Requirement to Surrender Disabled Placard/Plates

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

I understand that disabled placards/plates need to be surrendered within 60 days of the death of the placard/plate holder, but I can't find anything in the law that requires the surrender of the placard/plates when somebody recovers their mobility sufficiently that they no longer require it, nor would they qualify if attempting to obtain one for the first time. Am I missing something? Does someone else know of a law that would require the surrender of the placard/plates upon the recovery of the plate holder?

ETA: By "recovery", I'm talking about a recovery that is pretty close to the wheel-chair bound person jumping up and shouting "It's a miracle!". It's that drastic of a recovery, and yes, it's a real situation.

 

[adjusterjack]

Read section D of the application:

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/aebb95cd-c20a-49bd-bc13-dd74120044fc/reg195.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

While there doesn't seem to be a requirement for turning it in after being healed, the penalties are pretty severe for "displaying with fraudulent intent" which is what somebody would be doing if he/she was no longer disabled and was still displaying the placard or plates and using the reserved spaces.

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

I understand that disabled placards/plates need to be surrendered within 60 days of the death of the placard/plate holder, but I can't find anything in the law that requires the surrender of the placard/plates when somebody recovers their mobility sufficiently that they no longer require it, nor would they qualify if attempting to obtain one for the first time. Am I missing something? Does someone else know of a law that would require the surrender of the placard/plates upon the recovery of the plate holder?

ETA: By "recovery", I'm talking about a recovery that is pretty close to the wheel-chair bound person jumping up and shouting "It's a miracle!". It's that drastic of a recovery, and yes, it's a real situation.

The placards/plates expire. I assume that the disabled person would need to reapply with the same proofs that were required with the original application (medical certifications) - although it appears that renewal is automatic for those with "permanent" disabilities who have been issued permanent placards/plates.

Did the wheelchair-bound person who experienced the miracle recovery have a permanent placard/plate? If so, then I agree with adjusterjack that it probably would be penalties that would compel the no-longer-disabled person to surrender the no-longer-needed placard/plates.

Here is the link I found: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr07

 

[Zigner]

The placards/plates expire. I assume that the disabled person would need to reapply with the same proofs that were required with the original application (medical certifications) - although it appears that renewal is automatic for those with "permanent" disabilities who have been issued permanent placards/plates.

Did the wheelchair-bound person who experienced the miracle recovery have a permanent placard/plate? If so, then I agree with adjusterjack that it probably would be penalties that would compel the no-longer-disabled person to surrender the no-longer-needed placard/plates.

Here is the link I found: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffvr07

We're talking about the permanent plates. They "expire", but new ones with a new expiration date are automatically sent without recertification being required.

As to "fraudulent intent", once the placard/plates are issued, the person is authorized to use them. That authorization doesn't expire when the person is healed (which is my point.) Fraudulent intent seems to apply to a person who uses a placard/plate that is not issued to them.

 

[adjusterjack]

Here are the relevant statutes:

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-4461.html

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-4463.html

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-22511-6.html

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-22511-55.html

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-22511-59.html

Seems like there are enough checks and balances so that the "healed" person wouldn't get away with it for too long.

By the way, how do you make the links blue (live) like in your posts?

 

[quincy]

By the way, how do you make the links blue (live) like in your posts?

Ask someone this question off the board. Spammers should not have access and there should be no commercial links. Thanks.

I am still searching for something other than penalties that would require someone to surrender permanent plates/placards if no longer permanently disabled but have found nothing yet. I agree that it would be difficult to prove fraudulent intent if the renewal is automatic. I guess your state does not believe in miracles.

 

[Zigner]

I want to start by thanking you for the time to hunt these down and list them. I've found each of them, and they do not apply to the situation for which I'm inquiring as none of them address the matter of a person that was properly issued a permanent placard in the past, but has now recovered from the condition that qualified the person. Please keep in mind that the permanent placard in question was PROPERLY issued approx 6-7 years ago.

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-4461.html

4461 doesn't apply. It relates to lending a placard out and/or using a placard that wasn't issued to you.

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-4463.html

4463 doesn't apply. It relates to obtaining the placard by fraudulent means (the placard in question was properly issued) and forged/counterfeit placards.

