Do “points” apply to bicyclists?

As of Spring 2018 legislative session the answer is simple: no. (for before that, skip below to “historical info…”)

SB1455 makes explicit that infractions incurred while riding a bicycle cannot affect the rider’s drivers license, nor can it be used to affect motor vehicle insurance rates. It modifies §28-812, the bicyclist applicability statute.

Laws passed by the Fifty-third Legislature – Second Regular Session become effective  08-03-2018

These updates to the law were part of an omnibus bill sponsored by Gilbert republican Warren Petersen LD12 who ran the bill for a constituent (he mentions Ron Jones), with a number of semi-unrelated topics; e.g. it also modifies rules about handicap placards. At the House hearing, attorney Julie O’Connor (also of same law firm as Jones) testified. She indicated the items were things that were treated inconsistently in differing courts. The changes were presented as “good government” by Petersen.

The hearing in the senate was very jolly; Petersen apparently is a huge enemy of photo enforcement, and I guess the joke was the committee people suspect he has a one-track mind; anyway he was asked point blank, and repeatedly if this bill was somehow intended to be a striker to eventually become (yet another) attempt at banning photo enforcement, he repeatedly denied that, saying the bill was just as it appears, and is a a constituent bill.

The topic of BUI (biking under the influence) came up very briefly and was not addressed at the hearing — in any event this new law deals only with civil traffic so it doesn’t really have any applicability. To chose another criminal traffic matter; a bicyclist could be found guilty of 28-672 for, say, striking a pedestrian who had the right-of-way in a crosswalk if the there was serious injury or death involved.

Historical info below (now moot due to law change in 2018)

This is one of those topics that I never seem to actually get to the bottom of.

This article says aye! And that’s according to an almost direct quotation from Arizona MVD spokesperson:

 “But 68 bicyclists have had points assessed to their driver’s licenses in the past five years in the state. Most of those points were gained from people running stop signs, said Cydney DeModica, state Motor Vehicle Division public information officer”

Lawbreaking Bicyclists Fact Tickets in Tempe The Arizona Republic, January 28, 2002

This counselor says nay!  And he’s a staff counsel, also of MVD (the whole email is reproduced below in the comments section)!

 ARS 28-3306(A) states “The department may suspend or revoke the license of a driver or require a licensee ….” The critical word is driver which is defined as “a person that drives or is in actual physical control of a vehicle.” and the vehicle definition excludes devices moved by human power” This eliminates bicycles and pedestrians from the point system.

[ed note: The bicyclist applicability statute, 28-812, specifically makes bicyclists “subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle”. However, it only applies to chapters 3,4, and 5. The statute mentioned above, 28-3306, is in Chapter 8; and therefore can’t apply to bicyclists in any case. In other words, I’m agreeing with him for perhaps a different reason: under that statute MVD has no authority to suspend or revoke anyone’s drivers license for offenses committed while operating a bicycle]

Whom to believe? I tend to believe that it is possible, albeit unlikely (68 in FIVE years!), to get points assessed against your driver’s license for an infraction committed on a bicycle. Which is odd, since a license is not required.

Note that in City of Tempe, from the Bicycle Diversion Class (a page that is now obsolete): “Failure to complete the bicycle diversion class AT LEAST THREE DAYS PRIOR to your court date may result in . . .possible drivers license suspension”   Implying that points are levied. Though that is an old page; the current page doesn’t say that anymore, it was changed sometime in 2010.

Point System, and the AAC

The “point system”, as it were, is set forth in the Arizona Administrative Code Title 17, Article 4 ( R17-4-404. Driver Point System). In the table of penalties, it states “Any other traffic regulation that governs a vehicle moving under its own power.” The “nay” argument takes this to mean that bicyclists (and pedestrians by the way) would be excluded.  I tend to think that could be just an administrative glitch, or of no consequence to the question at hand. The administrative code is not law,  it is just a bunch of rules supposedly drawn up under the auspices of enabling legislation. Also to the contrary of the “nay”: elsewhere in the table of the penalties,  failure to comply with red traffic-control signal (for example) says nothing about vehicles or moving under their own power.

