BizLawBuz …. The Power of Know

Recent changes to the Michigan Vehicle Code have the potential for impacting many Michigan drivers, this time in a positive way. Public Act 289, which became effective in the closing days of 2010, amends the Michigan Vehicle Code to allow eligible drivers who are ticketed for certain moving violations to avoid the imposition of points if they successfully complete an approved basic driver improvement course. Further, if the requirements of the law are met, the Michigan Secretary of State (SOS) will not report the violation to any insurance carrier, thereby allowing the driver to avoid an almost certain premium increase, surcharge, or worse.

Key provisions of the law include the following:

• The SOS will determine if a ticketed individual is eligible to take advantage of the program. If so, the SOS will mail a notice informing the individual of the location of basic driver improvement courses and the time frame within which the course must be completed.
• The approved sponsor of the course must notify the SOS of the individual’s successful completion of the course within 60 days after the individual received notice.
• An individual is not eligible to take the course if:
  1) the individual was operating a commercial vehicle or was licensed as a commercial driver at the time of the violation;
  2) the violation is a criminal offense;
  3) the violation involves 4 or more points;
  4) the violation involves careless or negligent driving, a work zone speed violation or a violation involving a school speed zone or stopping for a school bus;
  5) the individual was cited for more than 1 moving violation at the same time;
  6) the individual’s license was suspended as a result of the violation;
  7) the individual previously completed a driver improvement course;
  8 ) the individual has 3 or more points on his or her record;
  9) the individual has no license or his or her license is restricted, suspended or revoked; and
  10) an individual is not eligible to take the course for a second or subsequent violation within 60 days.
• The SOS will maintain a computerized data base as necessary to implement the law. The SOS will make the information available to course sponsors so that they can track the effectiveness of their programs and provide a report to the SOS every 5 years.
• Approved sponsors cannot charge more than $100 for the course, a portion of which they will pay to the SOS to fund the implementation of the program.
• Sponsors of basic driver improvement courses must be approved by the SOS.

Read the entire text of the new law online by clicking here.

Duane L. Reynolds

Michigan’s Super Drunk Driving Law Takes Effect October 31,2010

On January 9, 2009, Governor Granholm signed into law a series of amendments to the Michigan vehicle code dealing with drunk driving and related offenses. Those amendments, referred to by many as Michigan’s “Super Drunk” driving law, take effect on October 31, 2010. In adopting these amendments Michigan joins some 45 other states that have adopted similar laws. Key provisions of the new law include the following:

1. Beginning October 31, 2010, drivers with a blood alcohol content (or, BAC) of .17 percent or greater will face significantly enhanced penalties. First offenders will face fines ranging from $200 to $700 (up from $100 to $500 under current law), up to 6 months in jail (up from 93 days under current law), up to 360 hours of community service and will be required to attend 1 year of substance abuse treatment, Alcoholics Anonymous or other community based support groups (only required for repeat offenders under current law.) The duration, frequency and type of treatment must be based on an assessment from a licensed alcohol assessor, paid for by the offender.
2. The new law and enhanced sanctions apply only to offenders convicted of offenses that occur after October 31, 2010. License and punitive sanctions for second and subsequent offenses remain unchanged regardless of the offender’s BAC.
3. The licenses of offenders convicted under the new law will be suspended for 1 year, and restricted licenses may not be granted for the first 45 days (referred to as a “hard” suspension.) Thereafter, for the next 320 days, the granting of a restricted license is contingent upon an ignition interlock device being installed in the offender’s vehicle, at their expense, including all charges for monthly monitoring of the device. Such devices are designed to prevent a vehicle from being started or driven by anyone with a BAC of .025 or greater (reduced from .04 under current law.) Under current law as applied, the Secretary of State recognizes the potential that these devices may not allow the vehicle to be started for reasons other than a BAC of .025 or greater. As a result, if a “startup” failure is followed by a “clean test” within 15 minutes, the startup failure is not recognized. Under the new law, after the first 2 months that the device is in use, all startup failures will result in sanctions; period.Any tampering or attempted tampering with the device, or, operating or attempting to operate a vehicle equipped with the device with a BAC of .025 or greater, will result in another 1 year suspension, including 45 days of no driving at all. If an offender who has been ordered to have a device installed in his or her vehicle is stopped driving a vehicle that is not equipped with the device, that vehicle may be impounded, the license plate may be confiscated and destroyed and the offender will face additional suspension and criminal sanctions, including up to 6 months in jail and up to a $5,000 fine. The interlock device must remain in the offender’s vehicle until the Secretary of State orders its removal.
4. The vehicle of anyone who is convicted of knowingly allowing an intoxicated person to drive their vehicle must be immobilized for 90 to 180 days, with the option of avoiding the immobilization if a monitoring device is installed.

