Ignition Interlock Device Installers

January 21st, 2013

Ignition Interlock Device installers can be found nationwide by searching our database of approved interlock installers. Once there, you can locate an installation facility near you and schedule an appointment online. Yo can also schedule appointments by calling us directly at 1-877-380-1555. Our call center is staffed by knowledgeable representatives who will help you locate a local ignition interlock dealer and schedule an appointment for installation.

Click on a state below to locate your Ignition Interlock Device Installer


Texas Ignition Interlock

December 23rd, 2011
Texas Ignition Interlock Laws

Texas is one of the larger states in the country, so it stands to reason that the problem of drunk driving would be prevalent on Texas highways. In 2008, more than 88,000 people were arrested in Texas for DUIs, a frightening number. In an effort to curb the spread of drunk driving and keep Texas commuters safe, the Texas legislature has enacted sterner, wide-reaching DUI laws.

Like most states, Texas determines the severity of its DUI penalties based on whether it is the first DUI charge the individual has experienced or not. 1st time DUI offenders in Texas can expect to pay heavy fines ($2000) and spend 72 hours in jail (mandatory). They will also have their license suspended for no less than 90 days and up to 1 years time depending on the circumstances of the arrest.

For second or subsequence offenses or a BAC of more than .15 the court must order the DUI offender to install ignition interlock devices on all of the motor vehicles he owns for 1 year following the end of the license suspension. 2nd time offenders also have to pay $4000 in fines and can spend anywhere from 30 days to a year in jail. Third time offenders are charged as felons in Texas. They will be forced to pay $10,000 in fines and will spend no less than 2 years and up to 10 years in the penitentiary.

Ignition Interlock Devices help reduce DUIs by separating the acts of drinking and driving. The devices are small breath alcohol detectors (about the size of a cell phone) that are attached to the cars ignition. A driver must blow a clean breath sample in order to start the car. IIDs are exceedingly effective in limiting recidivism among DUI offenders. Many drivers involved in fatal alcohol-impaired-driving crashes have been arrested previously for driving while intoxicated (DWI). In 2007, drivers with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 grams per deciliter or higher in fatal crashes were eight times more likely to have a prior conviction for driving while impaired than were drivers with no alcohol (NHTSA, 2008a). IIDs put a stop to these individuals getting behind the wheel, which results in fewer fatalities on Texas highways.

Arizona DUI Interlock Device

December 23rd, 2011
Arizona DUI Interlock Device

Most vehicle operators are conscious of the various consequences of an arrest for a DUI in Arizona. The loss of one’s drivers license, an increase in insurance rates and fines are all outcomes that motorists want to avoid if at all possible. While loss of mobility is an important concern, incarceration and loss of liberty is the most drastic result that drivers fear after a drunk driving arrest. Arizona drunk driving laws have changed over the years, and knowledge of the range of punishments for drinking and driving offenses is an important asset for someone who has recently been arrested.

The differences between basic DUI offenses and aggravated DUI offenses, as well as the effect of other circumstances such as drug-related DUI and out-of-state DUI, can all play a role in the severity of consequences that a driver faces if convicted. Arizona DUI Sentencing:

First-Time Versus Repeat DUI Offenses The most basic distinction in DUI sentencing is whether the driver has ever been convicted of a similar offense. A conviction for a first-time basic DUI blood alcohol content over .08 means one to ten days in jail, over $1,000 in potential fines and, since 2007, a mandatory ignition interlock installation at the driver’s expense.

A driver convicted of a second DUI within seven years 84 months of a first conviction is susceptible to a mandatory 30-day to 90-day jail sentence, community service, significantly higher fines and license suspension of one year. DUI punishments also increase based on the driver’s blood alcohol concentration BAC. Extreme DUI is an escalated charge based on a BAC measurement of .15 or more within two hours of driving. Arizona also recognizes a “Super Extreme” level of DUI enforcement, meaning a .20 BAC or higher. A first offense Super Extreme DUI means a minimum of 45 days in jail, along with other enhanced punishments.