Defensive Driving Classes

Motorists who get a ticket can get one ticket (once every 24 months) dismissed; they can pay a fee, and complete an approx 4 hr class (nowadays, it can be done entirely online). As things turn out, it ends up costing virtually the same amount as pleaing responsible (or being found responsible) — so why do it? Simple answer: points. By having the ticket dismissed there are no license points and no potential for, say, insurance rates to be increased because of them. What if a bicyclist got a ticket and wanted to attend defensive driving class to get the ticket dismissed?

28-3392. Defensive driving school; eligibility… A. A court: 1. Shall allow an individual who is issued a citation for a civil traffic moving violation… to attend a defensive driving school

The enabling statute seems crystal clear; Yes. Bicyclists are individuals. And that this statute appears in Chapter 8 is not limiting. There is, however, some contorted logic that  says that because points can’t be assigned to bicyclists (the “vehicle moving under its own power” in the AAC, above); therefore for some reason, bicyclists aren’t eligible for DDP. I’m not buying it, but there you have it. And all of that aside — if a bicycle diversion program is available; they tend to be much cheaper than DDP.

The Court Abstract

The key to actually understanding all this would be understand the procedures used by the courts and MVD. Courts transmit something called a “Court Abstract” to MVD for each and every reportable violation. The court abstract form had no place on it to specify what the infractor was driving or riding; it just lists things like name, DL number, date, citation number, statute, etc. (here is the blank Court Abstract form; if that doesn’t work just search adot mvd forms).

The enabling statue for the court records requirement is 28-1559; It is in chapter 5 (and thus could apply to bicyclists); there is, unfortunately, nothing obvious that would rule out its application bicyclists, there are hints, however, e.g. among the laundry list of information that must be transmitted from the court to MVD is “The registration number of the vehicle involved”; bicycles don’t have registration numbers (that’s the state-issued license plate required of and  found on motor vehicles).

There is more discussion of the Court Abstract at so-youve-killed-somebody-with-your-car-now-what?. At that link there is a very long and detailed document about how MVD handles court abstracts. In particular, there is an exhaustive list of statutes and the number of points associated with each. One thing is for sure, the “bicycle only” statutes, that is to say statutes that apply only to riders of bicycles, e.g. 28-815B riding more than two abreast, all carry zero points.

Arizona Republic, The (Phoenix, AZ)-January 28, 2002
Author: Senta Scarborough, The Arizona Republic

Arizona State University student Nicole Skillen could not believe that she almost got a ticket for riding her bike on the wrong side of the sidewalk.

“It is terribly unfair,” said Skillen, who shares the attitude of many that treating bicycling and automobile offenses the same is ridiculous.

But state law doesn’t agree. Some Tempe residents and ASU students may have learned that lesson last week after ASU Department of Public Safety and Tempe police officers gave warnings, wrote tickets and distributed bicycle safety information at the ASU main campus.

The project, sponsored by a grant from the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety, was targeted in part to educate bike commuters of the dangers and penalties of breaking local and state traffic laws.

But a bike diversion program being organized by Tempe police and courts and the ASU police may give Tempe bicyclists who are caught violating the traffic laws a break.

The court-ordered program would allow bike violators to attend a bicycle class for $51 to avoid steep fines and have their case dismissed. A ticket for a city violation costs $111, and for a state violation is $145 at Tempe City Court and a $90 fine at county justice courts.

For several years, ASU police offered the bike diversion program, but it ended eight months ago because of a lack of staff, ASU Police Chief John Pickens said.

ASU officers will teach the new course, which focuses on bicycle safety and laws, as part of their regular duties. The class is expected to start in early spring, Sgt. Allen Clark said.

“We are trying to prevent someone from being injured, and if we save only one life then it is all well worth it,” Pickens said.

Ninety-three bicyclists ticketed for traffic violations missed their chance to take the class as of mid-January, according to Tempe Municipal Court data.

East Tempe Justice Court Judge John Ore, who used the bike diversion program, said the class offers him “an excellent tool from the bench” to promote education.

“It is very good for the city and for the bicyclists,” said Gerri Mattern, Tempe prosecutor. “It think it is good because it will prevent accidents.”

Last year, three people died in bicycle-car collisions, and four died in 2000 in Tempe, Tempe police Sgt. Don Yennie said.

