Northern Virginia HOT Lanes

[cpzilliacus]

Virginia does indeed have consent judgments. Essentially, any time you settle a case and ask the court to memorialize the settlement in a court order, it's a consent judgment. It's useful for the person "winning" because it makes it easier to enforce the settlement agreement–you simply ask the court to enforce its own order, whereas if the parties sign a settlement agreement but don't get a court order other than having the case dismissed, enforcing the settlement requires you to sue the other party for breach of contract.

Typically a "consent judgment" that results from out-of-court procedures without a lawsuit ever having been filed is a "confession of judgment" rather than a consent judgment. What basically happens is you say "I agree to pay $x on the following terms, and if I fail to do so, the other party may ask a court to enter judgment against me for the entire remaining unpaid balance and the court may do so without awaiting my appearance." Someone approached me last year asking for help on a matter in which she had signed a confession of judgment arising from unpaid commercial rent. Unfortunately, I couldn't help her. If you confess judgment and you are then unable to pay, you're going to find yourself in a tough situation if the other person refuses to renegotiate. (Often confessed-judgment promissory notes will be used by lenders with people who have spotty credit history or who are renegotiating a debt due to changed financial circumstances. For example, you fail to pay a loan because you can't afford the payments. Rather than writing it off, they negotiate a payment plan. The document memorializing the payment plan may include a confession of judgment because they want the right to get a court order against you if you default a second time.)

Sounds identical or almost identical to the way that it is done in Maryland.

[NJRoadfan]

The commenters on that post share the concern I had about HOT pricing, mostly that its on a whim. Technically the price shouldn't go up until free flowing conditions at the threshold speed of 45mph cease at which the principal of demand destruction via tolls would be applied.

Off peak pricing is another area where there can be improvement. Slashing prices further (below the "break even" amount that the base minimum tolls likely reflect) during low traffic periods would generate some more toll income. No traffic in the lanes = no money being made. There are still fixed base costs outside of wear and tear that still need to be paid for like winter storm treatment/plowing and police patrol. Those lanes were a ghost town yesterday morning compared to when they were free to travel.

The other concern about turning over publicly funded/built roadways to private entities came up too.

[froggie]

Technically the price shouldn't go up until free flowing conditions at the threshold speed of 45mph cease at which the principal of demand destruction via tolls would be applied.

Problem here is, if you wait until "free flowing conditions at 45mph cease", then it is too late.  If the goal is to keep traffic at or above 45 MPH, you don't wait until you drop below to bump the toll up.

[1995hoo]

Channel 5 aired what Ms1995hoo and I thought was a very slanted anti-Transurban report on the 10:00 News tonight; it ended with the anchorman (I don't know his name) calling the HO/T lanes a scam and saying he refuses to use them. See link below.

http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/27766961/defense-attorney-unveils-strategy-to-challenge-huge-e-zpass-express-lane-fines

No doubt there are some people who just screw up, but you have to screw up really severely to wind up in this situation. Assume, for discussion purposes, you don't know your E-ZPass battery is dead and you run up six trips in three days. Since you don't know your battery is dead, you don't pay online within five days when the service charge is only $1.50.

That means you get a bill in the mail for the tolls plus $12.50 per trip (in this example, that means tolls plus $75). Seems to me that would get the average person's attention very quickly.

If you fail to pay the initial invoice, the fees increase to $25 per trip (in this example, that means $150 on top of the tolls). Again, I don't see how anyone could be so foolish as to ignore the invoice.

If you still don't pay, they refer it to a debt collection agency. That, of course, means additional fees on top of the ones already imposed. Understandably, state law lets Transurban pass on those fees to the person whose nonpayment caused them to incur the fees in the first place.

If debt collection goes nowhere in six months, they take you to court.

The attorney Channel 5 quoted talks a lot about criminal law and constitutional issues. I'm not sure his argument will work because under state law, the fees are deemed civil penalties, not criminal fines, and the summons shown on TV was a civil pleading (a warrant in debt, which is a standard form used in general district court). Of course, he can try to convince a judge the matter is actually criminal, but it's unclear whether he'd succeed.