More severe criminal consequences also result from a conviction involving any legally recognized aggravating factor. Under Arizona law, a person can be charged with a felony, Aggravated Driving Under the Influence, if he or she:

  • Is found guilty or pleads guilty to DUI during a period when his or her driver’s license or driving privileges have been cancelled, suspended, revoked, or refused or if the driver was required to use an interlock device
  • Violates Arizona drunk driving laws while a person under 15 years of age is in the vehicle Felony DUI charges put an offender at greater risk for long-term incarceration, especially if the defendant has a previous conviction on a drug charge, domestic violence offense or other felony on his or her criminal record
  • Commits a third or subsequent DUI violation within five years 60 months of a previous conviction

California Ignition Interlock

December 22nd, 2011
California Ignition Interlock Laws

California highways are some of the most heavily traveled in the world. With over 200,000 DWI arrests in 2008, California has the dubious distinction of having the most DWI offenders of any state in the country. The state ranks 2nd in alcohol related highway fatalities, with just over 1,200 in 2008. It is no exaggeration to say that California is ground zero when it comes to the fight against curtailing the amount of inebriated drivers on our highways, a fact that is not lost on the law makers or law enforcement officers in the state.

California has enacted several Ignition Interlock Laws and are leaders in the implementation of the devices to help stop DWI drivers in the state. Many of these laws place the power to required IIDs in the hands of the courts, but there are also some mandatory facets to the law that can effect DUI offenders, especially repeat offenders:

First time DUI offenders may require the installation of an ignition interlock device in order to operate their motor vehicle; the judge has discretion to order this device for a first-time drunk driving conviction, and will most likely do so in cases involving a BAC that is .15 or higher, when the offender refused to take a chemical test at the time of arrest or when injuries have occurred due to the DUI accident.

Second time DUI offenders will be required to install IIDs as a condition of being granted probation. The only matter to be decided will be the length of the requirement, which can range from one year to three years.

Habitual offenders who have been arrested for DUIs more than two times can expect mandatory installation of ignition interlock devices for extended periods of time. Additionally, renewal of unobstructed licenses for these drivers is unlikely.

Participating in California’s ignition interlock device program in order to get restored driving privileges does not mean a return to “regular driver” status. The license issued is considered a restricted license, which should be used so an individual can go to and from work, school, or take care of other matters deemed important by the courts. The use of IIDs in this manner allows DUI offenders to get back to the road sooner, enabling them to again become constructive members of society, while also eliminating the risk of recidivism among the DUI offenders. This is important because a staggering amount of DWI offenses are perpetrated by repeat offenders. Research shows that ignition interlocks reduce recidivism among both first-time and repeat DWI offenders, with reductions in subsequent DWI arrests ranging from 50 to 90 percent while the interlock is installed on the vehicle

Massachusetts Ignition Interlock

November 4th, 2011

Interlock ignition devices have helped reduce drunk driving in Massachusetts since 2006 and all convicted drunk drivers should be required to use the devices, lawmakers, activists and police officials said Thursday.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving officials joined Sen. Robert Hedlund (R-Weymouth) at the capitol to press for the bill’s passage, saying the policy is in place and helping to reduce drunk driving and alcohol-related fatalities in 15 other states, including Connecticut and New York.

Bill supporters said a 2006 law requiring repeat drunk drivers to install the breath test ignition devices, but noted studies show people who drive drunk may do so 80 times before they are caught.

“There’s little sense in waiting for a subsequent event to put forth technology we have right now,” said Northborough Police Chief Mark Leahy, president of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association.

According to MADD, more than 16,000 people are arrested in Massachusetts in an average year for driving while above the illegal blood alcohol content level of .08. Among the 3,786 repeat offenders who have completed interlock programs, only 85 have reoffended, according to MADD. The bill would require first-time offenders to have a device installed on their vehicle for at least six months after their license is reinstated.

Bill supporters claimed they face an “uphill battle” marked by opposition from trial attorneys, and Hedlund said he hoped to hear soon from district attorneys about whether they will support the bill.

