Dealing with the DMV in California can be an extremely frustrating experience. Unfortunately, DMV clerks tend to be very confident that their opinion about the law is correct when infact, they are wrong. Trying to correct a DMV employee can be met with anger and irritation rather than a willingness to serve and listen.

A case in point involves a current client who was arrested for a DUI at a time when his license was already suspended. The suspension was as a result of a reportable accident (involving damage over $750) which occured last December at a time when he had no insurance. Under Vehicle Code Section 16072, the DMV will suspend a persons privilege to drive for a year if a person is involved in an accident with no insurance coverage. However, the DMV will grant a restricted license in these circumstances if proof of insurance (SR22) is filed and a fee of $250 is paid.

My client has been to two seperate DMV offices to apply for a restricted license. He has also called the head office of the DMV in Sacramento. He is being told that he cannnot apply for a restricted license until he is enrolled in an alcohol education program. The DMV are confusing the law on two seperate issues. We are defending the DUI. An alcohol program may be required in the future, but not yet, and if we are successful, it may never be required.

The moral of this story is that dealing with the DMV is an art, not a science. The people working at the DMV often misunderstand the law (which is sometimes understandable) and are unwilling to listen when a member of the public tries to correct them.

I am meeting with my client in my office tomorrow to contact the DMV in Sacramento to correct this problem so that my client can drive for work as allowed under the terms of the Vehicle Code.

Do not be pushed around by the DMV. Consult with a DMV attorney in Los Angeles and these problems can be corrected.