Showing posts with label Non-Consent Towing Fees. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Non-Consent Towing Fees. Show all posts

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Unethical "Fee Splitting" Practice Banned In New York State

Flickr.com Photo

"Fee splitting" is when a business with a parking lot and a predatory towing company both get a cut of the take, looking upon citizens who happen into lots--often poorly and deceptively marked--as human prey.

According to an article in newsday.com, The good, decent, and visionary legislators who sponsored this law are...

State Senator Charles Fuschillo (R-Merrick) and Assemblyman Harvey Weisenburg (D-Long Beach). Clearly, in the State of New York there is bipartisan support for stopping predatory towing. Yes, even right before Election Day! But the idea, according to the article, actually came from Oyster Bay Town Clerk Steven Labriola.

Other reform measures in the bill, according to the article:

1.) Listing the name and location of the towing company. (They didn't already do that? Good lord, and I thought New York was leading the curve in most regards. I guess Minneapolis was way ahead of New York on this one)

2.) Lot owners have to be present when a vehicle is towed.

3.) Local governments can have stricter regulations against the lots. (I hope many local governments in New York state take this and run with it!)

The unfortunately-named town of "Hicksville" is mentioned in the article as a place infamous for predatory towing.

Take note of the term: FEE SPLITTING. It's now illegal in New York. It SHOULD be illegal in all 50 States, the terrorities, and (let us not forget) Canada.

But I seriously doubt if the Canadians--whose humane towing practices are the stuff of legend--would ever allow this kind of thing to crop up in the first place.

Passaic, New Jersey, Stands Up To Aggressive Towing

Flickr.com photo

Appalling stories of aggressive towing have led the city of Passaic, New Jersey to increase the price of parking tickets, but (quite sensibly) refrain from towing vehicles during street cleaning days, according to North Jersey Dot Com.

City drivers are...

...reportedly "applauding" the new system, where fines for parking go from $37 to $74, still much cheaper than getting towed.

Notably, the difficulties citizens have in Passaic seem to revolve more around TIME than MONEY, since the inefficient retrieval process takes many hours and some people are forced to take off the whole day. Councilman Chaim Munk helped lead the reform, and so gets a positive mention from this blog. Oily thumbs up to ya, Chaim!

These imperfect but positive reforms are the result of hundreds of residents in the city's Third Ward signing a petition against aggressive towing after the city changed parking rules to clean streets and keep storm drains free of debris.

The aggressive towing company which helped cause all the trouble--Raineri's Towing Company--wasn't commenting for North Jersey Dot Com. No surprise there.

Passaic, New Jersey proves that a petition with just a few hundred signatures can actually lead to positive towing reforms. Be inspired, citizens. Be very inspired.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Newark, Delaware Curbs Predatory Towing

Flickr.com, Newark, Delaware

According to a relatively recent article in the Newark Post, click here, some towing "horror stories" contributed to a city effort to crack down on predatory towing...

Newark is just the latest example of "predatory and abusive towing consciousness" busting out all over, with government entities and ordinary citizens asserting their right to be free from these civil rights violations. This is my first post about a situation in Delaware, and it's a great way to put that state on the "Towing Utopia" map, even if Newark is usually a place name we associate with...New Jersey. I guess there's one in Ohio, too.

Well, here's what's new in Newark, (Delaware) and maybe other cities might use some of this stuff as a model for their own ordinances:

1.) All towing companies have to be licensed by the city. Yeah, no more prowling the streets with your 1970s muscle car and a filthy tow strap, calling yourself a wrecker-for-hire. Goodbye good ol' days.

2.) Limits on non-consensual towing charges.

3.) No storage fee for the first 24 hours, on federal holidays, or on days when the tow company's storage lot is closed.

4.) Individual towing requests must be faxed during business hours.

5.) One hour grace period before vehicles can be towed from private property during non-business hours.

6.) Be still my foolish heart! A DROP RULE. Vehicle owners who catch their car being towed can reclaim their vehicle on the spot and pay a lesser tow charge. Yeah, better demand a receipt or that stuff will go in the driver's pocket.

7.) Failure to adhere to the rules could cost towing companies AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO HIRE 'EM a $500 fine. Gee, I hope that's per violation.

