-point speed in NY? Either way, 2 points in NJ. Your lawyer (again, a hint) may be able to get you a deal to something that doesn't count for points in NJ.
NY generally does not recognize out-of-state speeding tickets. I've been told it does recognize tickets from Quebec and Ontario. We have seen a Quebec speeding ticket on a NY driving record and we have seen out-of-state DUIs as well.
Florida recognizes out-of-state tickets. One common deal NY lawyers get for drivers is actually more points in FL than a low speed. So make sure you ask the lawyer you call what deal they think they can get for you in NY and how it will affect you in FL.
North Carolina is one of the trickiest. A speeding ticket that might be considered minor in NY could get you suspended in NC. Watch out! Virginia can also be difficult.
Every state is different and there can be many complications. So you might want to discuss this with a lawyer in the state where you got the ticket, and maybe with a lawyer in your home state as well.
And don't ask: "Do the points transfer?" It's not the right question. You should ask: "How will this affect me in my home state?"
---
Update: See new post on Out of state tickets for Maine drivers.
This is one of the most common questions we get: Do points transfer? Or: "Will the points transfer to my home state?"
The short and misleading answer is No. The points themselves do not transfer to other states.
So what does happen? In most situations, the state where you got the ticket will report any conviction to your home state. Your home state might then assign points to the violation according to its own rules.
Example: You are an Ontario driver and you get a speeding ticket in New York State, for going 85 mph in a 65 mph zone.
If you plead guilty or are convicted at trial of the 85/65, it will count for 4 points against you in NY. NY will report to Ontario. Ontario will count it against you per the Ontario system. 20 mph over the limit is about 32 km over the limit. In Ontario, 31-45 km over is 4 points.
If it had been 80/65, then it would still be 4 points in NY, but only 3 points in Ontario.
If your lawyer (yes, that's a hint) gets the ticket reduced to something less, there's a good chance it won't count for points against you in Ontario. A speed of 15 km (9 mph) or less in Ontario is no points, even though it would be 3 points in NY.
Different states handle tickets from other places differently. Quebec and Ontario recognize NY tickets and maybe tickets from a couple other states. Most other Canadian provinces do not recognize NY tickets. Maybe BC recognizes WA tickets?
New Jersey recognizes out-of-state tickets, and they generally count for 2 points there, no matter how many points they are in the state where you got the ticket. Could be a 3-point or 11-point speed in NY? Either way, 2 points in NJ. Your lawyer (again, a hint) may be able to get you a deal to something that doesn't count for points in NJ.
NY generally does not recognize out-of-state speeding tickets. I've been told it does recognize tickets from Quebec and Ontario. We have seen a Quebec speeding ticket on a NY driving record and we have seen out-of-state DUIs as well.
Florida recognizes out-of-state tickets. One common deal NY lawyers get for drivers is actually more points in FL than a low speed. So make sure you ask the lawyer you call what deal they think they can get for you in NY and how it will affect you in FL.
North Carolina is one of the trickiest. A speeding ticket that might be considered minor in NY could get you suspended in NC. Watch out! Virginia can also be difficult.
Every state is different and there can be many complications. So you might want to discuss this with a lawyer in the state where you got the ticket, and maybe with a lawyer in your home state as well.
And don't ask: "Do the points transfer?" It's not the right question. You should ask: "How will this affect me in my home state?"
---
Update: See new post on Out of state tickets for Maine drivers.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Why shouldn't I hire a lawyer to beat my ticket?
Saw something on the web that got me laughing. Back in '05 I did a post about lawyer marketing on the web. I critiqued some websites that claimed to help people with their tickets.
Well, someone from speedticketbeaters -dot- com tried to post a comment on that old blog post. I don't allow these sites to promote themselves through my blog. But it was funny. The comment asserted, among other things, that "traffic lawyers don't know anything about traffic law." This is quite similar to something on the site, which I quote below with more critique:
Why shouldn't I hire a lawyer to beat my ticket?
Here's several of many reasons:
"Several of many"??
Lawyers do not study traffic law in law school ....
I don't remember much traffic law in law school. But traffic cases in most of New York are handled in local criminal courts. Law school did cover Constitutional Law, Procedure, Evidence, Criminal Law. Along with a few other topics, those classes are quite relevant to traffic law. In addition, some of us actually learn more after law school. I've had over 40 jury trials. Maybe I learned something along the way.
... all [lawyers] ever ... do is plea bargain your ticket down to a lower fine. That is not winning, and still costs you big money in insurance ... and ... fines!
We do usually plea bargain. Our focus is not just the fine though. Most of our clients are concerned about the points and insurance impact. Many of them ask if we can get them a deal where they pay a higher fine so they can get less points - but it generally doesn't work that way.
And plea bargaining is not all we ever do. Our office has done several speeding ticket trials, and we win about half of them. We occasionally get tickets dismissed before trial too. But the strategy of fighting tickets is risky, and in most cases our clients prefer the safer option of a deal that protects their license and insurance.
Lawyers charge a fortune [and] ... do ... mediocre work ... on speeding tickets. ... Lawyers call us ... asking us to teach THEM ....
You'd think if they say we charge so much, they'd have the decency to publish their fees. They don't. They do at one point criticize other websites who charge only $50 as too cheap. There are places (like Florida and Texas) where lawyers don't charge much more than that.
There most certainly are some lawyers who do mediocre work. But most of the lawyers I see handling traffic cases do a good job for their clients. And if there are lawyers calling these guys for instruction, they strangely are not identified on the site.
One thing about hiring a lawyer - at least with most NY lawyers, we put our names and addresses on our websites. You know who we are. On this particular website there is no information identifying who really runs the site.
Another detail: It is true that in cases where the cop doesn't show up for trial, the case will sometimes be dismissed. But they usually do show up (I'd say about 95% of the time) and even when they don't, some judges won't dismiss the case.
There's also the nightmare scenario. Under NY law you can get up to 15 days in jail for speeding. You go without a lawyer to the wrong court with the wrong judge with the wrong set of facts, and then you don't handle things well, ... you might not be going home that night. It's pretty rare, but I remember one young woman who walked out of Court after the deal didn't go through, and was brought back in wearing handcuffs. I know of a couple judges who put people in jail for high speeds too.
These incidents are very rare, and not something I'd want my clients worried about. But if something does go wrong, do you really want to rely on a questionable website? You might feel more comfortable with a lawyer.
Well, someone from speedticketbeaters -dot- com tried to post a comment on that old blog post. I don't allow these sites to promote themselves through my blog. But it was funny. The comment asserted, among other things, that "traffic lawyers don't know anything about traffic law." This is quite similar to something on the site, which I quote below with more critique:
Why shouldn't I hire a lawyer to beat my ticket?
Here's several of many reasons:
"Several of many"??
Lawyers do not study traffic law in law school ....
I don't remember much traffic law in law school. But traffic cases in most of New York are handled in local criminal courts. Law school did cover Constitutional Law, Procedure, Evidence, Criminal Law. Along with a few other topics, those classes are quite relevant to traffic law. In addition, some of us actually learn more after law school. I've had over 40 jury trials. Maybe I learned something along the way.
... all [lawyers] ever ... do is plea bargain your ticket down to a lower fine. That is not winning, and still costs you big money in insurance ... and ... fines!
We do usually plea bargain. Our focus is not just the fine though. Most of our clients are concerned about the points and insurance impact. Many of them ask if we can get them a deal where they pay a higher fine so they can get less points - but it generally doesn't work that way.
And plea bargaining is not all we ever do. Our office has done several speeding ticket trials, and we win about half of them. We occasionally get tickets dismissed before trial too. But the strategy of fighting tickets is risky, and in most cases our clients prefer the safer option of a deal that protects their license and insurance.
Lawyers charge a fortune [and] ... do ... mediocre work ... on speeding tickets. ... Lawyers call us ... asking us to teach THEM ....
You'd think if they say we charge so much, they'd have the decency to publish their fees. They don't. They do at one point criticize other websites who charge only $50 as too cheap. There are places (like Florida and Texas) where lawyers don't charge much more than that.
