[CA] Please Help Missed Traffic School Deadline! Pasadena California!!

[kimchimango]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Hello, I got a ticket for driving without headlights and paid the fine on September 29 2017. However, it says on the paper "If you wish to attend Traffic school you must pay $62 within 30 days of the date stated in the item 2 of the clerk's certificate of mailing either in person or by mail at Pasadena Court only"

Right now it is December 13, and my mother told me that my insurance went up I had no clue that I had to do traffic school being only 19 I am completely clueless about tickets. This is definitely a learning experience and from now on I must read every sentence thoroughly and not rely on others.. Can anything be done, insurance already went up is it too late? I am planning to call them early in the morning but will it be better if i go to the court house and talk to the clerk and ask for a extension? Please help me.. My mother will take my car away and I am currently in college...

 

[FlyingRon]

It sounds like what you are saying is you never actually applied to take traffic school *AND* you missed the due date on the ticket. If this is the case you were likely found guilty in absentia (hence the DMV and your insurance company finding out). You've got more issues than your insurance going up. I can almost guarantee you have an additional FTA fee *AND* your license is suspended *AND* a warrant may be pending for your arrest.

If you applied to take traffic school, you are typically given 60 days to complete that. If you miss that and can present a good reason why the completion was not possible, an attorney may be able to make a motion to set aside what happened and allow you more time.

 

[kimchimango]

It sounds like what you are saying is you never actually applied to take traffic school *AND* you missed the due date on the ticket. If this is the case you were likely found guilty in absentia (hence the DMV and your insurance company finding out). You've got more issues than your insurance going up. I can almost guarantee you have an additional FTA fee *AND* your license is suspended *AND* a warrant may be pending for your arrest.

If you applied to take traffic school, you are typically given 60 days to complete that. If you miss that and can present a good reason why the completion was not possible, an attorney may be able to make a motion to set aside what happened and allow you more time.

I did not apply to take traffic school however I did pay the ticket first hand because in order to write the written declaration I think you needed to pay first. Anyways few weeks later I received a mail from my mother and it said that I was found guilty. It was a white sheet of paper, and also said in the bottom "If you wish to request a New trial you must summit a request for a new trial within 20 days." I just ignored it because I knew I had no chance of winning this case. Unfortunately, I just skimmed through the back page and as I am reading this paper right now on the bottom left side it said, "If you wish to attend traffic school you must pay$34 within 30 days." That was September 29th, now its December... I am thinking about going to the court house when it opens. Do I have a chance? Does the clerk have the authority to extend my traffic school?

 

[Zigner]

I did not apply to take traffic school however I did pay the ticket first hand because in order to write the written declaration I think you needed to pay first. Anyways few weeks later I received a mail from my mother and it said that I was found guilty. It was a white sheet of paper, and also said in the bottom "If you wish to request a New trial you must summit a request for a new trial within 20 days." I just ignored it because I knew I had no chance of winning this case. Unfortunately, I just skimmed through the back page and as I am reading this paper right now on the bottom left side it said, "If you wish to attend traffic school you must pay$34 within 30 days." That was September 29th, now its December... I am thinking about going to the court house when it opens. Do I have a chance? Does the clerk have the authority to extend my traffic school?

Your case is over. Pay better attention to official documents in the future.

 

[not2cleverRed]

https://forum.freeadvice.com/speeding-other-moving-violations-13/california-headlight-ticket-cvc-24250-please-help-635598-p2.html

 

[FlyingRon]

Zig is right. You didn't apply for traffic school and you didn't ask for a TDN after losing the TBD (you had about twenty days to do so). The TBD decision stands. Your case is over.

