If you need an official driving record for employment purposes or information regarding points on your license or license status, you can order driving records directly from the DMV.
However, if you are looking for publicly available driving history information such as convictions, court records, or tickets, please continue below and our partner TruthFinder may serve your needs.
Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1968, which includes the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), to secure equal housing opportunities regardless of race, creed, or national origin. This same period of history also saw the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Civil Rights Act”) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. More Information Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) It is the public policy of this state that all persons, except those persons incarcerated in state or local correctional facilities, are entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government and the official acts of those who represent them as public officials and public employees, consistent with the Freedom of. 104–287, § 1(1), in introductory provisions, substituted “titles I and IV of the Anti Car Theft Act of 1992, the Automobile Information Disclosure Act (15 U.S.C. 1231 et seq.), the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), and chapters 301, 305, and 321–331 of title 49” for “the Automobile Information Disclosure Act, the Motor.
Search Driving History & More
Instantly access all types of publicly available information in one place in just a few seconds.Search almost anyone at any time with this background check subscription service to obtain information on:
- Convictions, court records, and in many cases tickets
- Unlimited access to public records
Disclaimer: Truth Finder cannot be used for employment or tenant screening. Truth Finder is not a consumer reporting agency as defined by the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Driving records can be filled with unfamiliar terms. Find definitions to these driving record-related terms in our driving record glossary.
Driving Record Terms: A—G
Certified Driving Record
A certified driving record is issued, confirmed, and stamped by your state's motor vehicle management agency, and in most cases, cannot be obtained online. A certified driving record can legally be used to verify your driving record for jobs, insurance quotes, and court cases.
See: Driving Record; Non-Certified Driving Record
Citation
A citation is a form requiring or summoning you to either go to court or pay a fine for charges law enforcement has brought against you.
See: Failure to Appear in Court; Infraction
Conviction
A conviction occurs when a judge or jury finds you guilty of a criminal charge.
See: Expunge
Driver's License
A driver's license is an official, government-issued document proving your legal right to drive.
Driver's License Check
A driver's license check is a search you can perform to determine if your license is valid or suspended.
See: Points; Restrictions; Revocation; Suspension
Driving Record
Your driving record includes your vehicle's registration status, description, and a compilation of traffic-related offenses. A certified driving record and non-certified driving record will contain the same information, though a non-certified driving record is not legally admissible for jobs, court cases, or insurance purposes.
Depending on which state you live in, “driving records' may be referred to by different names, including:
- Driver records.
- Motor vehicle records (MVR).
- Vehicle records.
- Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) records.
- Driver history records.
- Driving history reports.
- Traffic records.
- Driver's license records.
- Driving record abstracts.
- Licensed driver records.
- Driver history abstracts.
- Driver record reports.
Drivers Action Act Mt.
See: Certified Driving Record; Expunge; Non-Certified Driving Record; Points
DUI/DWI
DUI stands for “driving under the influence'; DWI stands for 'driving while intoxicated. This is a misdemeanor or felony charge stemming from an arrest where you were suspected of driving with an illegal level of drugs or alcohol in your system. Use of the term varies by state.
See: Felony; Misdemeanor; Traffic Accident
Endorsement
Endorsements on your license give you legal permission to operate specialized vehicles like buses, trailers, and hazardous material transporters.
See: Restrictions
Expunge
To expunge a conviction from your driving record is to make it publicly inaccessible. There is usually a time period and/or petition process you must go through to request an expungement.
See: Driving Record; Felony; Misdemeanor
Failure to Appear in Court
A “failure to appear' is a charge that could be classified as either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the severity of your charges. If you fail to appear in court on the day appointed to your case, you could face increased fines or even arrest. This incident will show on your driving record until you fulfill your responsibility to the court.
See: Citation; Felony; Misdemeanor
Felony
A felony is a the most serious type of crime and is punishable by hefty fees, lengthy prison sentences or, in some states, death. Many serious traffic violations are felonies.
See: Expunge; Misdemeanor
Driving Record Terms: H—R
Infraction
An infraction is a minor offense that can be resolved by paying a fine to the state. Receiving a ticket for parking in a “no parking' zone would be an example of an infraction.