There most certainly are some lawyers who do mediocre work. But most of the lawyers I see handling traffic cases do a good job for their clients. And if there are lawyers calling these guys for instruction, they strangely are not identified on the site.
One thing about hiring a lawyer - at least with most NY lawyers, we put our names and addresses on our websites. You know who we are. On this particular website there is no information identifying who really runs the site.
Another detail: It is true that in cases where the cop doesn't show up for trial, the case will sometimes be dismissed. But they usually do show up (I'd say about 95% of the time) and even when they don't, some judges won't dismiss the case.
There's also the nightmare scenario. Under NY law you can get up to 15 days in jail for speeding. You go without a lawyer to the wrong court with the wrong judge with the wrong set of facts, and then you don't handle things well, ... you might not be going home that night. It's pretty rare, but I remember one young woman who walked out of Court after the deal didn't go through, and was brought back in wearing handcuffs. I know of a couple judges who put people in jail for high speeds too.
These incidents are very rare, and not something I'd want my clients worried about. But if something does go wrong, do you really want to rely on a questionable website? You might feel more comfortable with a lawyer.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
A Visit to Massachusetts Traffic Court
We took a little excursion yesterday to see how things work in Massachusetts Traffic Court. It was educational. Massachusetts speeding tickets and other tickets matter to drivers from there and from other states.
For MA drivers, most moving violations put two "surcharge points" on your driving record. Major violations, such as a DUI, are 5 points. The official explanation is at the Massachusetts Safe Driver Insurance Plan.
Massachusetts is not a member of the Drivers License Compact, but we believe they still report violations to other states. Per Chapter 2 of the RMV manual (pdf), most out-of-state tickets will affect a MA driver.
We talked after court with the police officer there. He said that the typical increase for one 2-point ticket is $200/year. The impact can last 6 years, though the SDIP explanation (see link above) indicates it's more complicated than that.
So how does Court work? Keep in mind that we went to only one court and only saw one "judge" - they're called Magistrate, or Clerk-Magistrate - and one police officer. We suspect that things may vary depending on the court, magistrate, and officer.
From what we saw, here's the deal:
1. Your case is scheduled for an initial hearing with the Clerk-Magistrate. You have to show up. We're researching whether a lawyer can appear for the client or if the client has to come. Practically speaking we think that a lawyer who does his homework can handle your case without you there.
2. They kept the courtroom empty. I'm not sure where the defendants waited, but probably a nearby waiting room. A bailiff comes out and gets you for your case. The Magistrate was kind enough to allow us to watch.
3. The officer in court presents the case. Usually this will not be the person who wrote the ticket, but someone from that police agency.
4. After the officer speaks, it's your turn. You present your case (or you don't).
5. The Magistrate decides the case, finding you responsible or not responsible. In some cases the officer in court does not have enough information and the Magistrate will find you not responsible.
6. The Officer may agree to convert your ticket into a warning. Two things seem to play a role in this decision -- your driving record and your attitude. If you admit guilt and have a clean record, you have a better shot at the warning. You're probably not getting this on a high speed or serious infraction, but you might get it on a minor violation.
7. If you are found responsible, you can appeal. This is a de novo hearing with a judge in the district court. De novo means new -- you get a fresh shot at the case. The officer who wrote the ticket has to appear, and you do too.
For MA drivers, most moving violations put two "surcharge points" on your driving record. Major violations, such as a DUI, are 5 points. The official explanation is at the Massachusetts Safe Driver Insurance Plan.
Massachusetts is not a member of the Drivers License Compact, but we believe they still report violations to other states. Per Chapter 2 of the RMV manual (pdf), most out-of-state tickets will affect a MA driver.
We talked after court with the police officer there. He said that the typical increase for one 2-point ticket is $200/year. The impact can last 6 years, though the SDIP explanation (see link above) indicates it's more complicated than that.
So how does Court work? Keep in mind that we went to only one court and only saw one "judge" - they're called Magistrate, or Clerk-Magistrate - and one police officer. We suspect that things may vary depending on the court, magistrate, and officer.
From what we saw, here's the deal:
1. Your case is scheduled for an initial hearing with the Clerk-Magistrate. You have to show up. We're researching whether a lawyer can appear for the client or if the client has to come. Practically speaking we think that a lawyer who does his homework can handle your case without you there.
2. They kept the courtroom empty. I'm not sure where the defendants waited, but probably a nearby waiting room. A bailiff comes out and gets you for your case. The Magistrate was kind enough to allow us to watch.
3. The officer in court presents the case. Usually this will not be the person who wrote the ticket, but someone from that police agency.
4. After the officer speaks, it's your turn. You present your case (or you don't).
5. The Magistrate decides the case, finding you responsible or not responsible. In some cases the officer in court does not have enough information and the Magistrate will find you not responsible.
6. The Officer may agree to convert your ticket into a warning. Two things seem to play a role in this decision -- your driving record and your attitude. If you admit guilt and have a clean record, you have a better shot at the warning. You're probably not getting this on a high speed or serious infraction, but you might get it on a minor violation.
7. If you are found responsible, you can appeal. This is a de novo hearing with a judge in the district court. De novo means new -- you get a fresh shot at the case. The officer who wrote the ticket has to appear, and you do too.
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Speeding ticket and DWI data
Interesting data on the web about speeding tickets on the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle website. There's another data set on DWI: RocDocs DWI.
Now, I say the data is interesting. Partly that's because it doesn't look accurate to me. For example it appears there are more DWI arrests in Albany County than in the Bronx. And there also appear to be no speeding tickets in New York City.
But it's still interesting.
Now, I say the data is interesting. Partly that's because it doesn't look accurate to me. For example it appears there are more DWI arrests in Albany County than in the Bronx. And there also appear to be no speeding tickets in New York City.
But it's still interesting.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Florida Speeding Tickets
Just added a page to the Redlich Law Firm website about Florida speeding tickets There seems to be a lot of tickets written there, so much so that I saw a TV show (or internet version of a TV show) about one of the traffic courts there.
Interesting thing for us concerns how we handle NY tickets for Florida drivers. A common reduction on speeding tickets in NY is the infamous 1110a. This appears to count for more points in Florida than a simple speed. NY lawyers who represent FL drivers should be careful about that.
Interesting thing for us concerns how we handle NY tickets for Florida drivers. A common reduction on speeding tickets in NY is the infamous 1110a. This appears to count for more points in Florida than a simple speed. NY lawyers who represent FL drivers should be careful about that.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
Are police tougher on out-of-state drivers?
Just read an interesting statistical analysis about speeding tickets by Professors Michael Makowsky and Thomas Stratmann. They both appear to be economics professors at George Mason University.
They analyzed a database of Massachusetts speeding tickets. Police there can choose to issue a fine or just a warning on the ticket. They found that police are more likely to fine out-of-town drivers and even more likely to fine out-of-state drivers. It's an interesting discussion, if you can wade through the statistical mumbo jumbo.
The paper is available online at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=961967.
They analyzed a database of Massachusetts speeding tickets. Police there can choose to issue a fine or just a warning on the ticket. They found that police are more likely to fine out-of-town drivers and even more likely to fine out-of-state drivers. It's an interesting discussion, if you can wade through the statistical mumbo jumbo.
The paper is available online at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=961967.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Speeding tickets: One opinion
Saw this article online about whether it's worth it to fight a speeding ticket:
MSN Money article on speeding tickets
Not sure I agree completely, and also not sure that all the comments apply in New York State. Still, a cautionary tale for those who get a ticket.
MSN Money article on speeding tickets
Not sure I agree completely, and also not sure that all the comments apply in New York State. Still, a cautionary tale for those who get a ticket.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Virginia Speeding Ticket Fines Make the New York Times
Seems the State of Virginia has decided to up the ante on speeding ticket fines. According to an article in yesterday's New York Times about Virginia speeding fines, getting ticketed for a speed of, say, 20 mph over the limit, carries a civil penalty of over $1000, plus the fines from the Court (up to $2500 more), and then maybe court costs too. Ouch!!
So as a result, of course, we are working on adding courts to our Virginia Traffic Court directory.