With ASU’s large bicycling commuter population, Tempe Municipal Court typically has a greater number of bicycle violations compared with other Valley cities, said Rick Rager, Tempe Municipal Court deputy manager.

And police say bicyclists are more vulnerable, especially on the roads where they most compete with cars and trucks. Safety measures such as helmets, reflectors and lights don’t replace paying attention and using common sense while bicycling, police warn.

In Maricopa County in 2000, 21 people were killed and 1,363 injured in 1,568 collisions involving cars and bicycles, go-peds, scooters and skateboards, according to ADOT data.

The bicyclist is most likely at fault in accidents, Yennie said. In Tempe, bike riders are the responsible party in crashes 65 percent of the time, according to city transportation data.

“Bicyclists just don’t have that kind of protection,” Yennie said. “When a car is in an accident with a bike, the bicyclist is the loser no matter who is right or who is at fault.”

ASU freshman Lindsey Burcell said she was glad police were enforcing the law.

“I think they feel like they have more rights riding a bicycle and that they have the right of way,” Burcell said.

And ASU freshman Mark Crumrine, a regular bike rider, admitted he didn’t know the laws concerning bicycles.

Police say people often aren’t aware that a moving violation such as running a red light or stop sign while bicycling could gain them the same points assessed to their driver’s license or against a future license as if they were driving an automobile.

“I would think hardly anybody realizes that they are subject to the same rules that apply to motor vehicles and the same penalties,” Yennie said.

But 68 bicyclists have had points assessed to their driver’s licenses in the past five years in the state. Most of those points were gained from people running stop signs, said Cydney DeModica, state Motor Vehicle Division public information officer.

State law doesn’t distinguish between a moving violation committed in a car or on a bike.

These offenders can attend any of the numerous state-regulated defensive-driving schools to avoid possible higher insurance rates.

“The biggest thing about bicycle safety is that is it grossly overlooked because people think it is a joke,” Ore said. “Police officers who cite for bicycle violations can almost count on verbal abuse. They think nobody enforces this.”

CAPTION: Tempe police Sgt. Don Yennie talks to some riders near Arisona State CAPTION: University about bicycle safety issues.

Edition: Final Chaser
Section: Valley & State
Page: B1

Record Number: pho62555868
Copyright (c) The Arizona Republic. All rights reserved. Reproduced with the permission of Gannett Co., Inc. by NewsBank, inc.

3 thoughts on “Do “points” apply to bicyclists?”

  1. pertaining to CA, from the “honk” column of the OC Register

    Q. What would be on a Department of Motor Vehicles driving record if someone had no license and got cited for not stopping at a stop sign when riding a bike? I read a Register story where a bicyclist got cited and it cost him $400.

    A. When a bicyclist is cited for an infraction, the offense can end up on a driver’s license, said Jan Mendoza, a DMV spokeswoman.

    “However, these citations are typically removed after it’s determined the infraction did not involve a motor vehicle,” she said. “No points are assigned for these violations. …

    “If a person is cited for bicycling DUI, the arrest or citation goes on a person’s driving record for three years but it is placed there without any sanctions or points against the person’s driver’s license.”

    Now, David, if the cited bicyclist didn’t have a driver’s license, like you talked about, an “X number” would be created; the record would be retained. The information would flow onto any new driver’s license.

    By the way …

    Tully Lehman – a spokesman for the Insurance Information Network of California said that your auto rates might go up with a drunk-while-bicycling citation.

  2. This is an archived email threat on the subject…
    (note it can be confusing because the formatting is lost– some of the responses were in-line)

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Richard Schweinsburg RSchweinsburg
    To: Ed Beighe ; Michael Sanders
    Cc: Matt Zoll
    Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 9:59 AM
    Subject: RE: Bicycle Diversion/License Points?

    In my opinion, I can’t see a reason why a person charged with a violation while on a bicycle would be prevented from the defensive driving diversion program. But since it does not entail any points, why would a person want to burn his only oportunity in a two year period by attending DDS to prevent a citation from being sent to MVD and recorded on the driving record when if allowed to be sent to MVD and recorded it would only show a bicycle violation to begin with?

    rich s

    —–Original Message—–
    From: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 9:30 AM
    To: Richard Schweinsburg; Michael Sanders
    Cc: Matt Zoll
    Subject: Re: Bicycle Diversion/License Points?