There IS certainly a valid question as to why Transurban proceeds this way instead of querying the E-ZPass database. I have all three of our plate numbers registered on my E-ZPass account, for example, so if my battery were dead, it'd be simple enough for them to get the correct account number and simply bill that account. I don't know why they don't do it that way, but I assume it has something to do with the idea of requiring E-ZPass and not allowing a "toll-by-plate" option like on Florida's Turnpike in the Miami are.

[cpzilliacus]

Technically the price shouldn't go up until free flowing conditions at the threshold speed of 45mph cease at which the principal of demand destruction via tolls would be applied.

Problem here is, if you wait until "free flowing conditions at 45mph cease", then it is too late.  If the goal is to keep traffic at or above 45 MPH, you don't wait until you drop below to bump the toll up.

Absolutely correct.

45 MPH on a freeway implies level-of-service "E," which is uncomfortably close to LOS "F," at which point performance falls of the edge. 

[cpzilliacus]

Channel 5 aired what Ms1995hoo and I thought was a very slanted anti-Transurban report on the 10:00 News tonight; it ended with the anchorman (I don't know his name) calling the HO/T lanes a scam and saying he refuses to use them. See link below.

http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/27766961/defense-attorney-unveils-strategy-to-challenge-huge-e-zpass-express-lane-fines

I am no fan of that television station or its network.

But I also think Transurban is being very foolish (in a public relations context) at this point, just having started toll operations along I-95, and the I-495 lanes relatively new. 

[jeffandnicole]

From the WTOP article:

Step 1: 

If you, like Luis, get hit with a summons, that is your red flag for step one: hire a lawyer to go to court on your behalf.

Uh-huh.  Lawyers appear to be the winners here in step one.

As for the other steps: My understanding is civil courts require less evidence than criminal courts.  A criminal court requires one to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  Civil court just needs to imply guilt.  So most of the other steps, which include pleading the 5th and telling the court you weren't the registered driver, probably won't work.

[Mapmikey]

Variable speed limits were still set at 65 even though the lanes were all but covered in snow this morning.  Anything faster than 35 felt unsafe to me.

Conditions in the 95 and 495 express lanes varied widely compared to their respective mainlines.  Some of it was due to fewer cars making a path in the toll lanes which was more prevalent on 495.  95 toll lanes had more action...there were 3 wrecks on mainline 95 to avoid...

Mapmikey

[1995hoo]

From the WTOP article:

Step 1: 

If you, like Luis, get hit with a summons, that is your red flag for step one: hire a lawyer to go to court on your behalf.

Uh-huh.  Lawyers appear to be the winners here in step one.

As for the other steps: My understanding is civil courts require less evidence than criminal courts.  A criminal court requires one to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  Civil court just needs to imply guilt.  So most of the other steps, which include pleading the 5th and telling the court you weren't the registered driver, probably won't work.

Correct. Pleading the Fifth in a criminal case is a protection. The court is not allowed to hold it against you. That's not true in a civil case–the court (or jury if there is one) is entitled to presume an adverse inference from your refusal to testify in a civil proceeding.

After I posted last night, it occurred to me it's all the more obvious that these are civil cases because it's Transurban bringing the court action. In a criminal case, it's the Commonwealth that prosecutes.

[jeffandnicole]

The attorney Channel 5 quoted talks a lot about criminal law and constitutional issues. I'm not sure his argument will work because under state law, the fees are deemed civil penalties, not criminal fines, and the summons shown on TV was a civil pleading (a warrant in debt, which is a standard form used in general district court). Of course, he can try to convince a judge the matter is actually criminal, but it's unclear whether he'd succeed.

And that would not go well.

In a civil case, this would be a traffic violation.  if you lose, it's a mark on your driving record.  Pay a fine.  Matter is closed.

In a criminal case, one would need to be prosecuted under something along the lines of theft of goods or services.  if you lose, it's a mark on your permanent record.  Depending on your employer, you have to disclose to your employer you've been convicted. You have to disclose to future employers on applications your conviction.  In some jobs, a criminal conviction bars you from employment.  Nearly all criminal convictions allow for some sort of jail time, which may be suspended on the condition of probation - in this case that you don't, even by accident, go thru an EZ Pass lane again for a period of time.