So as a result, of course, we are working on adding courts to our Virginia Traffic Court directory.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Article about lawyers in the Wall Street Journal
Saw an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal a few weeks ago and was waiting to write about it. The article is written by Cameron Stracher, titled "Meet the Clients". Stracher criticizes law schools for not teaching law students practical skills, and for "giving students the false idea that being a lawyer is all about intellectual debate."
I mostly disagree with the article, but it is a good read and I like a couple of insights. My favorite is where he challenges law school clinics, which always seem to have a "liberal tilt" (I assume he's referring to clinics for victims of domestic violence, or AIDS sufferers). He wonders where the clinics are for small businesses struggling to deal with claims made against them under the ADA. I would love to see a law school open any kind of clinic for small businesses.
The main thing I disagree with is the notion that law school should be more practical. Stracher implies that law schools should ready their students to hit the ground running the first day after they graduate. He misses the diverse ways students can go through law school. First of all, there are different kinds of schools. Some are known for the intellectual side of things, most notably Yale. Others are focused on the practical side. I'd say Albany Law School was like that when I was there, and I suspect it still is.
But even within schools, students can go for either side of things. I was mostly uninterested in a practical education when I hit school. I took several "useless" classes like Jurisprudence (legal philosophy), and another class where we tried to get into the minds of the Justices on the Supreme Court. Other students focused on practical courses, both to help them pass the bar exam and to ready themselves for their chosen area of law. The practical students also did more than clinics. They got part-time jobs during law school (full-time in the summers), again working in their chosen area of law. One recent grad who has done work for me recently took this route. He had far more experience in criminal law when he started helping me than I had when I opened my own firm, and he did excellent work right from the start. I was nowhere near as ready when I graduated and just lucked into the right job where I was coddled for months before I had a chance to endanger a client.
These jobs outside school are where students get their practical experience, and it's far better there than from law school professors. Most professors spend little time in the active practice of law. Some never had much experience in the first place. They are generally excellent at teaching the intellectual side of the law, and that's how they get to their position as law school professors. It is my personal opinion that the intellectual training provides more and more benefit as the attorney gets experience, helping to connect the dots so to speak.
Stracher makes some comment about new lawyers being unable to handle things. But that's not that big of a deal. If the lawyer is in over his head, he should ask for help, either from someone more senior in the firm or from an experienced local attorney, or even their adversary. I've found that the attorneys on the other side are often very helpful in teaching young lawyers how to handle things. There are a few who try to abuse the young lawyers, but most, at least in the Albany area and even some in New York City, recognize that mentoring that young lawyer is important for our profession and the good deed will be repaid someday in some way. I've certainly found that.
The other thing that struck me while reading Stracher's article was something that cannot be taught in schools and probably can't come through experience. It would be nice if lawyers cared about their clients. I find many lawyers lack empathy for what the client is going through. It's easy to become jaded and that does not lead to good customer service. I'll use speeding tickets as an example.
Most lawyers have no sympathy for the speeding ticket client. In the world of criminal defense, speeding tickets are nothing. I have yet to see a client get jail time, probation, or any consequence more serious than a fine. The most serious cases involve potential license suspensions or revocations, but that client is not new to the system. After you've just pled a client to a deal with 5 years in state prison, it's a little hard to be concerned about someone who may have to pay some fines.
But it is our job to take care of that client. And we will be more effective in that effort if we understand what the client is going through. So what is the client concerned about? First, the traffic stop experience was traumatic. The sense of security she had in her car was shattered. A guy in a uniform with a gun and a badge shined a flashlight in her eyes and spoke rudely to her. (Yes, I chose a male cop and a female driver - sexist I'm sure.) He handed her a ticket that is incomprehensible to non-lawyers. It says that a plea of not guilty must be submitted within 48 hours. The ticket was printed on thermal paper and it's faded and or blackened and is now hard to read. Another thing on the ticket says that she has to be in Court on such and such a date, and the address for the Court on the ticket is a PO Box. Is she supposed to report to the post office? And another thing on the ticket says that a warrant may be issued for her arrest if she doesn't show up.
She's worried about the fines and other costs that will come. Traffic tickets in most of New York State do not indicate the fine on the ticket. She's worried about her insurance rates. Maybe she's worried about her license as well. Maybe mom is calling worried about her son and how this will affect his future.
When this prospective client calls, the lawyer should address these concerns. We need to understand how scary this experience was for her. We need to tell her that the 48-hour rule, the court date, and the warrant thing are all false. We need to reassure her that it's not that bad, and that we can take care of this for her.
Once the client retains us, we need to address further concerns. Did the lawyer get my paperwork? Is he taking care of that court date on the ticket (yes, the one that isn't a real date)? Two months go by and she hasn't heard from the lawyer. She's worried about the status of her case.
It is my general sense that many lawyers utterly fail at this, not only on speeding tickets but in general. I'm still not satisfied at how my office does with this on our speeding tickets - we have hired a new associate whose principal responsibility will be to make sure the tickets are handled well, and just as important, make sure the clients know we're taking care of their cases. So hopefully we'll get there.
The key to taking care of these things is empathy. The attorney must be able to get inside the client's head to get a sense of what they're worried about, in any case, and address those concerns. For most clients this is not hard at all. They will either tell you straight up or will tell you if you ask. It's tougher in the criminal cases, especially the client has mental health issues. But it's even more important in those cases, because if those mental health issues are not addressed, the client is likely to have further problems. In the busy world of the practicing lawyer, it's hard to find time for empathy. For me, it seems that clients really appreciate it and it leads to many referrals. So it's not just being a good human being. It's also good business.
I should also mention practical limits to empathy. You need to have boundaries. I get the occasional speeding ticket client, or prospective client, who is very demanding. They ask the same questions three or more times on the initial phone call. They want a guarantee (we're ethically prohibited from making a guarantee - and it's also dishonest in my opinion). In these and other ways it becomes clear that this person expects to be the attorney's most important case. I generally reject those prospective clients. If it seems like it's been a long call, I check my phone to see how long it's been. Most clients hire me within 5 minutes. If the call has gone over 10 minutes I will usually tell them to find another lawyer. I've had cases where I figured this out after I was hired and have offered a full refund if the client will find another lawyer. In some cases this boundary setting wakes the client up and they become better clients. In others, they get angry and I let them move on to the next lawyer.
I suppose that ethically all clients are supposed to be equally important. But it ain't true. The client I had who was facing a potential life sentence (he got 18 1/2 years) was far more important than any of my other clients. The client who lost his leg in an accident, and who I've known for over three years now, is more important than most of my other clients. And plain and simple, if your $300 speeding ticket is your lawyer's most important case, then your lawyer is not successful, and may not be all that good of a lawyer.
I just don't think it's possible for law school to teach these things. You either had to learn this growing up or you have to get it from doing it. Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading the article and recommend it.
By the way, while looking for the link to the article discussed above, I found another article by Stracher about the troubles of being a lawyer.
I mostly disagree with the article, but it is a good read and I like a couple of insights. My favorite is where he challenges law school clinics, which always seem to have a "liberal tilt" (I assume he's referring to clinics for victims of domestic violence, or AIDS sufferers). He wonders where the clinics are for small businesses struggling to deal with claims made against them under the ADA. I would love to see a law school open any kind of clinic for small businesses.
The main thing I disagree with is the notion that law school should be more practical. Stracher implies that law schools should ready their students to hit the ground running the first day after they graduate. He misses the diverse ways students can go through law school. First of all, there are different kinds of schools. Some are known for the intellectual side of things, most notably Yale. Others are focused on the practical side. I'd say Albany Law School was like that when I was there, and I suspect it still is.
But even within schools, students can go for either side of things. I was mostly uninterested in a practical education when I hit school. I took several "useless" classes like Jurisprudence (legal philosophy), and another class where we tried to get into the minds of the Justices on the Supreme Court. Other students focused on practical courses, both to help them pass the bar exam and to ready themselves for their chosen area of law. The practical students also did more than clinics. They got part-time jobs during law school (full-time in the summers), again working in their chosen area of law. One recent grad who has done work for me recently took this route. He had far more experience in criminal law when he started helping me than I had when I opened my own firm, and he did excellent work right from the start. I was nowhere near as ready when I graduated and just lucked into the right job where I was coddled for months before I had a chance to endanger a client.