    Thank you so much. Bicyclist = no points.

    Would you be interested in giving us your opinion on whether a bicyclist is eligible for diversion? (perhaps this in not your baliwick?)
    28-3392 says that “A court… Shall allow an individual who is issued a citation for a civil traffic moving violation…” to attend.
    Certainly a bicyclist who has been cited fits this description.
    I see nothing there or in any of the 28-339x that would disallow a bicyclist. ?


    —– Original Message —–
    From: Richard Schweinsburg
    To: Michael Sanders ; Ed Beighe
    Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 8:40 AM
    Subject: RE: Bicycle Diversion/License Points?

    Ed and Mike, ARS 28-3306(A) states “The department may suspend or revoke the icense of a driver or require a licensee ….” The critical word is driver which is defined as “a person that drives or is in actual physical control of a vehicle.” and the vehicle definition excludes devices moved by human power” This eliminates bicycles and pedestrians from the point system.
    In addition Arizona Administrative Code R-17-4-404(B)(11) states”conviction or judgment of violating any other traffic regulation that governs a vehicle moving under its own power”. This again confirms by definition of vehicle that this excludes bicycles and pedestrians.

    Feel free to contact me if you have any further questions.

    Richard Schweinsburg
    Arizona MVD Criminal Justice Liaison
    Phone (602) 712-7677
    Fax (602) 712-3587

    —–Original Message—–
    From: Michael Sanders
    Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 3:49 PM
    To: Richard Schweinsburg
    Subject: FW: Bicycle Diversion/License Points?

    Richard: As a follow up to our phone conversation this morning I’m forwarding you this message from Ed Beighe in hopes that you can assist with answering his questions. He wants confirmation by “law/citation/rule/whatever” that the driver point system excludes bicyclists.
    Thank you,

    Michael N. Sanders, Senior Transportation Planner
    Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator
    Transportation Planning Division
    Arizona Department of Transportation
    206 S. 17th Ave., Mail Drop 310B
    Phoenix, AZ 85007

    —–Original Message—–
    From: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 2:37 PM
    To: Michael Sanders
    Subject: Re: Bicycle Diversion/License Points?

    Thanks for the speedy reply —

    well, no — the question is: because why?

    1) i can’t find anything in ARS that would either support or prohibit it. My guess is it is simply an administrative rule. Can you confirm? (the whole thing seems odd because I would think it would have to somehow appear in MVD’s R17-4-404. Driver Point System but I can’t anything that would exclude bicyclists.
    Note that I don’t have a problem with this, it makes perfect sense — though i would like to know the actual law/citation/rule/whatever.

    2) Moving on to the points being “necessary” in order to be eligible for D.D.School — I DID finally find it in their Administrative rules, “Section 7-205:Defensive Driver Program” (search on “points”), but again, nothing in ARS.
    This is just wrong. It appears that some rule-writer just made it up. Lawmakers can, and have made laws that apply to *motor* vehicle drivers — which clearly excludes bicyclists. They did not do so, the D.D. laws are for vehicle drivers.
    If a cited cyclist (that’s hard to say!) wishes to have his citation dismissed via the existing D.D.School he has every right to under ARS 28-3392 — but the Court’s Adminstrative Rules are arbitrarily blocking him.


    p.s. I have one thought that I don’t think is true because it involves spinning a rather incredible legal story, but perhaps someone has decided that these issues “by their nature can have no application” (ARS 28-812) to bicyclists. ?

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Michael Sanders
    To: Ed Beighe
    Cc: Coalition of Arizona Bicyclists (E-mail)
    Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 10:41 AM
    Subject: RE: Bicycle Diversion/License Points?

    Ed: I talked to Richard Schweinsburg, Criminal Justice Liaison at MVD. No, MVD does not assess points to bicyclists or pedestrians who have been cited for moving violations. Sounds like we need some legislation to get “bicycle driver diversion program”!

    —–Original Message—–
    From: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:29 PM
    To: Michael Sanders
    Subject: Bicycle Diversion/License Points?

    hi mike,

    Can you find out for certain if bicyclists are subject to points (on their motor vehicle license) for moving violations? Everybody I spoke to seems to think not — but i cannot find any basis for that — when I press them they don’t really know why that would be true.