Of course, a lawyer would make a lot more money too trying to defend a criminal case.

Civil courts are kangaroo courts in many cases, but the alternative is probably a lot worse!

[1995hoo]

There have been reports early on noting that Transurban was setting a single toll rate at the lanes' northern end. A guy with the username "sneedel" who comments on Dr. Gridlock's blog had noted the signs were listing $1.00 from the Franconia—Springfield Parkway to either the Beltway or Turkeycock.

Not the same today in the snow. I drove over to the Springfield Metro this morning and the signs were advertising $1.65 to the Beltway and $2.10 to Turkeycock. Given the massive traffic jams everywhere (Van Dorn was backed up through and beyond Kingstowne), I'd have expected a higher toll. A higher toll would also have helped manage congestion at the point where the non-HOVs have to exit.

[cpzilliacus]

WTOP Radio show with people from Transurban (recorded audio): WTOP's traffic team and Transurban officials were in the Glass Enclosed Nerve Center taking your calls and questions about the 95 Express Lanes on Monday, Jan. 5.

WTOP's veteran traffic reporter Bob Marbourg, WTOP Sprawl and Crawl reporter Ari Ashe were joined by Pierce Coffee and Mike McGurk of Transurban, which operates the 495 and 95 express lanes, to answer your questions about the new express lanes on Monday, Jan. 5, 2015.

[02 Park Ave]

How does one test the battery in one's E-Z Pass?

[1995hoo]

How does one test the battery in one's E-Z Pass?

I make a point of driving through a conventional toll plaza every so often to ensure the green light, or other appropriate indicator as used by a given agency, turns on. That's the only way I know of. The possibility of a dead battery is the one thing that concerns me about open-road tolling systems using E-ZPass because the transponder is battery-powered but gives no feedback to tell you it was read (compare to the SunPass Mini, which also gives no feedback but is not battery-powered).

[cpzilliacus]

How does one test the battery in one's E-Z Pass?

I make a point of driving through a conventional toll plaza every so often to ensure the green light, or other appropriate indicator as used by a given agency, turns on. That's the only way I know of. The possibility of a dead battery is the one thing that concerns me about open-road tolling systems using E-ZPass because the transponder is battery-powered but gives no feedback to tell you it was read (compare to the SunPass Mini, which also gives no feedback but is not battery-powered).

Though if the battery starts to fail, and you have registered your vehicle with the entity that issued you the transponder, then you should not have any financial penalty.

Using the Dulles Toll Road (even the E-ZPass only lanes) is a good way to get feedback that your transponder is still functioning correctly.

[1995hoo]

How does one test the battery in one's E-Z Pass?

I make a point of driving through a conventional toll plaza every so often to ensure the green light, or other appropriate indicator as used by a given agency, turns on. That's the only way I know of. The possibility of a dead battery is the one thing that concerns me about open-road tolling systems using E-ZPass because the transponder is battery-powered but gives no feedback to tell you it was read (compare to the SunPass Mini, which also gives no feedback but is not battery-powered).

Though if the battery starts to fail, and you have registered your vehicle with the entity that issued you the transponder, then you should not have any financial penalty.

Using the Dulles Toll Road (even the E-ZPass only lanes) is a good way to get feedback that your transponder is still functioning correctly.

The legitimate concern is that by all accounts this may not be true if you drive on Virginia's HO/T lanes because once you get that invoice in the mail, you get nailed for the $12.50 fee. The HO/T lanes are not operated by VDOT and Transurban apparently does not query the E-ZPass database to determine whether your account should be billed, although I know they now have this "first-time forgiveness" program.



I pulled up that WTOP broadcast from yesterday you linked further up the thread. Thanks for posting it. Of course this is not your fault, but an 83-minute audio program with no transcript? I'd be interested in what they had to say, but 83 minutes of audio is awfully lengthy. I wish they'd post a transcript.

[jeffandnicole]

It probably depends on the authority.