Anti-drunk-driving activist Ron Bersani said there are 4,900 interlock devices installed in Massachusetts and predicted the bill’s passage would save lives, including the lives of drunk drivers.

Bersani also called for increased pressure on judges to stop allowing repeat offenders to plead guilty to lesser offenses and to continue drunk driving cases without findings.

The bill (S 1746) is pending before the Transportation Committee, which held a public hearing on it in June.

Committee co-chair Sen. Thomas McGee (D-Lynn) told the News Service after the press conference that he has not taken a position on the bill. Asked when the panel might vote on it, McGee said he planned to meet with co-chair William Straus soon to go over bills before the committee.

McGee said he’s been focused lately on the state’s transportation infrastructure “crisis” and financing shortcomings.

Hedlund was the target of some criticism at the press conference over his Senate-approved amendment to a casino bill that would allow free or discounted drinks to return to Massachusetts. Hedlund and other senators who supported the amendment said it would keep a level playing field for bars and restaurants with casinos, which are allowed to offer free drinks to patrons under bills being negotiated by a six-member conference committee.

“I don’t want to get into that,” Hedlund told Erin Brenton of Kingston after she interrupted the press conference and publicly pressed him on why he had not spoken to her father, Charles Woods, who Brenton later said had worked for MADD’s Plymouth chapter and helped pass the law banning Happy Hour in Massachusetts.

“He should have never done this,” Brenton said after the press conference, referring to Hedlund’s amendment.

Hedlund told Brenton during the press conference he would discuss the issue with her after the event and didn’t want to take attention away from the ignition interlock proposal. He also said he planned to meet with anti-drunk-driving advocates today about his casino bill amendment.

Md. Expands Ignition Interlock Requirement

October 26th, 2011

Md. Expands Ignition Interlock Requirement

Drunken Driving Offenders Required To Take Part In Program

JESSUP, Md. – Maryland is expanding a Breathalyzer system to keep drunken drivers off the road.

Recent studies show 65 percent of people who have their licenses suspended for drinking and driving still drive. The Maryland Ignition Interlock Program is designed to keep drunken drivers off the road.

The program, which began in 1989, is being expanded to require more people to put the devices in their cars. The program allows people to drive and control drunken driving simultaneously.

The expanded state drunken driving program requires more drivers convicted of driving while intoxicated charges to install ignition interlock devices in their cars.

“Individuals convicted of drunken driving who agree to have this device installed into their vehicles will be able to continue to drive to their place of employment, and that’s the whole focus of this program — to take drunken drivers off the road,” Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration Administrator John Kuo said.

MVA officials and the Maryland State Police held a press conference Wednesday to announce the expansion of the program. Maryland has the highest per-capita participation in ignition interlock on the East Coast with numbers that have nearly doubled in the past few years, according to the MVA.

“This new law will help hold people accountable for their actions. It will reduce the number of opportunities for drunken drivers to re-affect. It will help us decrease injuries and deaths while increasing safety on Maryland roads,” Maryland State Police Superintendent Col. Marcus Brown said.

Those who violate the ignition interlock program face a fine of $1,000 and/or a year in prison for a first offense and a fine of $1,000 and/or two years in prison for a second offense.

Over the past three years, participation in the interlock system in Maryland has increased 66 percent with an estimated 9,100 participants to date.

Audi Johnston, who was required to use the Interlock system in her car, said she thinks the system made a difference in her life.

“The first time, I was an active alcoholic. So, I was trying to beat the system. The second time, it was a help to me to stay sober,” Johnston said.

“The cost of this is about $1,000 per year,” said Jack Magee of Start Smart. “Break it down into days, I mean, you’re talking about less than a half pack of cigarettes today to be monitored and to be able to drive.”

Officials also announced that Maryland is the first state in the nation to automate its comprehensive ignition interlock program. Participating drivers are required to report monthly to have their devices calibrated and to have their monitoring data electronically downloaded and sent to the MVA.

Oregon Ignition Interlock Device Fact Sheet

October 19th, 2011

After the first DUII conviction, if a person does not install an interlock device after the 1 year license suspension has ended, the person’s license will continue to be suspended for 1 year (2 year total suspension). At the end of the 2nd year, the person’s license is reinstated without a requirement for an IID.

