TVC...scam?

You did the right thing by trying to fight it, never feel dishonest about keeping your record clean regardless of the circumstances, only ones who benefit from it if its not are the insurance companies. Yeah one could tell you lesson learned and drive safe but fact is bad things happen to good people some times. Only a few are brave enough to come on here and share there experiences. Im not familiar with it but in the future I would not use this organization, keep a good local traffic attorney on hand, they can sometimes guide you to someone else if its out of there area.

 

I suspect probably not. Contesting a plea of guilty in a closed case seems expensive and most likely related to optimizing income to attempt the virtually impossible.

You should be made aware that any such incident, regardless of fault, statistically suggests you will very likely be involved in another within a year. Doesn't have to happen, it just often does. Many if not most carriers/insurers give you one reportable incident, two in a year, regardless of fault, and you're toast.

 

Court supervision and reduction of the tickets are not allowed anymore per FMCSA for CDL holders. Google ticket masking.

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.aspx?reg=384.226

§ 384.226Prohibition on masking convictions.The State must not mask, defer imposition of judgment, or allow an individual to enter into a diversion program that would prevent a CLP or CDL holder's conviction for any violation, in any type of motor vehicle, of a State or local traffic control law (other than parking, vehicle weight, or vehicle defect violations) from appearing on the CDLIS driver record, whether the driver was convicted for an offense committed in the State where the driver is licensed or another State.[76 FR 26895, May 9, 2011]

 

Good to know. So that obviously limits us to fighting for dismissal of the citation. Something most any good lawyer can accomplish a majority of the time.

 

I had TVC at one point. They did help, but what I paid into it and what I got out of it was a bit unbalanced. Maybe if I was more prone to getting tickets than I am, I'd have gotten more value out of it.

 

NO IT DOESN'T! You get your day in court. RM was on the right track, he just caught the wrong train. It was NOT designed to limit your ability to get a continuance (another court date which is a VERY different thing legally than deferred judgment), fight a ticket or cop a plea to a lesser charge. What it was designed to do was keep States from not posting convictions for moving violations in CDLIS, and it was the seal on the deal that what you do in your personal car appears on your CDLIS record, which was a BIG bone of contention and States were sympathetic (because it added burdens on resources they didn't have yet; "We gotta report EVERYTHING on a truck driver??!!! He!!, we can't even keep up with the new "common" CDL thing AND what they do in the trucks, much less what they do in their personal cars. WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES!").

States hated the CDL Act as much as drivers having to either test in, in the new unified system, or be grandfathered in and go get these new "CDL Licenses" did. So the Judges would "mask" convictions by making them non-moving violations or a vehicle maintenance violation. Same fine, just different conviction. The speeding through town would be the same fine (hence punished - don't do it again) but it would be changed to a "headlight out" on the record so it wouldn't go against your new CDL so they didn't have to report it to CDLIS.

It is still perfectly legal to accept a reduction of the severity; "If you can pay the $300 today I can knock the 15 over speed limit down to 10 over; if not it'll be $550 and bigger points on your MVR and report on your CDL", because it STILL gets reported as a MOVING VIOLATION into CDLIS, which almost 30 years later the States now have the resources to report MUCH better - some States were just getting computers in the late '80s. THAT's what "masking" was.

The other option was to "defer judgment" which was to find you guilty but not "officially" set the punishment (judgment) until you paid your full fine or completed a "rehab" program (driving school or whatever). It put the case in limbo, potentially forever. You still got punished but they didn't have to report because judgment had not been entered to close the case. You hadn't finished your part of the deal. Often it was five payments of $X each week until all but a dollar of the fine had been paid. The last dollar wasn't due for another ten years, so it was still "open" so it didn't have to be reported to CDLIS.