    The outcome of that question supposedly has bearing on my original question, which was: Is a bicyclist who is cited for a moving violation eligible to attend Defensive Driving School in order to get the citation dismissed? My reading of the enabling statutes are that they would unequivocably be eligible, yet the guy from the DDS program, at the supreme court, thinks not.

    By way of background: Bill Lazenby asked me to look into drafting legislation to create a bicycle diversion class, possibly by modeling it after the diversion option for motorists, the Defensive Driver School/Program. The enabling legislation gives responsibility for it’s creation and regulation to the Supreme Court, it looked to me like there was no reason it needs to be motorist-specific. Though it would appear that that is what has been implemented.

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Hise, Michael
    To: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 5:14 PM
    Subject: RE: Tempe’s Bicycle Diversion Program

    To my knowledge, points are limited to violations while operating a motor vehicle. However, don’t quote me, since the Motor Vehicle Division is the agency that would be in charge of point assessment for driver records.

    To get first-hand information, I recommend that you address your questions directly with MVD. I’m not sure who, specifically, can help you, but their main number is (602) 255-0072.

    Mike Hise
    Defensive Driving Specialist
    Arizona Supreme Court

    —–Original Message—–
    From: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 5:04 PM
    To: Hise, Michael
    Subject: Re: Tempe’s Bicycle Diversion Program

    Thank you for putting me in touch with Ms. DuBois, she had all the info for Tempe.

    One thing, maybe you could clear up for me regarding the eligibility for DDP — you said:

    “Bicycle violations (a person riding a bike who gets a citation) are not supposed to have points assessed by MVD.”

    Since bicyclists aren’t required have a license, this makes perfect sense to me. But…
    Can you tell me why it would be true that a bicyclist cannot be assessed points? In other words, after scouring ARS and the administrative code that deals with driver points (R17-4-404. Driver Point System), i can’t see any exclusion. Bicyclists are “subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle”, it would logically follow that they are subject to the same penalties, unless some exclusion were provided.

    “Only violations that carry points (moving violations involving a motor vehicle) are eligible for DDP”

    As a practical matter, I can see that drivers would want to choose DDP in order to avoid points, but I don’t see anything in 28-3392 that limits eligibility by points. So it would still seem to me that (theoretically anyway) bicyclists would be eligible for DDP. No?


    —– Original Message —–
    From: Hise, Michael
    To: Ed Beighe
    Cc: DDrive
    Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 10:07 AM
    Subject: RE: Tempe’s Bicycle Diversion Program

    Mr. Beighe:

    Please see my responses in bold italics next to your questions in your message below:

    Mike Hise
    Defensive Driving Specialist
    Arizona Supreme Court
    (602) 364-1526

    —–Original Message—–
    From: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 3:15 PM
    To: DDrive
    Subject: Fw: Tempe’s Bicycle Diversion Program

    Dear Ddrive,

    I have been asked by the The Coalition of Arizona Bicyclists to look into what would be involved in setting up a (presumably statewide) bicycle diversion school.
    Your website has been very helpful, and i have read the enabling ARS statutes — but now i have several questions.
    Perhaps you can refer me to the appropriate person? Response: the best person to contact is Jennifer DuBois. She is a Court Supervisor at the Tempe Municipal Court. Her telephone number is (480) 350-8455.

    – The city court of Tempe has a bicycle diversion class, BDC, Can you tell me, what enables their program — I mean, is it under the auspices of the Supreme Court’s Defensive Driving School? or is it something else entirely? I have not been able reach anyone specifically with knowledge of their program, if you have a contact please pass this along. Response: I spoke with a Deputy Court Administator at the Tempe Court. The program is an interagency program operated by the Tempe Municipal Court through ASU. The website you accessed clearly states the basics of the program. However, it is not affiliated with the Supreme Court’s Defensive Driving Program (DDP).

    – There appears to be nothing precluding the notion of having a bicycle diversion class (for offending cyclists). Is there? Or would legislative changes be required, in you opinion? Response: Unfortunately, I am not in a position to provide you with a legal opinion on this. Perhaps Ms. Dubois at the Tempe Court has some information on how they started their program and you can ask her when you speak with her. If I find out anything additional on this, I’ll get back to you.