Implied consent counts the number of offenses; suspension will occur regardless of an acquittal or conviction in the criminal case

Implied consent license suspension and hardship periods will likely overlap with DUII conviction license suspension periods.

All implied consent license suspensions begin 30 days after the date of arrest (officer seizes drivers license on the date of arrest if a person fails or refuses a breath test and issues the person a temporary permit)

After the second or subsequent DUII arrest, the hardship wait times match the length of the implied consent suspension period (1 year for failing the breath test or 3 years for refusing the breath test).

A persons first DUII conviction, is usually the persons 2nd offense under implied consent (unless the person was not initially eligible for diversion or chose not to enter diversion)

No IID requirement under Implied Consent unless the court requires it as a condition of diversion
For example, if a person is a first time offender and gets a hardship permit after the wait time, there is no requirement to have an IID while driving

For a second or subsequent DUII offender, there is, in effect, no chance to get a hardship permit since the wait period matches the suspension

  • Court Ordered Ignition Interlock
  • ORS 813.602: a court may require an IID as a condition of the diversion
  • Court to impose sanctions, if any, for failure to comply with IID
  • DMV puts a notation on person’s record
  • If a person applies for a hardship permit, DMV will require proof of IID
  • IID providers do not send compliance reports to the court but do send them to DMV – DMV does NOT inform the court


First DUII Conviction

  • 1 year license suspension
  • No wait time to get hardship permit (implied consent wait times still apply however)
  • If hardship permit is obtained, IID installation is required IID must be installed for 1 year
  • Start date of IID requirement is after the 1 year license suspension period has ended

DMV monitors IID installation

  • Once DMV receives a report from IID provider that IID is installed then DMV reinstates full driving privileges
  • If DMV receives a report of removal of IID, DMV reinstates license suspension (for the remainder of the year)
  • If DMV receive a report of tampering with IID, DMV reinstates license suspension (for the remainder of the year)
  • If IID is not installed as required, license suspension continues until:
  • IID is installed, OR:
  • For 1 year, if one year is up then IID is no longer required for reinstatement (70-80% do not install IID per DMV)

Second DUII Conviction

  • 3 year license suspension
  • 90 day wait time to get hardship permit (implied consent wait time
    however will likely be 1 or 3 years)
  • IID must be installed for 2 years
  • Start date of IID requirement is after the 3 year license suspension period
    has ended

DMV monitors IID installation

  • Once DMV receives a report from IID provider that IID is installed then DMV reinstates full driving privileges
  • If DMV receives a report of removal of IID, DMV reinstates license suspension (for 2 years)
  • If DMV receive a report of tampering with IID, DMV reinstates license suspension (for 2 years)
  • If IID is not installed as required, license suspension continues until:
  • IID is installed, OR:
  • For 2 years, if 2 years is up then IID is no longer required for reinstatement

Third and Subsequent DUII Conviction

  • Permanent license revocation
  • Not eligible to get a hardship permit
  • Eligible to petition the court for restoration of driving privileges after 10 years; 10 years period starts:
  • At the end of probation on the DUII offense, OR
  • After release from parole if prison term imposed If driving privileges restored by the court
  • IID is required for 2 years

First DUII Offense

  • Fail Breath Test at .08 or above
    • 90 day license suspension
    • Eligible for hardship permit 30 days after the suspension period begins (soonest a person is eligible for hardship permit is 60 days after arrest date)
  • REFUSE Breath Test
    • 1 Year License Suspension
    • Eligible for hardship permit 90 days after the suspension period begins (soonest a person is eligible for hardship permit is 120 days after arrest date)
  • Fail Breath Test at .08 or above
    • 1 year license suspension
    • Eligible for hardship permit after 1 year
  • REFUSE Breath Test
    • 3 year license suspension
    • Eligible for hardship permit after 3 years