Misdemeanor
A misdemeanor is a classification of crimes that are typically less severe than felonies. Depending on your state's laws, several traffic violations may be classified as misdemeanors.
See: Expunge; Felony
Moving Violation
A moving violation is classified by traffic laws being broken by vehicles in motion. Some examples include speeding, running a red light, and DUI.
See: DUI; Infraction; Non-Moving Violation
Non-Certified Driving Record
A non-certified driving recordis an unofficial copy of your driving history, lacking an official stamp from your state motor vehicle agency. Its main purpose is for personal review and is usually not accepted as a verifiable record for jobs, insurance quotes, and court cases. Many state motor vehicle agencies allow you to access your non-certified driving record online.
See: Certified Driving Record; Driving Record
Non-Moving Violation
A non-moving violation is classified by traffic laws being broken by stationary vehicles. Most parking tickets are non-moving violations.
See: Infraction; Moving Violation
Points
In states that have a driver's license point system, points are a representation of the severity and accumulation of traffic violations on your driving record. More serious offenses receive more points, and with enough points your license could even be suspended.
See: Driver's License Check; Driving Record; Revocation; Suspension
Restrictions
Restrictionsrefer to codes that can be printed on your license to limit certain driving privileges.
Some examples include:
- Daytime driving only.
- Needs to wear corrective lenses (glasses).
AND - Dates for when new drivers are allowed to drive other people.
See: Endorsements
Revocation
A driver's license revocation is the termination of your driver's license. Once you are eligible, you must reapply for a new driver's license before legally operating a vehicle.
See: Driver's License Check; Points; Suspension
Driving Record Terms: S—Z
Suspension
A suspension of your driver's license is a temporary complete restriction of your driving privileges. Your full driving privileges are typically restored after meeting specific criteria determined by the offense which caused the suspension.
See: Driver's License Check; Points; Revocation
Traffic Accident
A traffic accidentis an incident involving motorized vehicles where a vehicle or vehicles or property are damaged and/or people are injured or killed.
See: DUI
The Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994 (also referred to as the 'DPPA'), Title XXX of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, is a United States federal statute governing the privacy and disclosure of personal information gathered by stateDepartments of Motor Vehicles.
The law was passed in 1994. It was introduced by Democratic Rep. Jim Moran of Virginia in 1992, after an increase in some opponents of abortion using public driving license databases to track down and harass abortion providers and patients. Prominent among such cases was physician Susan Wicklund, who faced protests and harassment including her house being picketed for a month.[1] The law is currently codified at Chapter 123 of Title 18 of the United States Code.[2]
Substantive provisions of the act[edit]
The statute prohibits the disclosure of personal information (as defined in 18 U.S.C.§ 2725) without the express consent of the person to whom such information applies, with the exception of certain circumstances set forth in 18 U.S.C.§ 2721. These rules apply to Departments of Motor Vehicles as well as other 'authorized recipient[s] of personal information', and imposes record-keeping requirements on those 'authorized recipients'.
The permissible uses are:[3]
- For any government agency to carry out its functions
- For use in connection with 'matters of motor vehicle or driver safety and theft', including
- disclosure 'in connection with matters of motor vehicle or driver safety and theft, motor vehicle emissions, motor vehicle product alterations, recalls, or advisories, performance monitoring of motor vehicles and dealers by motor vehicle manufacturers'
- removal of non-owner records from the original owner records of motor vehicle manufacturers to carry out the purposes of the Automobile Information Disclosure Act, the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Saving Act, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, the Anti-Car Theft Act of 1992, and the Clean Air Act
- For use in the normal course of business by a legitimate business or its agents, employees, or contractors, but only to:
- verify the accuracy of personal information
- correct information
- For use in connection with any matter before a court or arbitration proceeding.
- For producing statistical reports and other research, provided that personal information is not published.
- For use by insurance companies.
- For providing notice to owners of towed vehicles.
- For use by licensed private investigation agencies, for a permitted DPPA use.
- For use by employers to verify commercial driver information as required by U.S. Code Title 49, subtitle VI, chapter 313.
- For use by private toll transportation facilities.
- For response to requests from motor vehicle departments.
- For the bulk distribution of surveys, marketing materials, or solicitations (opt-in only).
- When written consent of the individual is provided.
- For other uses specifically authorized by state laws.
