DMV Legislation effective Jan. 1, 2006
January 2006 -- Summary of legislation taking effect 1/1/2006 that impacts the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV): Click to Download.
New Regulations for School Bus Drivers
July 2005 -- The State of California has passed new laws affecting school bus driver regulation. The new laws require any person that operates a school bus to hold a commercial drivers license reflecting BOTH a passenger transportation endorsement AND a new school bus endorsement. These laws go into effect on September 20, 2005. The laws found in Vehicle Code Sections 12517(a) and section 15275.1 were required to comply with new federal regulations.
ATTENTION! All members of Kaiser in the East Bay BEWARE! CAUTION!
July 2005 -- Because of several cases we have been involved in that required appearances at the Oakland Driver Safety Office and that were initiated by what appears to be very questionable practices by some young Kaiser doctors, we feel compelled to report and warn our readers.
CASE # 1: A Kaiser doctor (Doctor McD.) submitted a confidential Morbidity Report for a patient and reported, "Moderate Dementia" The C.M.R was sent to Contra Costa Public Health Dept and then to D.M.V.
The reported patient was immediately REVOKED and hired us to represent him at the hearing.
At this point Dr. McD. was within her rights in making the report and is protected under the provisions of Health and Safety Code 103900, which requires the reporting of conditions characterized by lapses of consciousness or control or dementia. The family however reports that they were not informed of Dr. McD's intent or action.
D.M.V took the action without benefit of explanation, medical information, or anything save two words from Dr. McD. I subpoenaed the Driver Safety individual who took the action and she stated that she did not require any information from anyone regarding the subject, because that is what D.M.V. instructs her to do.
I talked to Dr. McD. and requested that she forward to me a medical form explaining her reason for coming to the conclusion that the subject had dementia, she agreed and I mailed the form with a return envelope to me. I never got the form and when I followed up with her she said it was in the mail. Not so. She in fact communicated "Ex Parte" with D.M.V. regarding the subject WITHOUT a signed release from the subject.
D.M.V could have conducted a re-examination under VC13801 and required the subject to appear and provide medical information. Instead they took an immediate action without benefit of any information, engaged in ex-parte communication with the doctor and overruled all objections in the knowledge that most people will not know what is going on or what to do about it.
They were wrong this time.
CASE # 2: Another young Kaiser doctor sent in a C.M.R. as above with the condition noted "driving while on MSContin" That's it folks. He saw the subject on an initial visit to Kaiser and said "if she did not use pain medication he would accept her but as it was, he wanted noting to do with her" As it stands she has used pain medication for almost two years to treat a very depilating medical condition and in fact the medication is prescribed by Kaiser Pain Clinic. She has a totally clean driving record and several of the doctors who treated her have stated she is absolutely safe to drive. Again D.M.V. revoked her based on a phone conversation and we will represent her at the scheduled hearing.
They were wrong again.
These cases are reported because young Kaiser doctors who appear to be operating on their own agenda initiated them. Regardless of the outcome at the D.M.V hearing these good people, both with spotless driving records have been traumatized and caused great stress and financial outlay.
Doctors and D.M.V have to be rightfully concerned with traffic safety and in many instances specific conditions need to be investigated by Driver Safety. If you appear at a driver safety hearing or a re-examination and think it will just require a friendly conversation, do not be naïve or operate in the world of the "good Fairy". You are in for a rude awakening.
If you are a Kaiser member in the East Bay ask them for their policy on reportable conditions. You need to know if the believe in "Patient, Doctor confidentiality" outside the requirements of H & S Code 103900.
Lastly if you become a victim of the system……………..Call us.
Cheating on Drivers Licence Test results in Prison Life Sentence
March 2005 -- Santos Reyes was given a life sentence in prison after cheating on a written drivers license exam because of "three strikes" legislation. Learn more >>
Does DMV Use Re-examinations as a Weapon? Part II
January 28 2005 -- We have had further questions about the situation regarding Ms Monson and the column by Sacramento Bee columnist Diana Griego Erwin concerning Ron Grimme.
Click here to read the complete "Driver's health woes temporary, but trouble lingers with license law" column describing Mr. Grimme's situation.
DMV has issued a statement indicating that the Monson matter should never have occurred. The more serious question is how often does this type of thing occur to unsuspecting license holders and NOTHING HAPPENS?
