Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR)

You are being tracked

In a report released last week, the ACLU describes in chilling detail the rapidly expanding law enforcement use of automatic license plate recognition (ALPR) systems nationwide. Originally designed to automatically scan surrounding vehicle plates for comparison against a “hot list” of wanted vehicles – such as those reported stolen or owned by a person for whom an arrest warrant was outstanding – ALPR devices have now become a seemingly indispensable investigative tool. While law enforcement use of emerging technologies is not in itself a problematic practice, how those tools are used can be of great concern.

How it works

While the underlying algorithms that make ALPR possible can be highly complex, the basic technological principles are fairly straight forward. Essentially the technology involves a camera, a computer, and a piece of software designed to “read” any vehicle license plates picked up by the camera. Mounted on police cruisers or road fixtures such as overpasses or street lights, sets of connected cameras can effectively scan the license plates of every vehicle within range.

While one or two such systems pose relatively little threat to everyday privacy, hundreds of such cameras are now active all over LA County and are being used by the LAPD, the LA County Sheriff, and the California Highway patrol. Together, the accumulated data from all these sources (all of which is shared between departments and even the Federal government through a backend server system known as BOSS) can be mined by law enforcement and the results used to paint a picture of the movements of any citizen who drives on public roads – going back months or even years into the past.

ALPR grows up

Originally developed in England as an offshoot of the massive public surveillance camera system long in use there, ALPR was first put to practical use in the late 1970s. However, despite its early potential, the prohibitive cost of computing and camera equipment made widespread use of the technology impractical until the last decade. Broad public knowledge of the practice is still underdeveloped. News reports were covering ALPR back in 2006, including an article published in Wired; but even at that relatively late date, the more nefarious aspects of the technology were still all but unknown. Even the ACLU is quoted in that article as being unconcerned about the practice at the time stating that there had been no legal challenge because the activity was not illegal – what a difference a few years can make.

Lost cost digital storage and the rise of privacy concerns

Much has changed since 2006 to make ALPR technology a much bigger concern today than it was just a few years ago. Of primary concern is the rapidly decreasing cost of huge computer storage capacity. Once a barrier to privacy invasion, digital storage technologies now allow law enforcement to maintain the records of their scans indefinitely; a possibility many agencies are all too happy to embrace. In the early days, hits were only scanned against a short list of “hot” vehicles. Today, everything has changed. Now, every single scan is logged into a database with some jurisdictions storing more plate data points per year then there are residents under their protection. What was once a benign police tool has now become every bit as controversial as the NSA phone surveillance program revealed earlier this year.

Indefinite storage

While police agencies tout the many legitimate uses of the ALPR technology, privacy concerns about the system stem not from its legitimate uses but largely from the length of time for which collected data is retained. Because every scanned plate is logged and stored in the database, Los Angeles streets are effectively under nearly permanent video surveillance. In the absence of any statewide regulation, agency privacy protections vary dramatically between institutions. The LAPD, for example, apparently holds the data for approximately two years, even on entirely innocent individuals. While the department has been hesitant to respond to ACLU records requests, written procedures appear to allow for data retention even of information not linked to any crime.

Dragnet

ALPR Camera Dragnet

Perhaps worse, no warrant is typically needed to mine the data, most of which is statistically worthless to law enforcement. Even in large jurisdictions such as LA County, the ACLU report reveals that less than one percent of the plate data recorded ever leads to any meaningful police action. The problem, however, is that location data, especially location data over long periods of time, can tell a great deal about personal behaviors. Which doctor you visit, what church you attend, which political rallies you have marched with, what friends you keep, which streets you take to work each day; all of this and much more can be gleaned from the plate databases of the LAPD alone. Even more troublesome is the fact that much of the data is stored by private companies with clear profit motives and that there are few, if any, access guidelines attached to the data. In short, it may be that anyone can access your location data at any time, even for commercial purposes.

How to protect yourself

In effect, your entire vehicle related paperwork is being continually monitored without your knowledge by most local law enforcement agencies in the LA area. To protect yourself it is critical that you make absolutely sure that your DMV paper work is complete and up to date. Maintain car insurance, make sure your registration is current, and keep up on your car payments. Any slip could give officers potential probable cause to pull you over and from there even a complete search of you and your vehicle is a possibility.

Private Settlements Are a Big Risk

If you are the victim of a car accident and are wondering whether you should accept the other party’s offer to settle privately, without involving the insurances companies, you might turn to Google for advice. Unfortunately, many of the results that turn up are user comments on non-legal forums where non-attorneys attempt to explain the complications of a vehicle collision. Despite this dearth of expert advice, many people keep trying, driven by a fear that their insurance rates will be raised if they report the accident to the authorities.

While private settlements might seem like a convenient way to avoid the potential hassles of dealing with insurance adjusters and claims processors, these types of arrangements are almost always a bad idea; at least without some input from an experienced attorney. There are just too many potential complications of which many people may be unaware. The following are some examples of the types of problems you might encounter during a private settlement attempt.

Who’s at fault?

California follows what is known as the Pure Comparative Fault Rule. Under our system an accident victim can file a lawsuit against the person at fault, even if the victim partially caused the accident. For example, let’s say you're in a car accident with another driver. At trial the jury determines that you were 10% at fault for the accident and that your total damages are $100,000. Under California law, you’ll be able to collect 90% of those damages from the other party; or $90,000. Of course, you may also have to pay them for the 10% of damages you caused them.