The act also makes it illegal to obtain drivers' information for unlawful purposes or to make false representations to obtain such information.[4] The act establishes criminal fines for noncompliance,[5] and establishes a civil cause of action for drivers against those who unlawfully obtain their information.[6]
Legislative history[edit]
After Rebecca Schaeffer was murdered in 1989 by Robert John Bardo who found her address by a private detective agency's use of DMV records, the easy availability of personal information from the DMV was called into question.[7]
The bill was introduced simultaneously during the 103rd United States Congress in the House of Representatives (as H.R. 3365[8]) and the Senate (as S. 1589[9]) on 26 October 1993. The text of the bill was incorporated into H.R. 3355, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which was eventually signed by PresidentBill Clinton as part of Public Law 103–322 on 13 September 1994.[10]
The statute's constitutionality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court against a Tenth Amendment challenge in Reno v. Condon.[11]
Jurisprudence[edit]
[citation needed]
With the emergence of new-age computing technology and devices in the early 2000s came collection, processing, aggregation, correlation, and redisclosure of user's data. Websites, 3rd party advertising, and tracking firms began using mechanisms that violated a user's privacy. While 'online' data identifying the user's computing technology was helpful, such data benefit was limited. Advertising entities had a millisecond while users were online to market their products; moreover, in order to 'track' consumers by obtaining computing device data, HTML cookies were added to their devices.[12] Since most computers and users deleted any cookies when they shut down their devices, this tracking mechanism failed to provide long-term tracking. What was needed was a means to associate 'online' data activities with 'offline' data, referencing personal information contained in public records, (Today, the objective is to associate 'online' data with 'offline' data and Biometrics, the new 'Holy Grail' of advertising data). The most accurate source of offline data and the cheapest was motor vehicle records maintained by the DMVs.
Since computer technology was progressing rapidly, federal and state laws had failed to be proactive, a risk to society of ungoverned technology. As such, litigation for violations was relatively non-existent. A new method to litigate Federal privacy cases was needed to protect the hundreds of millions of people violated by unauthorized tracking user's activities “Online” and “Offline” (public records). This was a formidable task since no law firms had litigated privacy cases involving the computer technology inherent within the exchange of user data between third-party affiliated entities, thus there was no case precedent, no 'blueprint' to follow. Earlier cases, such as the double-click 'cookie' case in 2001, had relied on using a wiretap statute, the Electronic Communication Privacy Act ('ECPA'). While a plausible allegation, it was a weak allegation since the website user had granted such permissible use within the website's term of service ('TOS').
In Kehoe v. Fidelity Federal Bank and Trust, James Kehoe sued Fidelity Bank for purchasing hundreds of thousands of motor vehicle records from the state of Florida in violation of the federal Drivers Privacy Protection Act. Fidelity Bank had purchased 565,600 names and addresses from the Florida motor vehicles department from June 2000 – 2003. This information was sold for pennies—literally, Fidelity was able to obtain the information for only $5,656. Fidelity used the information to target residents of Palm Beach, Martin, and Broward Counties for car loan solicitations. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida ruled in June 2004 that James Kehoe needed to demonstrate actual damages before obtaining any monetary recovery under the DPPA. The Court relied upon the recently decided Doe v. Chao and statutory construction rules to rule that the DPPA's liquidated damages do not accrue to a plaintiff unless he can show actual damages. Kehoe appealed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals which ruled: '...The statute at issue is the Driver's Privacy Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2721, et seq. ('DPPA'). Having considered the plain text of the statute, we conclude that a plaintiff need not prove actual damages to recover liquidated damages for a violation of the DPPA. Since the district court reached a contrary conclusion, we reverse and remand'. Kehoe v. Fidelity Federal Bank & Trust, 421 F. 3d 1209 (11th Cir. 2005), cert. denied.