When the NJ EZ Passes started failing after about 4 - 5 years or so, once they realized the issues - motorists that normally had no problems with EZ Pass started getting numerous no-reads - they went on the offensive and mailed everyone new EZ Passes, instructing the holder to mail back their old passes.  Everything was postage paid and no one incurred any costs. 

The newer EZ Passes also had a longer battery life - the estimated battery life was 7 years, but I'm thinking the majority of them are going on 10 years without issue.

Other agencies may say you're responsible for getting a new EZ Pass, including any costs associated with the tags.

This is also one of the reasons why it's important to keep your license plate info updated.  The no-reads will be tracked to your license plate number, and your account updated usually without penalty.  As for Transurban, if there's enough mis-reads, they may have to change their policy if they don't review tag numbers first (if enough people bug their elected officials, of course).

[jeffandnicole]

According to the Toll Roads News' front page, Newport, CA had no issues with VA's I-95 Express Lanes. 

Scroll down to December 30th... http://tollroadsnews.com/ 

Sometimes, punctuation is important.

[NJRoadfan]

The legitimate concern is that by all accounts this may not be true if you drive on Virginia's HO/T lanes because once you get that invoice in the mail, you get nailed for the $12.50 fee. The HO/T lanes are not operated by VDOT and Transurban apparently does not query the E-ZPass database to determine whether your account should be billed, although I know they now have this "first-time forgiveness" program.

Does the E-ZPass IAG agreement cover this issue? It seems billing to plate on file during no-reads if it matches the photo is the "standard procedure" for most agencies. If its part of the agreement for joining the IAG and accepting E-ZPass, than TransUrban is going to have to follow it. If not, perhaps the IAG needs to step in and clarify the procedures. The whole point of having the IAG is consistency and that includes policies and procedures.

One shouldn't be punished if the reader and/or tag randomly glitches out. TransUrban just needs to consider the uproar it caused in NJ/NY a few years back when electronic tolling was becoming mainstream. The ALPR read rate is good enough now that many of the misread transactions can occur without a person reviewing it if the plate photo matches what is on file in the E-ZPass database.

[1995hoo]

The legitimate concern is that by all accounts this may not be true if you drive on Virginia's HO/T lanes because once you get that invoice in the mail, you get nailed for the $12.50 fee. The HO/T lanes are not operated by VDOT and Transurban apparently does not query the E-ZPass database to determine whether your account should be billed, although I know they now have this "first-time forgiveness" program.

Does the E-ZPass IAG agreement cover this issue? It seems billing to plate on file during no-reads if it matches the photo is the "standard procedure" for most agencies. If its part of the agreement for joining the IAG and accepting E-ZPass, than TransUrban is going to have to follow it. If not, perhaps the IAG needs to step in and clarify the procedures. The whole point of having the IAG is consistency and that includes policies and procedures.

One shouldn't be punished if the reader and/or tag randomly glitches out. TransUrban just needs to consider the uproar it caused in NJ/NY a few years back when electronic tolling was becoming mainstream. The ALPR read rate is good enough now that many of the misread transactions can occur without a person reviewing it if the plate photo matches what is on file in the E-ZPass database.

I have no idea what the agreement says or how Transurban participates (that is, I don't know whether they're a member as a part of VDOT's membership or via some other means). mtantillo might know.

As a general matter, I agree with everything you say in this comment.

[mtantillo]

The legitimate concern is that by all accounts this may not be true if you drive on Virginia's HO/T lanes because once you get that invoice in the mail, you get nailed for the $12.50 fee. The HO/T lanes are not operated by VDOT and Transurban apparently does not query the E-ZPass database to determine whether your account should be billed, although I know they now have this "first-time forgiveness" program.

Does the E-ZPass IAG agreement cover this issue? It seems billing to plate on file during no-reads if it matches the photo is the "standard procedure" for most agencies. If its part of the agreement for joining the IAG and accepting E-ZPass, than TransUrban is going to have to follow it. If not, perhaps the IAG needs to step in and clarify the procedures. The whole point of having the IAG is consistency and that includes policies and procedures.

One shouldn't be punished if the reader and/or tag randomly glitches out. TransUrban just needs to consider the uproar it caused in NJ/NY a few years back when electronic tolling was becoming mainstream. The ALPR read rate is good enough now that many of the misread transactions can occur without a person reviewing it if the plate photo matches what is on file in the E-ZPass database.