IID Cost, Interlock Device Fees, & Hardship Permit Information

  • Average Installation Costs – $75
  • Average Monitoring – $50-$75 mo
  • Additional Installation Costs – some include first and last month costs
  • Varies from $150-$350 (figure includes actual installation)
  • Hardship Permits – SR22 Insurance Certificate required for hardship permit
  • SR22 also required for reinstatement of driving privileges after a criminal suspension
  • $125 DMV fee required for hardship permit
    Letter from Employer required for hardship permit (if not employer person can get
    permit to look for work)
  • If IID installed as a requirement of the hardship permit (criminal suspension), there is
    no credit given to IID requirement after criminal suspension period is complete
    Approximately 1% of the 450,000 criminal and implied consent suspensions obtain a
    hardship permit per DMV
  • Approximately 20-30% of suspensions imposed install ignition interlocks per DMV

LifeSafer Interlock

September 26th, 2011


LifeSafer Interlock was an originator of the ignition interlock industry in 1991, and has contributed significantly to the advancement of interlock devices. We have been instrumental in convincing lawmakers of the merits of allowing you, the client, to obtain legal driving privileges by installing an interlock, which has led to widespread utilization and success of interlock programs nationwide. LifeSafer interlocks have been used by more than 500,000 people and are the most widely used in the U.S. today. Our network of 600+ installation and service locations is a unique organization of locally operated interlock specialists who are dedicated to you, the interlock client, as their sole customer.

New York DWI Interlock Device Law Continues to Evolve

September 19th, 2011
New York DWI Interlock Device Law Continues to Evolve

It has already been one year since Leandra’s Law required alcohol interlock devices for anyone convicted of driving while intoxicated. And while development has been made to continue to keep repeat drunken drivers off the streets more can and should be done. Way too many people who’ve been convicted of DWI continue to evade the law and avoid the interlocks. And that puts all of us at risk.

The law is named for Leandra Rosado, an 11-year-old from the Bronx who was killed in 2009 in a car driven by the mother of a close friend who was driving seven girls to a sleep-over. It requires that those convicted of DWI operate only vehicles armed with interlock devices, for at least six months. The gear costs about $90 per month, plus an installation fees, paid for by the offender, and keeps a car from starting if the driver can’t blow an alcohol-free breathing sample.

Close to 1,800 people in Nassau have been sentenced to use interlock devices in the past year alone, but roughly 60 percent of them simply told judges they have no car and no plans to drive during the time their privileges are restricted. Some stick to it and use mass transit, bikes and rides. But others manipulate the system by driving without licenses, in cars registered to other people. The Nassau County district attorney’s office recently concluded an investigation, set to concur with the one-year anniversary of Leandra’s Law. Of 153 DWI offenders who were placed under surveillance, 98 appear to have honored their sentence. They told judges they would not drive and didn’t need interlock devices, and they stayed out from behind the wheel. Another 26 were using the interlock devices. The remaining 20 were arrested after being caught driving without the machinery.

There may come a day when every car has an alcohol interlock device, set to the legal limit. It’s a controversial idea, but since the only right such mandatory devices would infringe upon is one that doesn’t exist, the right to drive drunk, some argue it should happen. Until it does, if it does, law enforcement will be caught in a battle with those who would repeatedly evade drunken driving laws. District Attorney Kathleen Rice and Sen. Charles Fuschillo R-Merrick are working together to tighten up the law so that it does more to prevent repeat DWIs and force compliance. The most promising areas for progress are in increasing the length of time DWI convicts must use the interlocks, and changing the law so that drivers can’t wait out the penalty. Right now, someone sentenced to use an interlock for a set period can let that time pass, then get a license and drive without one. It would be better if the interlock clock started whenever DWI convicts got their licenses back, regardless of how long they waited.

New Ignition Interlock Process In Minnesota

August 30th, 2011

Those in Minnesota charged with driving while intoxicated will now be ordered to obtain an alcohol ignition interlock device installed on their automobile to reduce their license suspension time-frame. It is a huge impact for drunk driving offenders. While the ignition interlock device offers certain helpful characteristics, it permits people having numerous infractions the chance to regain their operating privileges faster so opinions are mixed as to if this is a positive initiative.