Currently, the average BAC of a person arrested for drunk driving in Michigan is .16. It is therefore estimated that the new “Super Drunk” driving law is likely to impact almost half of all persons arrested for drunk driving. Will it result in reduced incidents of drunk driving and greater safety? Only time will tell. What is certain is that convictions for drunk driving will be substantially more expensive and more consequential under the new law.

Duane L. Reynolds

Michigan’s New Law and Fines On Texting While Driving in Michigan

Accidents attributed to distracted driving
With a tremendous amount of hoopla, Michigan’s law banning texting while driving took effect this past July 1, 2010. In so doing, Michigan joined somewhere between 14 and 23 states (the reported numbers vary widely) and the District of Columbia, that have taken this approach in an effort to deal with the growing problem of distracted drivers. A summer 2009 study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute found that the act of writing a text message while driving substantially increased the chances of becoming involved in an accident. According to figures published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, accidents resulting from some form of distracted driving resulted in 6,000 deaths and 500,000 injuries in 2008. Overall, distracted drivers accounted for almost 80% of all accidents and 65% of near accidents, nation wide. Here in Michigan, some 3,315 accidents were attributed to distracted driving in 2009, with 900 of those specifically linked to some sort of cell phone use.

The new Michigan Vehicle Code
Despite the media attention, reports of that which the law allows, and that which the law prohibits, have varied widely. It’s not all that long and complicated, so I thought it worth while to reprint it here, in its entirety. The law, now part of the Michigan Vehicle Code, can be found at Michigan Compiled Laws Section 257.602b.

257.602b.
Use of wireless 2-way communication device for text messages while operating motor vehicle; local regulation; penalties

Sec. 602b. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person shall not read, manually type, or send a text message on a wireless 2-way communication device that is located in the person’s hand or in the person’s lap, including a wireless telephone used in cellular telephone service or personal communication service, while operating a motor vehicle that is moving on a highway or street in this state. As used in this subsection, a wireless 2-way communication device does not include a global positioning or navigation system that is affixed to the motor vehicle.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to an individual who is using a device described in subsection (1) to do any of the following:

• (a) Report a traffic accident, medical emergency, or serious road hazard.
• (b) Report a situation in which the person believes his or her personal safety is in jeopardy.
• (c) Report or avert the perpetration or potential perpetration of a criminal act against the individual or another person.
• (d) Carry out official duties as a police officer, law enforcement official, member of a paid or volunteer fire department, or operator of an emergency vehicle.

(3) An individual who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction and shall be ordered to pay a civil fine as follows:

(a) For a first violation, $100.00.
(b) For a second or subsequent violation, $200.00.

(4) This section supersedes all local ordinances regulating the use of a communications device while operating a motor vehicle in motion on a highway or street, except that a unit of local government may adopt an ordinance or enforce an existing ordinance substantially corresponding to this section.

Distracted drivers scare the daylights out of me
Is the law working? It’s too early to tell. I do know this. As someone who rides a motorcycle, distracted drivers scare the daylights out of me. On a motorcycle, I am pretty much at eye level with drivers, and can easily see what they are doing. Just this past weekend, on a trip to the west side of the state, I encountered numerous erratic drivers; you know the ones, driving too slow, too fast, drifting in and out of their lanes, and so on. In every instance, the driver was either talking on a cell phone or texting while driving. Very scary stuff.

The prohibition couldn’t be simpler: don’t read, type or send text messages while driving.

Duane L. Reynolds