I have no idea what the agreement says or how Transurban participates (that is, I don't know whether they're a member as a part of VDOT's membership or via some other means). mtantillo might know.

As a general matter, I agree with everything you say in this comment.

I know ever since Maryland switched to video tolling, they assume that all "no-reads" are people wanting to pay video tolls, so they mail you the invoice for the tolls at the video rate (150% the regular rate). If you have an E-ZPass, you would have to contest the video toll thing. I think in a lot of states, if you mis-read in-state, they have your info on file. But if you mis-read out of state, then MA E-ZPass won't know that your license plate is on a NY E-ZPass account, so they'll send you an invoice, which you contest with your E-ZPass transponder number.

This is very much unlike Florida where my parents drove through many SunPass lanes, but I had forgotten to give them the transponder. The license plate was on the account and all the tolls posted properly at the transponder rate, but as "video tolls". They even attached JPG's of the photos.

[1995hoo]

Dr. Gridlock's blog has a post about this morning's Metrorail woes that has given rise to a discussion of the I-95 express lanes.

First comment about them (boldface added to note the important part):

KBlit
9:48 AM EST
During yesterday's worse traffic than the last time there was worse traffic the I-95 toll lanes were virtually empty. The non pay 95 was clogged with traffic. I am sure that the operators will not release actual useage data but drivers have at least for now said no to be extorted by the 'bait and switch' toll operation. Why is it, except to not scare off users, does the billion dollar road scam refuse to post the actual end-to-end cost? As I understand it if the toll operation does not make its revenue the taxpayer makes up the difference.

I replied as follows. Tell me if I missed something here.

1995hoo
10:03 AM EST
There is no "actual end-to-end cost" at any given point because you do not lock in the rate to the far end when you enter the lanes. That is, say you enter via the ramp from the Horner Road slug lot at the Prince William Parkway interchange. You've locked in the toll rate to the flyover ramp back to the local lanes just north of Newington (denoted as "95-644" on the signs).

As you approach that flyover ramp, there is a separate toll rate schedule displayed for the remaining exits. You then decide if you want to pay that rate or exit into the local lanes. You will not lock in the toll rate for that segment until you pass under its first toll gantry.

This means it is impossible for there to be an "end-to-end cost" displayed when you enter down at Horner Road. It's about eight miles from there to Newington. Suppose, just for simplicity's sake, it takes eight minutes for you to drive that distance (that's 60 mph; most drivers would be going faster, but it's easier to estimate time at 60 mph). In those eight minutes, the toll for the northern segment may change before you get there. 

Bear in mind there are seven entry points for the northbound express lanes to the north of Horner Road (Route 123, US-1, slip ramp south of Newington, Franconia-Springfield Parkway, slip ramp in Springfield, Route 644, and the Beltway). So there could be lots more traffic entering the lanes further north, say if there's a big wreck out in the mainline or some such. In theory, using the segment-based tolling gives them more flexibility to manage the lanes by adjusting the pricing upwards for the areas where there is, or may be, more traffic using the lanes while leaving the pricing lower for areas where there are fewer vehicles entering.

This all reflects how a big difference between the I-495 and I-95 lanes is that the I-95 lanes have midstream exit/entry points to/from the local lanes, whereas the I-495 lanes don't. So you can't do "segments" on I-495.

The guy to whom I responded is apparently just stubborn. His reply, again with boldface added:

KBlit
10:22 AM EST
Got news for you in the business world that is called 'bait and switch.' All you need to do is display the end-to-end for that moment. That is neither rocket science nor beyond the capibilities of today's tech. You already see drivers, the actual paying ones, doing the weave to avoid paying until the last minute. Anyway actual paying versus users is misleading as only those who pay should counted as the 3 (+)'s do not and during a rush that is the bulk. But I suspect the taxpayer will get the make up costs. How of the Richmond crowd who voted for this deal now work for the contractor?