    – On your list of acceptable violation codes,, the “bike rules” (28-811 through 28-816, only 815D is listed and that only affects vehicles) are missing — why would that be? Response: ARS § 28-3392(A)(1) establishes what charges are eligible for DDP. It states, “A court shall allow an individual who is issued a citation for a civil traffic moving violation pursuant to chapter 3, articles 2 through 15 of this title, or a local civil traffic ordinance relating to the same subject matter to attend a defensive driving school for the purposes provided in this article.” ARS § 28-815D pertains to someone operating a motor vehicle in a bike path–not someone who is riding a bike. Bicycle violations (a person riding a bike who gets a citation) are not supposed to have points assessed by MVD. Only violations that carry points (moving violations involving a motor vehicle) are eligible for DDP. I hope this information is helpful to you!

    Thank you,

    Ed Beighe

    Background info —
    Defensive Driving School:

    The mechanism to divert drivers committing common traffic offenses is referred to as Defensive Driving School (DDS) in the statutes, § 28-3391 through 3399.
    This is all pretty straightforward/brief because it simply directs the The Arizona Supreme Court to set up the program.
    There is a lot of info at their website: , including an *extensive* set of adminstrative rules (+ 100 pages!) which cover all manner of detail regarding oversight of schools — which are privately run and overseen by the court.

    Nothing in the statues or even the administrative rules preclude a bicycle diversion program. The only hangup is that the Supreme Court (well the DDS oversight guys) controls the curriculum.

    The Tempe City court has a formal bicycle diversion course:
    It is run by ASU’s P.D.
    I am not sure how that was set up, i will try to find out.
    One strange thing about it is, according to the website, on violators of “bike laws” are eligible! E.g. a bicyclist cited for running a stop sign would not be eligible.


    Arizona Administrative Code, R17-4-404. Driver Point System :

  3. every now and then, i check into this. I stumbled onto a web page on azcourt dealing with the ATTC; It had an email contact so I gave that a spin:

    From: “Mathes, Marretta”
    To: ‘Ed Beighe’
    Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 3:35 PM

    That’s a very good idea. Thank you for the suggestion. Currently, each law enforcement agency has an ATTC that is catered to the individual agency, while taking into account that they must follow the guidelines set forth on the approved ATTC located in the Arizona Rules of Court.

    I’m not sure when the Supreme Court will look at the version in the Rules of Court for revisions, but when they do, I will be sure to put the suggestion out there. I’ll also suggest it to law enforcement agencies that are still developing their citations when they submit them to me for approval. Thanks again and have a great weekend!

    Marretta Mathes

    From: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 3:26 PM
    To: Mathes, Marretta

    hey if there’s some sort of “suggestion box” i would like to offer that this information SHOULD be included on the generic ATTC.
    The reason is this: we have no way to track the types of citations issued to bicyclists; e.g. (an actual example; which was tied to some proposed legislation involving stop signs) we requested Tuscon PD how many stop sign violations were issued to bicyclists within some time period and their answer was “we have no idea”.

    From: “Mathes, Marretta”
    To: ‘Ed Beighe’
    Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 12:57 PM

    Hi Ed,

    I got in touch with the MVD and Court liaison, and she informed me that points are NOT assessed to bicycle violations. Thanks,

    Marretta Mathes

    From: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 3:05 PM
    To: Mathes, Marretta

    no rush.

    From: “Mathes, Marretta”
    To: ‘Ed Beighe’
    Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 12:25 PM

    Hi Ed,

    I am double checking on this now and will get back to you within the next day or so. Thanks.

    From: Ed Beighe
    Sent: Monday, February 02, 2015 3:37 PM
    To: Mathes, Marretta

    I thought maybe you could shed some light:
    I’ve been trying for some time to find out for sure if bicyclists in Arizona who commit moving violations will have points assessed against their driver license (assuming they have one, a DL is not even required to ride a bike).
    Two MVD people essentially told me conflicting stories.

    I noticed that the generic ATTC has no place to indicate if the infraction was committed by a bicyclist vs. a motorist (nor does the court abstract that gets transmitted to MVD); other states tend to have a check-box for this information.

    Some court clerks I’ve chatted with have told me that they don’t transmit abstracts when they know the violation was a bicyclist — but that seems rather hit-and-miss and informal.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *