ELD full compliance

Now that is a completely different topic...

And yes I have, but I will admit it's rare.
It's stacked against the driver by getting sent back to the originating office for review. Of course the officer or his boss will be disinclined to reverse their inspection.

But the statement was there is no way to fight a violation unless there is a citation. That's factually wrong.

 

But don’t the violations (points) fall off,year by year?

 

Yes, now does anybody know why we have the issue with "warnings" going on your record, that's right because of people like Roadlaw and everybody on here telling everybody who gets a ticket to fight it in court, even when they deserve the ticket.

 

Points are triple the first year, double the second, actual the third year. After 36 months they "fall off" as does the violation.
I'm sure it can still be found, it's just not used after that.

 

Who said anything about RoadLaw talking about “warnings”? I too believe warnings are not a thing in trucking with the exception of verbal warnings, of course.

I suspect this “warning” thing is being tossed around because DOT officers are telling drivers they will only get a “warning.” That probably relaxes many drivers. Eventually the driver will find out that the so called “warning” is just another word for a violation with no citation. This is evidently to the favor of DOT officers as they don’t have to put up with angry drivers, and they’re also less likely to be taken to court.

 

Okay, to clear things up, everyone who is talking about “warnings” is likely referring to violations without a citation. Warnings are not available on Driver/Vehicle Examination Reports, which is the document that you receive after a DOT inspection.

 

Who are you using for ELD?

 

I think this site may shed some light into this problem. From what I’m reading, DataQ doesn’t appear to be meant for challenging a violation where you believe the officer was wrong in a way of normal argumentation. The examples given in the site are for “errors,” like if the DOT officer accidentally marked the wrong violation. Below is the explanation from the site. Also, the last paragraph appears to show what companies like TVC and RoadLaw are doing. So they fight it in court, and if they’re successful, then they go after DataQ.

You can challenge the following types of data through DataQs:

Roadside Inspections

• A violation from a roadside inspection is incorrect or is listed multiple times.
• A violation or inspection is not yours, i.e., it was recorded under the wrong motor carrier or driver.
• An inspection record is missing.
• An inspection is listed multiple times.
• An inspection report contains incorrect information.
• You want to have an adjudicated citation removed.*

*NOTE: You can challenge a citation that a driver received during an inspection that took place on or after August 23, 2014, if a court or other adjudicator found the driver not guilty, the case was dismissed, or the driver was convicted of a different charge. On the DataQs site, select the “Inspections/Violations” type of request and then select “Citation associated with a violation on an inspection.”

How to knock out bad inspection or crash data with DataQs

 

Hey @Rubber duck kw . I actually had success getting a violation overturned on data Q because the hazmat certified DOT inspector was actually wrong on a violation he found and wrote me up for. That one was a success and the FMCSA actually mailed me a new inspection report that said No Violations discovered.

However, a couple years later I was pulled over by a DOT certified state patrol for doing 65 in a 55 mph zone. He did not give me a citation for the speed BUT he did do a level 1 inspection and noted the speed on the inspection sheet, but it also said no citation issued. As it turned out, that trooper was actually wrong. I still in the 65 zone. After providing proof, FMCSA responded to my data Q with basically said "no citation was issued, cannot challenge. Warning only".

The FMCSA is a joke