Axatax

First off, before some smart ****, chimes in, this is NOT my car.

I understand this is going to be a state/country specific question to some degree, but are there any legal gotchas with installing a remote-start alarm on a vehicle equipped with a "breathalyzer" interlock device?

Necessarily, the alarm will touch some of the same circuits as the breathalyzer, and will need to bypass this device in order for a remote start to function (it is a simple ignition kill at the key switch harness).

I'm going to be doing a remote start/alarm on such a vehicle and I've never encountered this before.

ef_newb

if you bypass the device in any way, you are committing a felony.

the driver has the device for a reason.. giving them a means to bypass said device and drive drunk is both legally and morally wrong.

TypeRfit

iTrader: (6)

^^THIS^^ Besides, every so often he has to go in and get it recalibrated, the officer will be able to tell if it has been bypassed or not. I would stay away from doing such a thing.

bgdriver

I would think that as long as it turned off if you put it gear or after a few minutes, like how it turns off without the key, you aren't really doing anything bad. IDK how it is legally though.

ef_newb

legally, the remote start has to be installed AFTER the breathalyzer. which sorta defeats the purpose of having the remote start in the first place.. at least until it has to be removed. at that point, he is free to enjoy the use of his remote start

(after meaning between the breathalyzer and the ignition, so the breathalyzer is still preventing the car from starting)

Axatax

Thanks. I've reconsidered and I'm not going to touch this car.

ef_newb

you can still do it.. just make sure the customer his r/s will be useless until the blow-n-go is pulled. odds are he will bail on it tho, as most people who ask for this are thinking that they can work around the system by having the r/s start the car, thus allowing them to drink. ****in lowlifes..

Axatax

I think that may be the motivation. I've just done a crash education on these devices and I don't want to bother.

Apparently even disconnecting the battery logs an event that will result in the vehicle's owner receiving a ticket ("tampering"). I just don't want to get involved with this.

rjr162

Yup... and if its a CST intoxalock unit, they are already so damn glitchy and error prone its not funny (I used to work with those devices for years.. while I believe in some punishment and what not for repeat offenders, your prior offense in PA could be 8 or 12 years ago and they can make you slap one on not to mention the .08 is a soft limit and I know people who got "nailed" at .04 not because of how they were driving but because a bulb was out).

I could go on even more about CST.. as in I stalled one bad out of the box and CST made the customer pay another $70 + shipping to swap it with a good one.. wtf? Pretty hard core money scam for such a crap device that gets half *** installed

VegaS10

I work for the company that does the ignition interlocks in NC.

Bypassing the unit will get the client in HUGE trouble.

I deal with alot of cars that have remote start installed, and once I tell them how the device works, I give the m the option of disabling the remote start, or bringing me another vehicle. Most of the time they have me disable the remote start.

wrx-killer-Sti-eater

iTrader: (1)

I done it for a member and it was a nightmare for him. Actually the remote start was done first. And they add the breathalyzer. There install was horriable and they chopped up his ignition harness to the point were the car would not start. Thinking it was the remote start. They tagged into it. Long story short is the remote start will give the device a bypass start to the breath alyzer. So when they check it. You will fail. Also in california remote start has to be disabled on any car with a breath alyzer