When CDLIS came out most States were not fond of it. It was a tremendous burden on them to have to report to the Feds; to CDLIS - the database; Commercial Driver License Information System - a product of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 which went into effect July 1 of 1987, commonly called the CDL Act, so they did what States do when they disagree with the Feds; Find ways around the cumbersome burdens till they can deal with them closer to in line with what the Feds want them to do. 384.226 was aimed at the States to force them to report to CDLIS - not at limiting a driver's full Constitutional Rights to trial (a hearing at a reasonably convenient time) and equitable Due Process (ability to make a deal).

Sorry RM. I have nothing but high regards for you but in this issue I very respectfully disagree. CMVSA 1986 and 49 CFR § 384 were not aimed at drivers (other than to stop you from having multiple licenses). They were aimed at States to make them comply with the spirit of Federal Law.

 

There have been many laws over the years, that States did not like and chose to ignore.

The rule that I posted a copy of is quite clear.

A mechanic friend of mine has a cdl. It is only used when he has to road test the larger vehicles in order to be legal.

He was in another state on vacation and caught speeding. The ticket was issued while in his personal car. He tried to get supervision and the ticket removed from his record. The state advised him of this rule and stated since he has a cdl, they could and would not be able to change the ticket for him.

Now, this does not mean that all of the states will follow the law, but you had better be prepared.

 

I agree, they won't do that any more and what you do in ANY state goes on your record (except parking tickets) and you have 30 days to report it to the company also, but you can still fight a ticket (plead not guilty) and get continuances (reasonable ones). Too many people believe that regulation prevents them from fighting a ticket, getting a continuance for legitimate reasons or coping a plea to similar but lesser charge in a broad category which it doesn't. It has to be within reason, though. There was a big legal battle in Federal Court between SC and FMCSA over this because it was (and still is) common practice to change a speeding 10 MPH or less over the limit ticket for a CDL holder to a "careless or negligent driving" charge because the points and fines are less. Feds cited the regs, State pushed, it went to Federal Court. It was found to be OK for them to do that because speeding IS careless and negligent driving. They had a similar issue over reducing the number of MPH to s lower category and the State won that too under the rationale that it had to be within reason and giving the benefit of the doubt to the possibility the detection device may be a little off. Can't knock a 90 in a 55 down to a 10 over but a 70 in a 55 yes which was a huge deal because the magic number for a speeding ticket to be considered a serious violation in the federal regs is 15 over and 2 of those within a 3 year period is an automatic disqualification of your CDL (60 days for that offense I believe) and you got to go through a whole huge rigormorole to get it reinstated.

At the end of the day you are absolutely correct in that, that Judge is gonna do what he or she wants to and often it isn't in line with the Feds, which is why it's great to have an attorney that is local and knows that particular court.

The irony of changing the speeding less than 10 to a carless and negligent is it can actually hurt a lot of CDL drivers and they would have been better off in the long run with the small speed violation. Insurance companies freak smooth out when they see the words careless or negligent driving when they would have been OK with the small speed if the rest of the MVR looked OK. I've had many good drivers turned down because of that when they would have been accepted with a small speed. Insurance company wouldn't approve them because it said carless or negligent on an otherwise OK MVR, so I couldn't hire them.

 

you have now moved on and that is the beauty of the whole ordeal.I had several speeding tickets,a radar detector possession ticket in a commercial vehicle,and something else,all in the span of 2010 to 2013.My mvr has zero points as i type this.By you paying the ticket on time by their standards,which is all i did,it is entirely possible that you may have zero points as well.Those local clerks have more say than you'd think when they enter the tickets into a system.she/he may have intentionally neglected to enter that you were driving a commercial vehicle.

wait and see if the points are there.either way,you now rest easier as you handled the situation and it is indeed over with.

 

I have seen these booths for pre-paid legal services setup in truckstops all over. The one particular place I see them is in Walcott, Iowa. I have noticed they never ask us older drivers if we want their service but the younger, most vulnerable ones who fall for their scam. I usually walk by them and say,"IT's A SCAM," and boy do they get pissed off!!