New Jersey’s “No Point Ticket” Can Be a Speed Trap
Posted By Steven J. Richardson on June 11, 2009
In New Jersey, points assigned against your license can cause problems, like increased auto insurance premiums or the suspension of your license if you get too many of them. That is why people try to avoid them. Prior to 2000, drivers given traffic tickets that could result in the assessment of points, speeding, for example, were usually able to avoid them when represented by an attorney by downgrading it to an innocuous charge that did not carry points. However, the State then enacted a statute under the Motor Vehicle Code for “Unsafe Operation of a Motor Vehicle” under N.J.S.A. 39:4-97.2 (commonly referred to as a “97-2″). This allowed for the avoidance of points, in exchange for a fine and a $250 surcharge, twice within five years. In other words, if you used it a third time within that period, you would be assessed four points!
This changed several months ago when the New Jersey Appellate Division held, in the case of Patel v. New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, that the five years started to run only after there had been a third offense and the assessment of points! This effectively says that you only have two lifetime opportunities to avoid points. After your third offense (and 4 points) you can then “reset the clock” if you go five years without using the plea. For this reason, this plea should only be used after careful consideration, consultation with a lawyer, and in situations where the assessment of any points could result in adverse consequences, such as the ones stated above.
Another consideration is the dilemma of the out of state driver ticketed in New Jersey. Traffic penalties in one state are usually “reciprocated” in another, but not always for exactly the same thing. For example, in Pennsylvania or Delaware, “unsafe operation” is equivalent to “careless driving” and carries points! As you can see, a 97-2 is not an option in that instance, and only serves to emphasize the importance of out of state drivers consulting with an attorney before entering into any plea in our traffic courts.
UPDATE: This situation has changed, as the NJ Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division in Patel. See the more recent post here.
I stil don’t quite understand this statute. I went to traffic court today with a 4-point speeding ticket and talked to the prosecutor who immediately offered:
1. to drop 2 points or
2. the no point ticket.
I had talked to my insurance agent who said to avoid the second option if possible. My record has been spotless for 25 years so I took the 2 point reduction. However, I saw several people take the no point option. Each time the judge asked them if they understood the implications of the law. He also explained the appellate ruling. He always asked ‘are you sure this is what you want to do?’ I inferred, sitting in the back row, that he didn’t think this was a smart option in many instances.
Also - I learned today that if you want to skate with a low fine, just say you don’t speak English and require a translator, hand the judge an Ecuadoran drivers license, and act dumb. If you don’t have a valid license you can’t have had insurance but this was never raised. No question was asked about immigration status.
Bottome line: As a law abiding American citizen who got his first speeding ticket since 1983, I paid the same fine as someone who probably broke half a dozen State and Federal laws.
Thanks for listening.
James Nihill
Alexandria Twp., NJ
Mr. Nihill:
The 97-2 “no point ticket” option clearly isn’t what it used to be. For what it’s worth, I think you handled this well. Sometimes points can affect auto insurance, but you spoke to your agent before taking the plea. With a spotless record and no real impact on insurance rates as a result of the points, I see no benefit to a 97-2 plea. It can only limit your options down the road. Good luck in the future!
Steve Richardson
[...] I mentioned in a previous post, those seeking to avoid motor vehicle points against their New Jersey licenses by pleading to the [...]
[...] a June 11, 2009, post, I talked about a “gotcha” that existed in a New Jersey statute used to avoid points on [...]