These jobs outside school are where students get their practical experience, and it's far better there than from law school professors. Most professors spend little time in the active practice of law. Some never had much experience in the first place. They are generally excellent at teaching the intellectual side of the law, and that's how they get to their position as law school professors. It is my personal opinion that the intellectual training provides more and more benefit as the attorney gets experience, helping to connect the dots so to speak.
Stracher makes some comment about new lawyers being unable to handle things. But that's not that big of a deal. If the lawyer is in over his head, he should ask for help, either from someone more senior in the firm or from an experienced local attorney, or even their adversary. I've found that the attorneys on the other side are often very helpful in teaching young lawyers how to handle things. There are a few who try to abuse the young lawyers, but most, at least in the Albany area and even some in New York City, recognize that mentoring that young lawyer is important for our profession and the good deed will be repaid someday in some way. I've certainly found that.
The other thing that struck me while reading Stracher's article was something that cannot be taught in schools and probably can't come through experience. It would be nice if lawyers cared about their clients. I find many lawyers lack empathy for what the client is going through. It's easy to become jaded and that does not lead to good customer service. I'll use speeding tickets as an example.
Most lawyers have no sympathy for the speeding ticket client. In the world of criminal defense, speeding tickets are nothing. I have yet to see a client get jail time, probation, or any consequence more serious than a fine. The most serious cases involve potential license suspensions or revocations, but that client is not new to the system. After you've just pled a client to a deal with 5 years in state prison, it's a little hard to be concerned about someone who may have to pay some fines.
But it is our job to take care of that client. And we will be more effective in that effort if we understand what the client is going through. So what is the client concerned about? First, the traffic stop experience was traumatic. The sense of security she had in her car was shattered. A guy in a uniform with a gun and a badge shined a flashlight in her eyes and spoke rudely to her. (Yes, I chose a male cop and a female driver - sexist I'm sure.) He handed her a ticket that is incomprehensible to non-lawyers. It says that a plea of not guilty must be submitted within 48 hours. The ticket was printed on thermal paper and it's faded and or blackened and is now hard to read. Another thing on the ticket says that she has to be in Court on such and such a date, and the address for the Court on the ticket is a PO Box. Is she supposed to report to the post office? And another thing on the ticket says that a warrant may be issued for her arrest if she doesn't show up.
She's worried about the fines and other costs that will come. Traffic tickets in most of New York State do not indicate the fine on the ticket. She's worried about her insurance rates. Maybe she's worried about her license as well. Maybe mom is calling worried about her son and how this will affect his future.
When this prospective client calls, the lawyer should address these concerns. We need to understand how scary this experience was for her. We need to tell her that the 48-hour rule, the court date, and the warrant thing are all false. We need to reassure her that it's not that bad, and that we can take care of this for her.
Once the client retains us, we need to address further concerns. Did the lawyer get my paperwork? Is he taking care of that court date on the ticket (yes, the one that isn't a real date)? Two months go by and she hasn't heard from the lawyer. She's worried about the status of her case.
It is my general sense that many lawyers utterly fail at this, not only on speeding tickets but in general. I'm still not satisfied at how my office does with this on our speeding tickets - we have hired a new associate whose principal responsibility will be to make sure the tickets are handled well, and just as important, make sure the clients know we're taking care of their cases. So hopefully we'll get there.
The key to taking care of these things is empathy. The attorney must be able to get inside the client's head to get a sense of what they're worried about, in any case, and address those concerns. For most clients this is not hard at all. They will either tell you straight up or will tell you if you ask. It's tougher in the criminal cases, especially the client has mental health issues. But it's even more important in those cases, because if those mental health issues are not addressed, the client is likely to have further problems. In the busy world of the practicing lawyer, it's hard to find time for empathy. For me, it seems that clients really appreciate it and it leads to many referrals. So it's not just being a good human being. It's also good business.
I should also mention practical limits to empathy. You need to have boundaries. I get the occasional speeding ticket client, or prospective client, who is very demanding. They ask the same questions three or more times on the initial phone call. They want a guarantee (we're ethically prohibited from making a guarantee - and it's also dishonest in my opinion). In these and other ways it becomes clear that this person expects to be the attorney's most important case. I generally reject those prospective clients. If it seems like it's been a long call, I check my phone to see how long it's been. Most clients hire me within 5 minutes. If the call has gone over 10 minutes I will usually tell them to find another lawyer. I've had cases where I figured this out after I was hired and have offered a full refund if the client will find another lawyer. In some cases this boundary setting wakes the client up and they become better clients. In others, they get angry and I let them move on to the next lawyer.
I suppose that ethically all clients are supposed to be equally important. But it ain't true. The client I had who was facing a potential life sentence (he got 18 1/2 years) was far more important than any of my other clients. The client who lost his leg in an accident, and who I've known for over three years now, is more important than most of my other clients. And plain and simple, if your $300 speeding ticket is your lawyer's most important case, then your lawyer is not successful, and may not be all that good of a lawyer.
I just don't think it's possible for law school to teach these things. You either had to learn this growing up or you have to get it from doing it. Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading the article and recommend it.
By the way, while looking for the link to the article discussed above, I found another article by Stracher about the troubles of being a lawyer.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Someone should have hired a lawyer sooner ...
I'm often asked by prospective traffic ticket clients as to whether they really need a lawyer. The answer is no, but that depends on your definition of the word need. The other day I saw someone who didn't think she needed a lawyer. She was wrong, and the consequences were severe.
I walked into this small-town court a few minutes after the session was supposed to start. The judge was sitting at the bench. Standing in front of him, a local police officer and an attractive young woman were speaking with each other and with the judge. I signed in and started chatting quietly with a couple of attorneys on the side. Another attorney who I know well mentioned to me that he would consider giving this woman free representation due to her derriere (he used a shorter word). I didn't think she was that special. And to ensure my political correctness, I hereby disapprove of that attorney's remark, and am deeply remorseful for anything I may have done to suggest otherwise.
In a few minutes I was called by another officer from the same department (let's call him Joe - I don't know his real first name) and we discussed my case briefly, reaching an agreement. We went back into the courtroom to wait our turn. The young lady was still in front of the judge, apparently not satisfied with the offer that had been made.
Joe and I talked quietly while this was going on. I learned that the young lady had a lengthy driving record, with multiple speeding tickets and that her license had either been revoked or suspended by DMV because of this.
The scene our intrepid young woman was making prompted Joe to a realization. She's got a revoked or suspended license. She probably drove here and will probably drive away. So when the young lady finally wrapped up (her case was adjourned), Joe kept an eye on her and, from a distance, followed her outside.
About 20 minutes later, Joe came back in with the young lady in handcuffs. She was now being charged with Aggravated Unlicensed Operation in the 3rd degree, commonly referred to as AUO 3rd. This is a misdemeanor - a criminal charge. The nature of the offense is driving with a suspended license. Joe also charged her with Resisting Arrest, which is also a misdemeanor.
Now, I'm not saying this woman needed a lawyer, because need is such a strong word. I do believe she should have hired a lawyer, long, long, long before that night. Certainly by the time she had been handed her third speeding ticket, and probably when she got the second one. And maybe, just maybe, she should have hired a lawyer for the first ticket.
While I'm at it, she should have started to obey the Vehicle & Traffic Law of the State of New York. Yes, I do think the speed limits are too low in most places. I might even exceed those limits and otherwise violate the V&T Law myself occasionally. But after you've received two speeding tickets, you really should adjust your behavior accordingly. And maybe it's just me, but if your license is suspended, you really shouldn't drive and you certainly shouldn't speed excessively.
On a brief tangent, I had one client who was arrested for AUO 3rd after being pulled over for going 53 in a 30 mph zone. He was also charged with UPM (marijuana possession). So let me get this straight. You're suspended and you have marijuana in the car. Why on earth would you be going more than 20 mph over the speed limit?