While the Kehoe case was on appeal to the 11th circuit, then to SCOTUS, the Law Offices of Joseph Malley P.C. began an extensive freedom of information requests to all state DMVs, requesting any and all documents on persons and companies obtaining the DMV database in bulk, referencing the obtainment of all DMV records and periodic updates. The research and followup with all state DMVs would take more than a year. The firm was able to ID 36 State DMVs that were selling motor vehicle records in bulk. An analysis then was required of all of the people and entities obtaining the data to determine if it appeared they had a DPPA permissible use as required by the DPPA. Extensive follow-up discussions with all DMV officials were required to obtain additional information. Gambling on the outcome of the SCOTUS ruling, the extensive research turned out not to be in vain. Once SCOTUS denied writ on the Kehoe case, permitting the 11th circuit ruling to stand that actual damages were not required and an individual could choose to accept actual or statutory damages, the precedent was set. The Malley Firm was prepared to file and began filing an extensive amount of Federal Privacy Litigation. The Federal Class Actions involving violations of the Driver's Privacy Protection Act ('DPPA'), 18 U.S.C. § 2721, et seq, filed by the Law Offices of Joseph H. Malley P.C. in Texas, Florida, Missouri, and Arkansas, involving about 4-500 companies, include the following:
1. Sharon Taylor et al. v. Acxiom Corporation et al., 2:07-cv-0001, (E.D. Tex. 2007);2. Sharon Taylor et al. v. ACS State & Local Solutions, Inc. et al., 2:07-cv-0013, (E.D. Tex. 2007); 3. Sharon Taylor et al. v. Texas Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company et al., 2:07-cv-0014, (E.D. Tex. 2007);4. Sharon Taylor et al. v. Safeway Inc. et al., 2:07-cv-0017, (E.D. Tex. 2007);5. Sharon Taylor et al. v. Biometric Access Company et al., 2:07-cv-0018, (E.D. Tex. 2007);6. Sharon Taylor et al. v. Freeman Publishers Inc., 2:07-cv-0410, et al., (E.D. Tex. 2007);7. Richard Fresco v. R.L. Polk., No. 09-13344 (11th Cir. 2010), (Fresco II'- Intervention);8. Cook v. ACS State & Local Solutions, Inc. 663 F.3d 989 (10th Cir. 2011);9. Haney v. Recall Center, No. 10-cv-04003 (W.D. Ark. May 9, 2012) (certified class action);10. Doe et al. v. Compact Information Systems Inc. et al., 3:13cv05013MBH, (N.D. Tex. 2013);11. Cross v. Blank, Adv. No.: 9:15ap00926FMD, (M.D. Fla. 2015);12. Arthur Lopez v. Cross-Sell et al., 3:16-cv-02009-K, (N.D. Tex. 2016); 13. Laning et al. v. National Recall & Data Services Inc. et al., 3:16-cv-02358-B (N.D. Tex. 2016); and 14. Lopez v. Herring, Civil Action No. 3:16-CV-02663-B, (N.D. Tex. 2017).
http://www.fox13news.com/news/local-news/216818850-storyhttp://www.fox10tv.com/story/36851521/drivers-license-info-sold-fox-news-investigation-finds Has DMV Violated the Drivers' Privacy Protection Act and Your Security? -https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/.../interview-privacy-class-action-lawsuit-driv...Cross-Sell Class Action Says DMV Records Illegally Sold
References[edit]
- ^Miller, Michael W. (August 25, 1992). 'Information Age: Debate Mounts Over Disclosure Of Driver Data'. Wall Street Journal.
- ^18 U.S.C.§§ 2721–2725
- ^18 U.S.C.§ 2721
- ^18 U.S.C.§ 2722
- ^18 U.S.C.§ 2723
- ^18 U.S.C.§ 2724
- ^'Addresses at DMV Remain Accessible : Privacy: New rules were written to keep information confidential. Critics say there are too many loopholes'. Los Angeles Times. 1991-08-19. Retrieved 2020-11-18.
- ^Bill details of H.R. 3365 from THOMAS
- ^Bill details of S. 1589 from THOMAS
- ^Legislative notes on the Driver's Privacy Protection Act, courtesy of the Legal Information Institute
- ^528 U.S. 141 (2000)
- ^Englehardt, Steven; Narayanan, Arvind (2016-10-24). 'Online Tracking: A 1-million-site Measurement and Analysis'. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. CCS '16. Vienna, Austria: Association for Computing Machinery: 1388–1401. doi:10.1145/2976749.2978313. ISBN978-1-4503-4139-4.
Drivers Action Act Mt Vernon
External links[edit]
- Information on the DPPA at the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
Drivers Action Act Mtv