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-22511-6.html

22511.6 doesn't apply. It relates to the DMV revoking a placard for various reasons, such as it being fraudulently obtained, fees not being paid, the placard owner being deceased, etc. I will say that (3) comes the closest as it allows for the DMV to revoke the placard "When the placard could have been refused when last issued or renewed", but it does not put any requirement on the placard holder to surrender the placard without being notified to do so by the DMV, nor does it put any requirement on the plate holder to notify the DMV in the event that they have recovered. Furthermore, recertification is not required when a renewal permanent placard is sent by the DMV every two years.

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-22511-55.html

22511.55 doesn't apply. It relates to the issuance of the placard (remember, the placard in question was properly applied for and issued.)

http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/vehicle-code/veh-sect-22511-59.html

22511.59 doesn't apply. It relates to the issuance of temporary placard. The placard in question is a permanent disability placard.



So...
I'm still trying to figure out if California law requires the placard holder to voluntarily surrender their properly issued permanent placard upon recovery from the condition that qualified them for the placard at the time of issuance.

 

[adjusterjack]

So...
I'm still trying to figure out if California law requires the placard holder to voluntarily surrender their properly issued permanent placard upon recovery from the condition that qualified them for the placard at the time of issuance.

I got those statute numbers from the DMV website but haven't found anything else online to answer the question.

You might have to contact the agency (DMV?) that issues them and see if they can point you to chapter and verse though I'm guessing they'll tell you yes, you do have to turn them in, but won't be able to cite you any authority for that opinion.

If you don't mind my asking, why is this an issue for you?

 

[TheGeekess]

22511.6 doesn't apply. It relates to the DMV revoking a placard for various reasons, such as it being fraudulently obtained, fees not being paid, the placard owner being deceased, etc. I will say that (3) comes the closest as it allows for the DMV to revoke the placard "When the placard could have been refused when last issued or renewed", but it does not put any requirement on the placard holder to surrender the placard without being notified to do so by the DMV, nor does it put any requirement on the plate holder to notify the DMV in the event that they have recovered. Furthermore, recertification is not required when a renewal permanent placard is sent by the DMV every two years.



So...
I'm still trying to figure out if California law requires the placard holder to voluntarily surrender their properly issued permanent placard upon recovery from the condition that qualified them for the placard at the time of issuance.

From what that reads, when the next renewed placard comes in, you take it back and tell them 'No thank you, not needed anymore.'

(I'd ask you what the DMV said when you called them and asked them your question, but then, you ARE on the Left Coast, where your state and local governments can't afford to keep services available for their citizens, but have the money to protect 'endangered' species.)

 

[quincy]

From what that reads, when the next renewed placard comes in, you take it back and tell them 'No thank you, not needed anymore.'

(I'd ask you what the DMV said when you called them and asked them your question, but then, you ARE on the Left Coast, where your state and local governments can't afford to keep services available for their citizens, but have the money to protect 'endangered' species.)

I read somewhere when researching Zigner's question that, in California, there is one placard/plate issued for every 8.8 drivers in the state* (and I personally think that the .8 driver deserves one ).

In Michigan, the state enacted a law that allows for cities to charge even those with disabled placards or plates for metered parking. Although spaces are still designated for the disabled, the elimination of free parking worked to reduce the number of placard applications by approximately 90%.* No free parking, no desire to have a disabled plate apparently.




*Although I made note of what I read, I forgot to make note of the sources and therefore do not guarantee accuracy

 

[Zigner]

From what that reads, when the next renewed placard comes in, you take it back and tell them 'No thank you, not needed anymore.'

(I'd ask you what the DMV said when you called them and asked them your question, but then, you ARE on the Left Coast, where your state and local governments can't afford to keep services available for their citizens, but have the money to protect 'endangered' species.)

Actually, that section talks about if the DMV could have refused to issue it.

 

[Zigner]

I read somewhere when researching Zigner's question that, in California, there is one placard/plate issued for every 8.8 drivers in the state* (and I personally think that the .8 driver deserves one ).

In Michigan, the state enacted a law that allows for cities to charge even those with disabled placards or plates for metered parking. Although spaces are still designated for the disabled, the elimination of free parking worked to reduce the number of placard applications by approximately 90%.* No free parking, no desire to have a disabled plate apparently.




*Although I made note of what I read, I forgot to make note of the sources and therefore do not guarantee accuracy

Anecdotally, many people I speak to aren't even aware of the free meter parking (or the fact that green curbs [time limited parking] don't apply, nor do areas restricted to "permit parking" on neighborhood streets.)