Ignition Interlock Violation Lawyer

The Registry takes a zero-tolerance approach to ignition interlock violations. Registry Hearing Officers regularly impose 10-year license suspensions for even the most minor of interlock violations and infractions. However, not all reported smart start violations are valid. Sometimes the IID will register a violation which was not caused by the operator and there is a legitimate explanation for it. If you have been accused of an intoxalock violation, you should contact a lawyer. These explanations for Massachusetts ignition interlock violations can often save an interlock user from a 10-year IVO license suspension.

Ignition Interlock Violation Examples

Circumvention, the smart start violation occurred during the installation of the interlock and it was not the customer’s fault.

The violation was caused by the ignition interlock unit. The unit was replaced, and the issue was resolved.

The interlock handset briefly disconnected from the connecting cord. A Rolling Re-test was requested by the device, and a passing sample was administered.

Notations on the client’s account indicate that the vehicle was in the possession of a mechanic for repair.

The client disconnected the head unit through the improper sequence, resulting in a Circumvention headset disconnect violation.

The violation occurred during the monitoring service of the interlock and was not caused by the actions of the client.

The interlock handset briefly disconnected from the connecting cord. A Rolling Re-test was requested by the device, and a passing sample was administered.

Log data indicates that the vehicle’s battery was dead.

The interlock violation was caused by a voltage discrepancy in the vehicle, detected by the interlock unit.

The log data from the interlock device indicates that the client passed a Rolling Re-test. The device logged a skipped test in error. Additionally, the device logged circumvention 1 minute after the Missed Rolling Re-test. Both of these events were a result of a unit issue. The unit was serviced and the issue was resolved.

The violations were recorded when the Interlock device failed calibration.

The missed rolling re-tests were a result of client being newly installed on the same date. The device breath volume was lowered to address the issue.

Missed Rolling Re-tests, the interlock rolling re-tests did not prompt the client due to a vehicle low voltage or connection issue between device and vehicle.

The Request for the Rolling Re-test occurred at the same time the vehicle engine was turned off.

Missed Rolling Re-test, the device entered into a Rolling Re-test window when the ignition of the vehicle was turned to the off position.

Missed Rolling Re-test, violation due to inexperience, new client.

The Ignition Interlock Device failed calibration at the subsequent lockout service.

Missed Rolling Re-test, the interlock failed to prompt the client that a Rolling Re-test was requested. The client could not provide the Rolling Re-test.

Missed Rolling Re-test, the Interlock initialized the Rolling Re-test after the vehicle’s ignition was turned to the off position, due to voltage issue with the vehicle.

The device did not prompt for the Rolling Re-test due to vehicle voltage issue encountered by the interlock.

Missed Rolling Re-test, the Interlock initialized the Rolling Re-test after the vehicle’s ignition was turned to the off position, due to voltage issue with the vehicle.

Missed Rolling Re-test, the violation was caused by an unknown fault, with the interlock or the vehicle voltage. The unit was replaced to address the issue.

The client completed the Rolling Re-test within the Rolling Re-test window, however the unit experienced a voltage discrepancy, and logged the Missed Rolling Re-test in error.

Failed Start-up Test, the interlock fuel cell was determined to be out of range.

The device calibrated out of range when the device was tested.

The client encountered a handset unit malfunction which prevented her from providing a breath sample for the rolling test. The client returned to the service center and the issue was confirmed to be a unit issue. The unit was replaced and the lockout fee for skipped running tests was discounted.

Save your License with an Ignition Interlock Violation Lawyer

I have been defending clients from ignition interlock violations since the Massachusetts ignition interlock law was enacted on January 1, 2006 and these are a few excerpts from actual ignition interlock violation cases which my law office has handled. I have studied the interlock device inside and out. I thoroughly researched and investigated the alleged violations and these are examples of the actual explanations which I have obtained from the customer’s ignition interlock service provider.

These examples demonstrate that not every reported smart start violation is legitimate. There may be valid reasons for missed rolling re-tests, failed rolling retests, and alleged circumvention. Given the high stakes and the complexity of the law, science, and RMV regulations, legal representation is absolutely critical these ignition interlock violation cases.