I generally advise clients to go no more than 8 mph over the limit, and no more than 5 over if they have a significant driving record. --What honey?-- Oh, I mean I tell all my clients not to speed at all. Of course.
I walked into this small-town court a few minutes after the session was supposed to start. The judge was sitting at the bench. Standing in front of him, a local police officer and an attractive young woman were speaking with each other and with the judge. I signed in and started chatting quietly with a couple of attorneys on the side. Another attorney who I know well mentioned to me that he would consider giving this woman free representation due to her derriere (he used a shorter word). I didn't think she was that special. And to ensure my political correctness, I hereby disapprove of that attorney's remark, and am deeply remorseful for anything I may have done to suggest otherwise.
In a few minutes I was called by another officer from the same department (let's call him Joe - I don't know his real first name) and we discussed my case briefly, reaching an agreement. We went back into the courtroom to wait our turn. The young lady was still in front of the judge, apparently not satisfied with the offer that had been made.
Joe and I talked quietly while this was going on. I learned that the young lady had a lengthy driving record, with multiple speeding tickets and that her license had either been revoked or suspended by DMV because of this.
The scene our intrepid young woman was making prompted Joe to a realization. She's got a revoked or suspended license. She probably drove here and will probably drive away. So when the young lady finally wrapped up (her case was adjourned), Joe kept an eye on her and, from a distance, followed her outside.
About 20 minutes later, Joe came back in with the young lady in handcuffs. She was now being charged with Aggravated Unlicensed Operation in the 3rd degree, commonly referred to as AUO 3rd. This is a misdemeanor - a criminal charge. The nature of the offense is driving with a suspended license. Joe also charged her with Resisting Arrest, which is also a misdemeanor.
Now, I'm not saying this woman needed a lawyer, because need is such a strong word. I do believe she should have hired a lawyer, long, long, long before that night. Certainly by the time she had been handed her third speeding ticket, and probably when she got the second one. And maybe, just maybe, she should have hired a lawyer for the first ticket.
While I'm at it, she should have started to obey the Vehicle & Traffic Law of the State of New York. Yes, I do think the speed limits are too low in most places. I might even exceed those limits and otherwise violate the V&T Law myself occasionally. But after you've received two speeding tickets, you really should adjust your behavior accordingly. And maybe it's just me, but if your license is suspended, you really shouldn't drive and you certainly shouldn't speed excessively.
On a brief tangent, I had one client who was arrested for AUO 3rd after being pulled over for going 53 in a 30 mph zone. He was also charged with UPM (marijuana possession). So let me get this straight. You're suspended and you have marijuana in the car. Why on earth would you be going more than 20 mph over the speed limit?
I generally advise clients to go no more than 8 mph over the limit, and no more than 5 over if they have a significant driving record. --What honey?-- Oh, I mean I tell all my clients not to speed at all. Of course.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Pleading guilty to speeding tickets
In contrast to my earlier post today, something in the same ballpark just popped up.
In this case, the client pled guilty by mail to three speeding tickets between 5/04 and 9/05 (within 18 months of each other). Under NY law, you get your license revoked for that. Each of his speeds were relatively minor (81-85 mph in 65 mph zone).
Had she hired a good lawyer to handle these tickets, each would likely have been reduced to a non-moving violation (the 85 would be a close call, but still a good reduction).
So now she's paying me substantially more than what it costs to handle one of these normally, for me to do writs of coram nobis. Under coram nobis, I apply to the Court to vacate the original conviction, then we start over.
Unfortunately in the first Court, the ADA was unwilling to agree to anything less than a 3-point speed, so now we have to move in another court (or go to trial in the first court, which is unwise). The reason for not reducing lower -- client has 3 recent speeding tickets. I explained that one of those is the one we're negotiating, but even with 2 recent tickets, the ADA would not agree to a larger reduction.
That's why you want to keep your record clean, and why it's generally a good idea to consult a traffic ticket lawyer early on, rather than when it's too late.
In this case, the client pled guilty by mail to three speeding tickets between 5/04 and 9/05 (within 18 months of each other). Under NY law, you get your license revoked for that. Each of his speeds were relatively minor (81-85 mph in 65 mph zone).
Had she hired a good lawyer to handle these tickets, each would likely have been reduced to a non-moving violation (the 85 would be a close call, but still a good reduction).
So now she's paying me substantially more than what it costs to handle one of these normally, for me to do writs of coram nobis. Under coram nobis, I apply to the Court to vacate the original conviction, then we start over.
Unfortunately in the first Court, the ADA was unwilling to agree to anything less than a 3-point speed, so now we have to move in another court (or go to trial in the first court, which is unwise). The reason for not reducing lower -- client has 3 recent speeding tickets. I explained that one of those is the one we're negotiating, but even with 2 recent tickets, the ADA would not agree to a larger reduction.
That's why you want to keep your record clean, and why it's generally a good idea to consult a traffic ticket lawyer early on, rather than when it's too late.
Speeding ticket websites
I knew this kind of call would come someday. It came today.
Caller: Do you handle appeals of speeding tickets?
I asked him to tell me more about the situation. He had gotten a speeding ticket in Athens Town Court. Athens is in Greene County, a bit south of Albany. The ticket was for 90 mph in a 65 zone.
He went to trial himself, using the Tipmra method. He seemed surprised I'd never heard of it.
Of course he lost the trial. I checked out the Tipmra site later and found out that, like others, they guarantee you a refund. Whoopee! This guy just got whacked with $655 in fines and surcharges, his insurance rates are going to go through the roof, his license is in jeopardy, and you'll refund his $29.95. Thanks.
Of course, it turns out that this guy didn't actually pay for the whole thing. He read the free part of the site and went from there. Now he's calling me for free advice on how to do his appeal. The conversation went a bit downhill after I told him I'd charge $2500 to do an appeal in County Court.
And now he's got another ticket, for 93 mph in a 65 zone. Hmm. 6 points plus 6 points equals 12 -- about to lose his license. Nice going.
If he had hired me (or any other competent lawyer), he would have gotten his first ticket resolved for about $400, with minimum fines, no risk to his license, and no impact on his insurance.
The funniest part -- he got the first ticket when he was on his learner's permit. I asked who was in the car with him -- his dad. So he's going 90 mph with his dad in the car.
Reminds me of the Darwin awards. :-)
Caller: Do you handle appeals of speeding tickets?
I asked him to tell me more about the situation. He had gotten a speeding ticket in Athens Town Court. Athens is in Greene County, a bit south of Albany. The ticket was for 90 mph in a 65 zone.
He went to trial himself, using the Tipmra method. He seemed surprised I'd never heard of it.
Of course he lost the trial. I checked out the Tipmra site later and found out that, like others, they guarantee you a refund. Whoopee! This guy just got whacked with $655 in fines and surcharges, his insurance rates are going to go through the roof, his license is in jeopardy, and you'll refund his $29.95. Thanks.
Of course, it turns out that this guy didn't actually pay for the whole thing. He read the free part of the site and went from there. Now he's calling me for free advice on how to do his appeal. The conversation went a bit downhill after I told him I'd charge $2500 to do an appeal in County Court.
And now he's got another ticket, for 93 mph in a 65 zone. Hmm. 6 points plus 6 points equals 12 -- about to lose his license. Nice going.
If he had hired me (or any other competent lawyer), he would have gotten his first ticket resolved for about $400, with minimum fines, no risk to his license, and no impact on his insurance.
The funniest part -- he got the first ticket when he was on his learner's permit. I asked who was in the car with him -- his dad. So he's going 90 mph with his dad in the car.
Reminds me of the Darwin awards. :-)
Thursday, February 02, 2006
Speeding tickets
With all the traffic on the Speeding Ticket FAQ page on my main site, I figured I should add more information. Plus, I get calls occasionally from people with tickets in other places that I don't handle. I've had calls about Georgia, Texas, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and many for New York City, Long Island and Westchester.
So I've added three new pages:
New York City speeding tickets,
New Jersey speeding tickets,
and
California speeding tickets.
Now I'm going to watch Google Analytics to see if these pages get any traffic. I doubt they'll rank on searches, but maybe some of the visitors to the main faq page will see the links and click over. I will probably add some other states in the future, but for now I want to see how these do.
It's somewhat interesting to see how other states handle speeding tickets. From a brief look around, NY may be one of the toughest states, with high fines and surcharges. On a brief review, California may be even worse.
So I've added three new pages:
New York City speeding tickets,
New Jersey speeding tickets,
and
California speeding tickets.
Now I'm going to watch Google Analytics to see if these pages get any traffic. I doubt they'll rank on searches, but maybe some of the visitors to the main faq page will see the links and click over. I will probably add some other states in the future, but for now I want to see how these do.
It's somewhat interesting to see how other states handle speeding tickets. From a brief look around, NY may be one of the toughest states, with high fines and surcharges. On a brief review, California may be even worse.
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Speeding tickets and insurance
People often ask me how their speeding ticket will affect their insurance rates. There is actually a specific provision of the law, Insurance Law § 2335, that addresses one portion of that question, and I've pasted the text at the bottom of this post.
Other parts of the law allow for insurance companies to establish what's called a "merit rating plan". Each company has their own plan, and it's awfully hard to find out the details of the plan. I would think I'm pretty sophisticated (having worked for an insurance company), but I haven't been able to figure it out with my policy.
§ 2335 prohibits them from raising your rates for traffic infractions, unless blah blah blah. If you read the text, it reads like that and you'll scratch your head for a while trying to figure it out. I think I understand it, but who knows.
Getting to the details, essentially I read it as saying that:
They can't raise your rates for getting a traffic ticket, unless
1. The relevant violation(s) occurred within 3 years before the date 4 months before your policy period starts.
-- If I read that right, you can get any ticket less than 4 months before your policy period starts, and they can't raise your rates until the next year.
-- Note that it's the date of the violation, not of the conviction, that matters. I think. It says "apply to a conviction for a violation that occurred ...". Presumably that means it's when the violation occurred, not when the conviction occurred. So the longer you stall your ticket, the less impact it will have on your insurance?
2. (1) says a speeding ticket for 15 or less over the limit (i.e. 70 in a 55; 80 in a 65) cannot affect your insurance.
-- What if you get two speeding tickets of 15 or less? As I read this, it still shouldn't affect your rates.
3. After a long list of other items, (14) says "two or more moving violations of any other provision ..."
-- Well, speeding is not an "other" provision. It's one of the provisions in the list, so two speeding tickets of 15 or less shouldn't affect your rates.
4. What if you get one other moving violation (the typical reduction is an 1110(a) - failure to obey a traffic control device - a 2-pointer), and you get a speed of 15 or less?
-- As I read this, it still should not affect your rates. You've got one "other" moving violation (the 1110(a)), and one speed, which is not an "other".
So if you're a speeding ticket lawyer, and you have the opportunity to plead your client down from a 6-point speed to an 1110(a), should you do so, or should you go for a 3-point speed?
-- By the logic above, if you want to protect your client's rates, you should ask for the 3-point speed.
Now reality sets in. First, the insurance companies may not follow the law. If they don't, it's going to cost your client a lot more to challenge the insurance company in Court. You can complain to the Insurance Department, but will they even understand the issue?
And of course your client will probably think that getting 2 points is better than 3. How do you address this situation? Ideally you discuss it with your client.
Above I mentioned that 2 speeding tickets should not affect rates (if they follow the law). But remember that a speed might be either 3 or 4 points. Let's take the 3-pointer (which is for speeds of 1-10 mph over the limit). The 2 tickets add up to six points. That means DMV will hit your client with the new Drivers Responsibility Assessment, costing an additional $300. Or if you get two 4-pointers, the fines are higher (max $355 each, up from about $200 for the 3-pointer), and now the assessment is $450.
Also keep in mind that 3 speeds in 18 months means you lose your license. So yes, you can get three 3-point speeds and only have 9 points, and theoretically your rates won't go up, but your license will be suspended or revoked.
The statute itself is below.
-------
Insurance Law § 2335 -- Motor vehicle liability insurance rates -- prohibition of surcharges for certain traffic infractions
No insurer authorized to transact or transacting business in this state, or controlling or controlled by or under common control by or with an insurer authorized to transact or transacting business in this state, which sells a policy providing motor vehicle liability insurance coverage in this state shall increase the policy premium in connection with the insurance permitted or required by this chapter solely because the insured or any other person who customarily operates an automobile covered by the policy:
(a) has been found guilty of a traffic infraction under any of the provisions of the vehicle and traffic law provided, however, that this provision shall not apply to a conviction for a violation which occurred during the thirty-six month period ending on the last day of the fourth month preceding the month of the effective date of the policy if such conviction consisted of:
(1) operating a motor vehicle at a speed of more than fifteen miles per hour in excess of the legal limit;
(2) operating a motor vehicle in excess of the speed limit, or in a reckless manner, where injury or death results therefrom;
(3) operating a motor vehicle in excess of the speed limit, or reckless driving, or any combination thereof, on three or more occasions;
(4) operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated or impaired by the consumption of alcohol;
(5) operating a motor vehicle while impaired by the use of a drug, within the meaning of section one thousand one hundred ninety-two of the vehicle and traffic law;
(6) homicide or assault arising out of the use or operation of a motor vehicle, or criminal negligence in the use or operation of a motor vehicle resulting in the injury or death of another person, or use or operation of a motor vehicle directly or indirectly in the commission of a felony;
(7) operating a motor vehicle while seeking to avoid apprehension or arrest by a law enforcement officer;
(8) filing or attempting to file a false or fraudulent automobile insurance claim, or knowingly aiding or abetting in the filing or attempted filing of any such claim;
(9) leaving the scene of an incident without reporting;
(10) filing a false document with the department of motor vehicles, or using a license or registration obtained by filing a false document with the department of motor vehicles;
(11) operating a motor vehicle in a race or speed test;
(12) knowingly permitting or authorizing an unlicensed driver to operate a motor vehicle insured under the policy;
(13) operating a motor vehicle insured under the policy without a valid license or registration in effect, except when the person convicted had possessed a valid license or registration which had expired and was subsequently renewed, or during a period of revocation or suspension thereof, or in violation of the limitations applicable to a license issued pursuant to article twenty-one or article twenty-one-a of the vehicle and traffic law; or
(14) two or more moving violations of any other provision of the vehicle and traffic law;
(b) has had a temporary suspension of a driver's license pending a hearing, prosecution or investigation or an indefinite suspension of a driver's license which is issued because of the failure of the person suspended to perform an act, which suspension will be terminated by the performance of the act by the person suspended, or has had more than one such temporary or indefinite suspension arising out of the same incident issued against him or her, provided that the foregoing provisions of this section shall not apply if such suspension or suspensions has or have not been terminated on or before the effective date of the policy; or
(c) with respect to a non-commercial private passenger automobile insurance policy, has had an accident while operating a commercial vehicle in the course of employment and in the discharge of the employee's duties at the time of the accident, unless the accident is determined to have been caused by the intentional action or gross negligence of the insured.
Other parts of the law allow for insurance companies to establish what's called a "merit rating plan". Each company has their own plan, and it's awfully hard to find out the details of the plan. I would think I'm pretty sophisticated (having worked for an insurance company), but I haven't been able to figure it out with my policy.
§ 2335 prohibits them from raising your rates for traffic infractions, unless blah blah blah. If you read the text, it reads like that and you'll scratch your head for a while trying to figure it out. I think I understand it, but who knows.
Getting to the details, essentially I read it as saying that:
They can't raise your rates for getting a traffic ticket, unless
1. The relevant violation(s) occurred within 3 years before the date 4 months before your policy period starts.
-- If I read that right, you can get any ticket less than 4 months before your policy period starts, and they can't raise your rates until the next year.
-- Note that it's the date of the violation, not of the conviction, that matters. I think. It says "apply to a conviction for a violation that occurred ...". Presumably that means it's when the violation occurred, not when the conviction occurred. So the longer you stall your ticket, the less impact it will have on your insurance?