 

[Zigner]

I did not apply to take traffic school however I did pay the ticket first hand because in order to write the written declaration I think you needed to pay first. Anyways few weeks later I received a mail from my mother and it said that I was found guilty. It was a white sheet of paper, and also said in the bottom "If you wish to request a New trial you must summit a request for a new trial within 20 days." I just ignored it because I knew I had no chance of winning this case. Unfortunately, I just skimmed through the back page and as I am reading this paper right now on the bottom left side it said, "If you wish to attend traffic school you must pay$34 within 30 days." That was September 29th, now its December... I am thinking about going to the court house when it opens. Do I have a chance? Does the clerk have the authority to extend my traffic school?

The funny (ironic) thing about this is that I believed in June (and I believe today) that you DID have a fair shot at beating this.

 

[not2cleverRed]

I did not apply to take traffic school however I did pay the ticket first hand because in order to write the written declaration I think you needed to pay first.

Why didn't you bother to follow any of the advice that you were given last summer in your original thread?

Anyways few weeks later I received a mail from my mother and it said that I was found guilty. It was a white sheet of paper, and also said in the bottom "If you wish to request a New trial you must summit a request for a new trial within 20 days."

That would mean that you had 20 days from the date on the document to request a new trial. 20 days have passed. You can no longer request a new trial.

I just ignored it because I knew I had no chance of winning this case. Unfortunately, I just skimmed through the back page and as I am reading this paper right now on the bottom left side it said, "If you wish to attend traffic school you must pay$34 within 30 days." That was September 29th, now its December... I am thinking about going to the court house when it opens. Do I have a chance? Does the clerk have the authority to extend my traffic school?

That means that you had 30 days. It is well past October 30th.

No, the court clerk doesn't have the authority to just change the rules for you. Why should you get preferential treatment? It's not like you have a good reason, you just blew it off because you didn't think it was important.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Also, now that your insurance knows about the ticket even if you were allowed to go to traffic school there is nothing that would force the insurance carrier to reduce your rates back to what they were.

 

[Zigner]

Also, now that your insurance knows about the ticket even if you were allowed to go to traffic school there is nothing that would force the insurance carrier to reduce your rates back to what they were.

Traffic school would remove the point from his record. His rates would be adjusted.

(It's academic, because he's not going to be able to go to traffic school.)

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Traffic school would remove the point from his record. His rates would be adjusted.

(It's academic, because he's not going to be able to go to traffic school.)

For my info, can a CA insurance company not just decide to increase the rate? Do they have to have points on the licence?

 

[Zigner]

For my info, can a CA insurance company not just decide to increase the rate? Do they have to have points on the licence?

The rate increase would be due to the point(s) - if the point(s) no longer exist(s), then the rate would go back to what it was. Now that I'm thinking about it, it's not so much the point as it is the violation. If the violation is wiped out (by traffic school), then the insurance company can't increase it's rate due to the violation.

 

[Taxing Matters]

The rate increase would be due to the point(s) - if the point(s) no longer exist(s), then the rate would go back to what it was. Now that I'm thinking about it, it's not so much the point as it is the violation. If the violation is wiped out (by traffic school), then the insurance company can't increase it's rate due to the violation.

Are you relying on a California statute or insurance department regulation for that conclusion? If so, what rule exactly is it? Unless there is some provision in California law that would prohibit the insurance company from raising the rates once they learn of driving history that may increase risk the insurance company likely can, under its contract with its insured, raise the rates to compensate for that risk regardless of whether traffic school results in dismissal of the ticket.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I guess what I'm asking is this. Is there some law in CA that only allows an increase if there is a violation on the books. Here we have a case where the carrier found out about the violation and increased the rates because of it. Even if the violation were removed because he took the class it doesn't change the fact that he did violate the law and just because the violation is removed the carrier still knows it actually happened. The bell has been rung so to speak.

Think about it there are carriers that will give you a discount if you put those plugins on your car that sends them data on your driving habits. If they see that you speed around they can raise your rates on because they know you do it even though you never got a ticket for speeding.

 

[Zigner]

If there is no violation (because it's dismissed) then there is no increase. One isn't penalized for something they weren't convicted of.