Either he simply doesn't understand it or he's just stubborn and refusing to listen. I suspect the latter, given his earlier use of the propaganda phrase "billion dollar road scam." That sort of thing is a pretty clear indicator the person is just going to rant. But for some reason, I responded anyway:

1995hoo
10:43 AM EST
It's not called "bait-and-switch" at all. If the sign says "95-644" and you're headed to "395-236," it's simply not reasonable for you to think the toll rate you see on the first sign is for the full length of the lanes.

I know it's trendy in today's America to want to blame everyone else if you don't understand or don't like something, but people have to take some personal responsibility for learning how things work, and in this case that means learning what the signs mean.

You keep talking about "the end-to-end for that moment." THERE IS NO SUCH THING and it's time you stopped pretending there is. You're thinking of it as though it's the Beltway. On the Beltway, you lock in ALL the potential toll rates when you pass under that first gantry. If you're coming from Springfield and it's $12.00 to the lanes' northern end, you lock in $12.00 when you pass under the gantry just south of Braddock, regardless of whether the rate then goes up (or down!) for drivers entering while you're in the lanes.

I-95 DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY. The rate for the northern segment can, and often will, change while you're already in the southern segment. If, when you entered at Horner Road, the sign showed a rate of, I don't know, $2.35 to "95-644" and $6.45 to "395-236," but then when you reached the "95-644" point the sign then said it would be $5.00 for you to continue to "395-236," THAT would be a bait-and-switch because you would have reasonably thought you locked in the $6.45 total toll and now they're telling you it's $7.35 total.

Instead, the signs further south do not show the rate for the northern segment because that rate is unknown until you approach that segment. There's no "bait-and-switch" about it. The sign tells you the toll to "95-644." That is what you pay if you enter at that time. A second sign then tells you the toll to "395-236" and you decide whether to pay it.

This discussion is why I kept nagging Dr. Gridlock to devote column space to the segment-based tolling!

Mike, cpzilliacus, am I missing anything in my comments above?

I knew the segment thing was going to cause no end of confusion and hand-wringing out there.

[jeffandnicole]

KBlit
10:22 AM EST
Got news for you in the business world that is called 'bait and switch.' All you need to do is display the end-to-end for that moment. That is neither rocket science nor beyond the capibilities of today's tech.

Actually, what he is proposing is classic bait-and-switch.  If he were to get on the tolled lanes when the price said "$5.00", and later it was raised to $7.00, he'd be complaining that he already entered the road and it should have remained $5 for him.  I'm quite sure that if he was charged $7, he wouldn't care what it said "for that moment", and would be complaining about this additional bait-and-switch tactic.

[cpzilliacus]

Mike, cpzilliacus, am I missing anything in my comments above?

I knew the segment thing was going to cause no end of confusion and hand-wringing out there.

I think you covered it accurately and well.

I dislike the segment-based tolling with a passion - except - that it may prove to have merit when the 95 Express lanes are pointed south, to avoid the congested mess in Stafford County where everything narrows from 2 lanes to 1 lane.

Though I concede the same could perhaps be said about the 495 Express Lanes approaching their north terminus north of Va. 267 (Dulles Toll Road).

[1995hoo]

KBlit
10:22 AM EST
Got news for you in the business world that is called 'bait and switch.' All you need to do is display the end-to-end for that moment. That is neither rocket science nor beyond the capibilities of today's tech.

Actually, what he is proposing is classic bait-and-switch.  If he were to get on the tolled lanes when the price said "$5.00", and later it was raised to $7.00, he'd be complaining that he already entered the road and it should have remained $5 for him.  I'm quite sure that if he was charged $7, he wouldn't care what it said "for that moment", and would be complaining about this additional bait-and-switch tactic.

Notice that's what I said in my reply. He has not replied further (yet).

If the system worked the way you theorize in your post, I'd agree it's confusing for the average driver and could be seen as a "bait-and-switch." That's why I think it's good it doesn't work that way, even if the "segment" system may also be confusing. In my view, if the sign shows a toll rate to a specific point and you are charged that toll rate, then you have no basis for complaint, even if you find it confusing that they then charge a different rate for the next stretch of road. That's far preferable to displaying a toll rate that is subject to change once you're already on the road. That would be misleading and far more confusing.