2. (1) says a speeding ticket for 15 or less over the limit (i.e. 70 in a 55; 80 in a 65) cannot affect your insurance.
-- What if you get two speeding tickets of 15 or less? As I read this, it still shouldn't affect your rates.
3. After a long list of other items, (14) says "two or more moving violations of any other provision ..."
-- Well, speeding is not an "other" provision. It's one of the provisions in the list, so two speeding tickets of 15 or less shouldn't affect your rates.
4. What if you get one other moving violation (the typical reduction is an 1110(a) - failure to obey a traffic control device - a 2-pointer), and you get a speed of 15 or less?
-- As I read this, it still should not affect your rates. You've got one "other" moving violation (the 1110(a)), and one speed, which is not an "other".
So if you're a speeding ticket lawyer, and you have the opportunity to plead your client down from a 6-point speed to an 1110(a), should you do so, or should you go for a 3-point speed?
-- By the logic above, if you want to protect your client's rates, you should ask for the 3-point speed.
Now reality sets in. First, the insurance companies may not follow the law. If they don't, it's going to cost your client a lot more to challenge the insurance company in Court. You can complain to the Insurance Department, but will they even understand the issue?
And of course your client will probably think that getting 2 points is better than 3. How do you address this situation? Ideally you discuss it with your client.
Above I mentioned that 2 speeding tickets should not affect rates (if they follow the law). But remember that a speed might be either 3 or 4 points. Let's take the 3-pointer (which is for speeds of 1-10 mph over the limit). The 2 tickets add up to six points. That means DMV will hit your client with the new Drivers Responsibility Assessment, costing an additional $300. Or if you get two 4-pointers, the fines are higher (max $355 each, up from about $200 for the 3-pointer), and now the assessment is $450.
Also keep in mind that 3 speeds in 18 months means you lose your license. So yes, you can get three 3-point speeds and only have 9 points, and theoretically your rates won't go up, but your license will be suspended or revoked.
The statute itself is below.
-------
Insurance Law § 2335 -- Motor vehicle liability insurance rates -- prohibition of surcharges for certain traffic infractions
No insurer authorized to transact or transacting business in this state, or controlling or controlled by or under common control by or with an insurer authorized to transact or transacting business in this state, which sells a policy providing motor vehicle liability insurance coverage in this state shall increase the policy premium in connection with the insurance permitted or required by this chapter solely because the insured or any other person who customarily operates an automobile covered by the policy:
(a) has been found guilty of a traffic infraction under any of the provisions of the vehicle and traffic law provided, however, that this provision shall not apply to a conviction for a violation which occurred during the thirty-six month period ending on the last day of the fourth month preceding the month of the effective date of the policy if such conviction consisted of:
(1) operating a motor vehicle at a speed of more than fifteen miles per hour in excess of the legal limit;
(2) operating a motor vehicle in excess of the speed limit, or in a reckless manner, where injury or death results therefrom;
(3) operating a motor vehicle in excess of the speed limit, or reckless driving, or any combination thereof, on three or more occasions;
(4) operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated or impaired by the consumption of alcohol;
(5) operating a motor vehicle while impaired by the use of a drug, within the meaning of section one thousand one hundred ninety-two of the vehicle and traffic law;
(6) homicide or assault arising out of the use or operation of a motor vehicle, or criminal negligence in the use or operation of a motor vehicle resulting in the injury or death of another person, or use or operation of a motor vehicle directly or indirectly in the commission of a felony;
(7) operating a motor vehicle while seeking to avoid apprehension or arrest by a law enforcement officer;
(8) filing or attempting to file a false or fraudulent automobile insurance claim, or knowingly aiding or abetting in the filing or attempted filing of any such claim;
(9) leaving the scene of an incident without reporting;
(10) filing a false document with the department of motor vehicles, or using a license or registration obtained by filing a false document with the department of motor vehicles;
(11) operating a motor vehicle in a race or speed test;
(12) knowingly permitting or authorizing an unlicensed driver to operate a motor vehicle insured under the policy;
(13) operating a motor vehicle insured under the policy without a valid license or registration in effect, except when the person convicted had possessed a valid license or registration which had expired and was subsequently renewed, or during a period of revocation or suspension thereof, or in violation of the limitations applicable to a license issued pursuant to article twenty-one or article twenty-one-a of the vehicle and traffic law; or
(14) two or more moving violations of any other provision of the vehicle and traffic law;
(b) has had a temporary suspension of a driver's license pending a hearing, prosecution or investigation or an indefinite suspension of a driver's license which is issued because of the failure of the person suspended to perform an act, which suspension will be terminated by the performance of the act by the person suspended, or has had more than one such temporary or indefinite suspension arising out of the same incident issued against him or her, provided that the foregoing provisions of this section shall not apply if such suspension or suspensions has or have not been terminated on or before the effective date of the policy; or
(c) with respect to a non-commercial private passenger automobile insurance policy, has had an accident while operating a commercial vehicle in the course of employment and in the discharge of the employee's duties at the time of the accident, unless the accident is determined to have been caused by the intentional action or gross negligence of the insured.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Speeding Tickets in New York
Just some thoughts on speeding tickets. Got a call this morning. I get calls like this regularly. The caller, from New York City, got a speeding ticket in the Town of Bethlehem. She wanted to know how much to pay. Unlike other states, New York traffic tickets do not list the fine.
Here's how it works in New York traffic courts. First you plead -- guilty or not guilty. While the ticket says to appear in Court on a particular date, it is far more sensible to plead by mail. You don't have to go.
A side note here - that date is not rigidly enforced in most courts. In general one needs to be careful about court dates, but this one is far less important. If you're late, don't ignore it. Just send a letter to the Court stating your plea. If you are late enough, you will get a notice from DMV that if you don't appear, your license will be suspended. This is a good time to hire a lawyer, if you're that late, to make sure your license is not suspended.
Back to the process. If you plead guilty, the judge will set a fine and send you a notice. You will also get points on your license (if it was a moving violation), and you may get an extra surcharge from DMV if you get 6 points or more within 18 months. You also may lose your license if you get enough points or speeding tickets.
If you plead not guilty, the Court will set a trial date. In many courts a lawyer can negotiate a reduction for you by mail. You don't have to go to Court, and neither do we. In almost all courts a lawyer can appear for you, so you don't have to go. Or you can go yourself. In some courts they will not negotiate with someone who does not have an attorney. And in general, a lawyer should get you a better deal than you can get for yourself. A good lawyer knows what kind of deal to ask for.
Contrary to popular opinion, in most courts if the cop does not show up for trial, the ticket will not be dismissed. I did get one dismissed last night for this reason, but many courts will just adjourn for a new date. Not fair? Correct, but life isn't fair.
Here's how it works in New York traffic courts. First you plead -- guilty or not guilty. While the ticket says to appear in Court on a particular date, it is far more sensible to plead by mail. You don't have to go.
A side note here - that date is not rigidly enforced in most courts. In general one needs to be careful about court dates, but this one is far less important. If you're late, don't ignore it. Just send a letter to the Court stating your plea. If you are late enough, you will get a notice from DMV that if you don't appear, your license will be suspended. This is a good time to hire a lawyer, if you're that late, to make sure your license is not suspended.
Back to the process. If you plead guilty, the judge will set a fine and send you a notice. You will also get points on your license (if it was a moving violation), and you may get an extra surcharge from DMV if you get 6 points or more within 18 months. You also may lose your license if you get enough points or speeding tickets.
If you plead not guilty, the Court will set a trial date. In many courts a lawyer can negotiate a reduction for you by mail. You don't have to go to Court, and neither do we. In almost all courts a lawyer can appear for you, so you don't have to go. Or you can go yourself. In some courts they will not negotiate with someone who does not have an attorney. And in general, a lawyer should get you a better deal than you can get for yourself. A good lawyer knows what kind of deal to ask for.
Contrary to popular opinion, in most courts if the cop does not show up for trial, the ticket will not be dismissed. I did get one dismissed last night for this reason, but many courts will just adjourn for a new date. Not fair? Correct, but life isn't fair.