The situation gets dramatically more complex in cases where the plaintiff is more than 50% at fault. Without qualified legal advice, you may not know for sure who is legally responsible for your injuries or for how much each party will ultimately be liable. Trying to guess can be costly.

Damage calculations

Estimating exactly what a settlement is worth, poses a challenge even for experienced attorneys. Questions abound, such as: will the injuries create a permanent disability, have the full extent of the injuries been discovered, and how lost wages or other income should, be calculated.  There is a lot to consider, and this list barely scratches the surface. Without expert advice, your estimate of the damages or injuries might be way off the mark. Ultimately this means that you may be accepting an offer which grossly under compensates you for your injuries.

Insurance misconceptions

Many people considering a private settlement are worried that their insurance rates will skyrocket if they report an accident, even one in which they were not at fault. I wish that there was an easy way to settle this question but the truth is the situation is a bit more complicated. How an accident will affect your rates is determined by the particular insurance company involved. For some companies, rate increases are only assessed against drivers who are at-fault in a collision. In other situations the severity of the incident or the amount of damage is a critical factor. In today’s competitive insurance market, some insurers actually market policies that include accident forgiveness clauses designed to prevent rate increases associated with certain types of collisions. Ultimately you will have to check with your particular insurer for details. However, it is unwise to attempt a private settlement merely out of fear that your rates will go up.

Notification

While they may not raise your rates for reporting an accident in which you were not primarily at fault, not reporting an accident can give the insurance company a reason not to pay for any later claims you may decide to file for the incident. This is because most policies have a notification clause that requires you to give them a fair opportunity to duly investigate the situation. If you do not tell them in time, and the delay ends up hurting their ability to protect themselves legally, they may be able to avoid paying on your claim.

Don't forget the DMV

While not reporting an incident to your insurance company is a matter of choice – albeit with some consequences for choosing poorly – reporting to the DMV is not optional. Under California law any accident with over $750 in damage or with any personal injury – no matter how minor - must be reported within 10 days of the incident. Both parties must file this report, regardless of fault. Furthermore, if any party was uninsured at the time of the incident, the DMV will still impose sanctions on that person including suspending their license for one year.

Dishonesty, double-dipping, and fraud

Even if you avoid the minefield presented by the above issues, there’s sometimes no accounting for human ingenuity. Without the benefit of deep insurance pockets, you may have a very difficult time actually collecting on your private settlement; especially if you agreed to take payments. Personal checks are often no good, and by the time you figure this out it might be too late to find the person. In every accident you should always take down insurance and driver’s license details from all parties involved, in addition to taking pictures of the scene and any damage. This way, even if you accept a private settlement up front, you’ll have some recourse if things go south later on.

Hire a lawyer

Hire an attorney! I know this might seem suspect coming from an attorney, but I hope I've convinced you that it’s good advice. Settling your accident privately is legally and financially risky and the motivations for doing so are weak at best. Get the legal help you need and avoid years of potential headache down the road. Your attempt to save a few bucks in the short term might end up costing you everything.

Driving Without a License in California

Driver's Licenses for Undocumented Immigrants?

A new California law took effect January 1, 2013 giving certain undocumented residents the right to obtain a driver’s license. Signed by Governor Brown late last year, AB 2189 authorizes the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue licenses to individuals who qualify for the new Federal work-visa program developed by President Obama. Specifically, the bill directs the DMV to accept as proof of residency, whatever documentation the Federal Government provides in connection with the Deferred Action immigration program.

Many unlicensed drivers still on the road

But, California lawmakers aren't finished with the issue just yet. While AB 2189 authorizes licenses for a large number of undocumented residents, some sources estimate that as many as one million unlicensed drivers still populate California roadways, most as a result of their undocumented status. A new bill, AB 60, seeks to rectify this situation by authorizing driver’s licenses for most of the remaining undocumented residents, however some legislators oppose the move and the bill’s future is uncertain. So, where does that leave average drivers?

Steep penalties

Driving without a license on a public road in California is against the law. California Vehicle Code section 12500 requires that California drivers possess a valid license issued by the state in which they live and authorizing their use of the class of vehicle they are operating. While you can only be criminally convicted of a misdemeanor for violation of this law, the practical consequences can be severe; especially if you are involved in an accident while driving without a license. First, even misdemeanor convictions will appear on your criminal record, potentially haunting your future efforts to get a job, obtain affordable car-insurance, or apply for certain benefits. Second, California’s financial responsibility laws may tangentially affect your situation.

Under California Civil Code sections 3333.3 and 3333.4, individuals who are injured in an incident involving the operation or use of a motor vehicle, may be precluded from suing for certain types of damages (notably pain and suffering) if they are not properly insured; even if someone else is clearly at fault. Because most insurance companies will not issue a policy to a person who does not have a valid driver’s license, unlicensed drivers who are involved in a car accident are likely to find themselves unable to collect much money from the other party. In other words, if you don't have a driver’s license, you probably can't get insurance, which means you probably can’t get paid by the guy who hits you in a car accident.

Get a license

While there are a number of nuances to this law, and courts are continually interpreting its wording, the warning should be clear. Driving without a license is a very bad idea. If you are undocumented, and do not qualify for the newly expanded licensing program, the best approach is to avoid driving. Take public transportation or find a way to carpool whenever possible. For those of you who are eligible, take the time to get your license and maintain proper insurance on your vehicle. The costs of failing to comply with these laws far outweigh the risks.

That being said, if you are charged with driving without a license, or if you are injured while operating an uninsured vehicle, check with an attorney immediately to see what your options are. There is no substitute for good legal advice in every situation.