With regard to the Grimme issue it would appear that appropriate procedures were followed as required by statute and Mr. Grimme has fallen victim to legislation written with little thought to details or consequences. Many Vehicle Code sections are passed as a response to very vocal and aggressive special interests. The concern is mostly valid but because legislators are driven by a desire to get reelected and satisfy the media spotlight they have little interest in practical details. What follows is sloppy legislation that often needs change.
One fact that is usually unknown to anyone outside DMV is how or when special codes are introduced to a driving record and can have a profound effect on the individuals license. Just as a Driver Safety employee sent a notice of re-examination to Ms Monson so also can a Driver Safety employee introduce a P & M code or a J stop to a drivers record. No notification is sent to the driver but that code can cause all sorts of problems. One code can cause a notice of reexamination to go out if the individual is involved in an accident and another code can cause a stop on the reissue of a license at renewal time. You will never know why until you have to start dealing with the stressful nightmare.
The bottom line …if DMV is taking an action against your driving privilege or certificate and you are entitled to a hearing (not a mandatory action) request a hearing within 10 days. It's a little like voting. If you fail to exercise your constitutional rights you will probably get shafted and you should not complain.
Does DMV Use Re-examinations as a Weapon?
January 2005 -- We have been contacted for our reaction to the recent media reports regarding the Medical pot advocate who was contacted for a reexamination. Diane Monson, one of the Northern Californians testing the federal government's strict stance against medical pot in a case before the U.S. Supreme Court received a notice from DMV requiring a review of her driving qualifications.
Monson's attorney, David Michael demanded reconsideration by DMV and they promptly agreed to postpone the contact. The position of Ms Monson was that the reexamination was an act of retaliation and there was noting on her record to justify this sudden review. Attorney Michael questioned the reexamination process and wondered if others are caught in this bureaucratic morass.
The quick answer to Mr. Michael and Ms Monson is "Yes". Mr. Branch (the DMV spokesman) promises to undertake a complete review of this matter, but the only thing DMV will do is caution the Driver Safety staff to be careful and consider their procedures. One of their procedure memos dated 10/04/2001 DS 2001-11 indicates that there must be a nexus to driving when reviewing the qualifications to drive IE: a reexamination.
Ms Monson was reported to have a clean driving record, with the exception of a speeding ticket fifteen years ago. So why the reexamination? The answer is "Because they can" even if it violates their own policies and procedures. The above referenced DS 2000-22 policy memo states " newspaper articles and television/radio broadcasts cannot be used as the sole basis for scheduling a reexamination or taking an immediate suspension/revocation action." It would appear that Ms Monson was called in because she is a medical marijuana user and a driver safety employee said, "let's reexamine her".
Very few outside DMV understand the process and in the media reports regarding this issue everyone referred to the "reexamination hearing". It is not a hearing and you have no rights. It is an investigative interview and the rules of an administrative hearing DO NOT APPLY. You refuse to appear or refuse to answer questions or supply requested documents….. You will be suspended under 13801 of the vehicle code.
If you have questions regarding the reexamination process or a physical/mental issue, including those relating to alcohol or drug use, e-mail your question or call us at the number on our home page.
Cell Phone Use Now Illegal While Driving Certain Vehicles
1/1/2005 -- Effective January 1, 2005 VC 23125 makes it illegal to drive a school bus or transit vehicle while operating a wireless
telephone.
Holiday Dangers of Driving While Drowsy - Tips to Protect Yourself
12/2004 -- The holiday season adds to the risk that more people will be driving while tired. Sleep is an essential function of the human body. The lack of sleep impairs our work performance, affects our mood
and behavior and our cognitive abilities. More >>
The Court Process for DUI Cases
12/2004 -- Have you ever wondered what a person arrested for driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol experiences in the court
system? Unless you’ve worked in the system or experienced it first hand, many people do not realize DUI sentencing by
the courts can be confusing and very expensive. More >>
Lap-Shoulder Belts Required on New School Buses
7/1/2004 -- On July 1,2005 California became the first state to require lap-shoulder belts on all new school buses.
| Percentage of kids that ride school buses in California: | 15% |
| Number of kids killed each year in School Bus accidents (U.S.): | 6 (avg) |
| Cost of School Bus without seat belts: | $90,000 |
| Cost to add seat belts: | $7,000 (approx) |
| Amount State of Calif. reimburses districts for transportation: | 46 cents per dollar |
Disclaimer: The information presented on this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice. We are not attorneys and we encourage you to seek legal advice regarding your individual legal issues.
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) found in California Government Code Sections 11400 through 11528, and CVC Sections 14100 through 14112 govern Driver Safety hearings conducted by DMV.