Friday, October 14, 2005
Speeding tickets and out-of-state drivers - update
Following up on recent posts about out-of-state drivers and speeding tickets, I just got a new client with a NJ license. The driving record does indeed show a NY ticket. Below is how it appears:
********** Driving History **********
VIOLATIONS:
(1) STATE:NY VIOLATION DATE:02/26/2001 CONVICTION DATE:04/17/2001
POSTED SPEED LMT: 55 ACTUAL SPEED: 84
STATE DESCRIPTION: SPEEDING 25+ OVER THE LIMIT
STATE ASSIGNED POINTS: 2
COURT: NEW YORK
***********
The record shows other violations in NJ. Interesting to note that, while it shows up as only 2 points, the description of 25+ over the limit also shows on the NJ driving record. I'm not sure if insurance companies can consider the nature of the out-of-state offense, or only the points, when they decide on your premiums.
********** Driving History **********
VIOLATIONS:
(1) STATE:NY VIOLATION DATE:02/26/2001 CONVICTION DATE:04/17/2001
POSTED SPEED LMT: 55 ACTUAL SPEED: 84
STATE DESCRIPTION: SPEEDING 25+ OVER THE LIMIT
STATE ASSIGNED POINTS: 2
COURT: NEW YORK
***********
The record shows other violations in NJ. Interesting to note that, while it shows up as only 2 points, the description of 25+ over the limit also shows on the NJ driving record. I'm not sure if insurance companies can consider the nature of the out-of-state offense, or only the points, when they decide on your premiums.
Monday, August 22, 2005
Speeding ticket lessons
Tough night. I had two clients (sisters) who had been driving together and got pulled over for a fairly high speed on the Taconic in a town in Columbia County. Showed up in Court and the Trooper gave me a harder time than usual. Don't get me wrong. The Trooper was a decent guy. But the facts turned out to be worse than usual.
Their speed was high, more than 30 mph over the limit. Then the Trooper told me that they had kids in car seats in their cars. In my experience, this really bothers police. And then he mentioned that they had a sob story, about their brother having been in an accident. The Trooper also didn't like that my clients weren't there tonight, which is unusual in my experience. Only once before has a Trooper cared about that.
And it turns out that judges in Columbia County are tougher on speeding than what I see from judges in other counties. Normally I would expect to get this 8-point speed reduced to a 3-point non-speed, especially since both clients had pretty clean records. Maybe I've just been lucky so far. The best he would do for me was a 4-point speed. He wrote it up as 13 mph over the limit, saying that since it was less than 15 over, it would have less impact on their insurance. I'm going to have to look that one up.
Anyway, it was better than what could have been. By keeping the points below 6, it saves the clients from the new assessment from DMV, which would have cost them $300 each. And hopefully their insurance rates either won't go up, or it won't be too bad.
Lesson #1: Don't speed in Columbia County (which includes Hudson, NY and Chatham, NY, and a fairly long stretch of the Taconic).
Lesson #2: If you're going to speed in Columbia County, don't go more than 25 mph over the limit. The Trooper indicated that judges in the County won't agree to a non-speed if you're over that number. By the way, the 25 mph rule is a pretty good rule anywhere. I advise clients to aim for no more than 8 mph over the limit, as it is rare to see a ticket for less than 10 over. Of course, I do have one pending now for 9 mph over the limit, so there's no perfect answer. Go slower than the limit and they might decide that's suspicious and pull you over.
Lesson #3: Don't blab your sob story to the cop. They just don't want to hear it. I've got one client who was on her way to a hospital to "harvest" tissue from a dying patient for an eye transplant. The cop still wrote her a ticket. Be respectful to the cop (it isn't that great of a job, some of the things they do is pretty important, and they're mostly good people). There are all sorts of ways you can piss off a cop. Being polite and respectful, even apologetic, is much safer.
Oh, and lesson #4: Don't drive too fast with kids in your car. They really hate that.
Now, for the second part of our story. A friend of mine got a ticket a while ago. Turns out it was in the same court. I had referred my friend to a young lawyer (I forget why - either I couldn't be there the night it was originally scheduled, or I thought the Court was too far). So I get there and I see my young lawyer friend and my buddy together. Of course I didn't remember making the referral so I was trying to figure out why they were there together. :-)
So anyway, turns out my friend had several other tickets on his record already. He pled guilty to a few of them without hiring a lawyer. So they show up in this court in Columbia County needing a no-pointer to save his license. No dice.
The lessons here?
A: Never, never, never plead guilty to a traffic ticket that has points. You can almost always get a reduction (especially if you didn't piss off the cop - see #3 above). Not getting the reduction now can hurt you later, as my friend just learned. Yes, a speeding ticket lawyer is expensive. Personally, I think what I do is worth the money I'm paid.
B: If you've gotten 2 or 3 tickets within a few months, it's time to wake up. You need to slow down. You are in danger of losing your license. That might be a problem if you have a job and you need to drive as part of that job, or if you drive to work.
Their speed was high, more than 30 mph over the limit. Then the Trooper told me that they had kids in car seats in their cars. In my experience, this really bothers police. And then he mentioned that they had a sob story, about their brother having been in an accident. The Trooper also didn't like that my clients weren't there tonight, which is unusual in my experience. Only once before has a Trooper cared about that.
And it turns out that judges in Columbia County are tougher on speeding than what I see from judges in other counties. Normally I would expect to get this 8-point speed reduced to a 3-point non-speed, especially since both clients had pretty clean records. Maybe I've just been lucky so far. The best he would do for me was a 4-point speed. He wrote it up as 13 mph over the limit, saying that since it was less than 15 over, it would have less impact on their insurance. I'm going to have to look that one up.
Anyway, it was better than what could have been. By keeping the points below 6, it saves the clients from the new assessment from DMV, which would have cost them $300 each. And hopefully their insurance rates either won't go up, or it won't be too bad.
Lesson #1: Don't speed in Columbia County (which includes Hudson, NY and Chatham, NY, and a fairly long stretch of the Taconic).
Lesson #2: If you're going to speed in Columbia County, don't go more than 25 mph over the limit. The Trooper indicated that judges in the County won't agree to a non-speed if you're over that number. By the way, the 25 mph rule is a pretty good rule anywhere. I advise clients to aim for no more than 8 mph over the limit, as it is rare to see a ticket for less than 10 over. Of course, I do have one pending now for 9 mph over the limit, so there's no perfect answer. Go slower than the limit and they might decide that's suspicious and pull you over.
Lesson #3: Don't blab your sob story to the cop. They just don't want to hear it. I've got one client who was on her way to a hospital to "harvest" tissue from a dying patient for an eye transplant. The cop still wrote her a ticket. Be respectful to the cop (it isn't that great of a job, some of the things they do is pretty important, and they're mostly good people). There are all sorts of ways you can piss off a cop. Being polite and respectful, even apologetic, is much safer.
Oh, and lesson #4: Don't drive too fast with kids in your car. They really hate that.
Now, for the second part of our story. A friend of mine got a ticket a while ago. Turns out it was in the same court. I had referred my friend to a young lawyer (I forget why - either I couldn't be there the night it was originally scheduled, or I thought the Court was too far). So I get there and I see my young lawyer friend and my buddy together. Of course I didn't remember making the referral so I was trying to figure out why they were there together. :-)
So anyway, turns out my friend had several other tickets on his record already. He pled guilty to a few of them without hiring a lawyer. So they show up in this court in Columbia County needing a no-pointer to save his license. No dice.
The lessons here?
A: Never, never, never plead guilty to a traffic ticket that has points. You can almost always get a reduction (especially if you didn't piss off the cop - see #3 above). Not getting the reduction now can hurt you later, as my friend just learned. Yes, a speeding ticket lawyer is expensive. Personally, I think what I do is worth the money I'm paid.
B: If you've gotten 2 or 3 tickets within a few months, it's time to wake up. You need to slow down. You are in danger of losing your license. That might be a problem if you have a job and you need to drive as part of that job, or if you drive to work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)