Stoisits: Driver identification – unjust punishment of car drivers

Driver identification – unjust punishment of car drivers

ORF-Series "Bürgeranwalt" (“Advocate for People”) – Broadcast of February 4th, 2009

The broadcast „Bürgeranwalt“ on 7 February 2009 was dedicated to the regular complaints of car drivers in connection with driver identification.

The married couple B. is carrying on a business in Upper Austria. Whilst driving in Vienna Mr. B. by mistake used a bus lane in Wien-Döbling. As a result, his wife as the car owner, received a fixed penalty notice. In a letter Mr. B. lodged an objection against it and stated that he himself had been driving the car at that time. Eventually he nevertheless paid the penalty in the amount of 56 Euros and thought that this would be the end of the matter. In fact, three months later Mrs. B. received a request for driver identification. She did not fill in the form as the penalty for driving in the bus lane had already been paid by her husband. Subsequently the Federal Police Headquarter Vienna imposed a penalty of 70 Euros on Mrs B.

In the broadcast the Federal Police Headquarter Vienna took the view that Mrs B. should have filled in the request for driver identification. Mr B.’s letter was invalid as an objection and the proper procedure could only commence with the request for driver identification. For Ombudsperson Terezija Stoisits this formalistic approach of the au-thorities is incomprehensible: „Naturally Mr B. has to pay a penalty for driving in the bus lane and he has already done so. With his letter the authorities were also informed who the driver of the car was; nevertheless they initiated a driver identification procedure, so to say in order to find out something they already know.“ Ombudsper-son Stoisits thus demanded in the broadcast the cancellation of the penalty notice ex officio by the Federal Police Headquarter Vienna and promised that the Office of the Ombudsperson would be obtaining the response of all authorities concerned.

Mr E. is one of two managing directors of a Viennese company. When his company car was parked in Bad Vöslau, the police initiated a driver identification procedure as the MOT badge had allegedly expired. Subsequently this turned out to be wrong. During Mr E.’s absence the second managing director filled in the request for driver identification and sent it back, albeit late. The consequence was a penalty order against Mr E. because of the late return of the request. Mr E. appealed against it at the Independent Administrative Tribunal of Lower Austria, which took note that he had not been in Vienna at that time, but at the same time imposed a penalty of 58 Euro against Mr E. as the request for driver identification was incomplete.

During the broadcast Ombudsperson Stoisits expressed her lack of understanding that citizens would be punished on the grounds of a late or incomplete response to the request for driver identification despite there no longer being an underlying offence of which they could be accused. In addition, Ombudsperson Stoisits also made a general demand: „Both cases illustrate how intransparent the procedure concerning driver identification is for individuals. The letters sent out to citizens in this respect vary from authority to authority. I am therefore appealing, as on numerous occasions before, to the responsible Ministry of Transport to create nationally standard forms for a transparent and efficient request for driver identification.“ Thereupon the representative of the Ministry of Transport promised during the broadcast to review the existing letters of requests for driver identification with the view of possible improvements.