City Councilman Paul J. Pomeroy said it was time to "bring down the hammer" due to the horror stories told by residents. So take courage, citizens of Towing Utopia! Tell your horror stories and hope for "the hammer" to result, though it may take a while.

Unfortunately, some good proposed rules fell by the wayside, including property owners being on site for all tows and a requirement to photograph the parking violation. But it sounds like excellent progress in Newark. I sure hope the rules get ENFORCED, however. The passage of the rules is only a first step. Predatory and abusive towing companies will violate the rules wholesale if nobody is minding the store.

Saturday, August 16, 2008

Oceanside, California Dishes Out Abusive, Predatory Towing At Traffic Checkpoints


Flickr.com photo

Two things Oceanside, California has in common with Escondido.

1.) Both cities have traffic checkpoints where the vehicles of uninsured, unlicensed drivers are seized for excessive periods of time and sums of money.

2.) Both cities like to "prettify" their city hall buildings. Check out the image above! Way to go, Oceanside!

But in regard to seizing vehicles, this article...

...tells the tale of Oceanside resident Tammy Bridges, who seems to be a bit of a space cadet. A stay-at-home mother of two, she didn't bother to renew her drivers license despite getting a routine renewal notice in the mail. About four months later, she discovered her mistake at a traffic checkpoint.

Bridges was told her vehicle was going to "car jail." Because she was alone, police confiscated her vehicle, forcing the 41-year-old mother to walk two miles. (If another licensed driver had been along, that person could have taken the car home)

To make the situation worse, Space Cadet Tammy managed to ignore another piece of paperwork which arrived in the mail: new charges for driving without a license. Fees racked up once again before she discovered her mistake. Now Tammy's husband is in charge of the household paperwork.

Tammy's family isn't struggling too much, economically, despite the tough economy. They managed to handle the costs of the misadventure without resorting to credit cards. Just barely.

Yet because of her experience, Tammy sees how the costs of vehicle seizure could be devastating for struggling families. The story also sparked quite an interesting online discussion about the issues associated with the checkpoints and vehicles being seized and towed away. Here is my sifting to pull out the "virtual wheat" from the internet chaff.

* "Bob" said the fees for various infractions are crazy, and for $60 to $70 you could "truly feed a family for a week."

* A poster called "Government Thugs" said it was more cost effective to drive a "desposable" [sic] junker. If the police seize it, let them keep it.

* A pster called "Hmmm" agreed Tammy was irresponsible, but the fees and fines in California are "way out of hand." Gouging people for little mistakes tears down everybody's faith in the system.

* After a storm of blogging about "no license, no insurance" a guy who claimed to actually be an insurance against said his policies cover the car, not the driver. So claiming Tammy was driving around without insurance probably wasn't even true. Another blogger said the better solution would have been issuing Tammy a "fix it" ticket and letting her go.

* A poster named Mya related the following horror story where only the towing company managed to get rich: Her husband went to traffic court in Hemet, California, for a traffic violation. The violation was dismissed and he walked out of court with his paperwork.

A couple months later--on an Easter Sunday--he was stopped at a checkpoint and told his license had been suspended for failure to appear in court. Naturally, he protested this had to be some kind of mistake. Quite clearly, he remembers an officer saying "If it is indeed a mistake by the DMV or the courthouse, you will be reimbursed by the police department."

You can guess the rest. Some clerk had forgotten to complete the paperwork at the courthouse. But did the guy get reimbursed for getting his car towed? He did not. The police department refused his claim and told him to "give up" because his claim would be denied "each time."

Total cost for being an innocent driver at a checkpoint: One day of lost wages, $500 in towing and storage fees.

* One poster claimed the checkpoints seize and have towed as many as 30 cars in one day, and claimed this adds up to about $45,000 if the vehicles are held for 30 days.

Escondido's Appetite For Revenue Is Insatiable


Flickr.com photo

Just today, word comes of numerous city fees being jacked up in Escondido, California, including police department fees on towed vehicles. ($135 to $175, or $175 to $200, depending on the size of the vehicle)

But to take away the pain, sort of, I offer an image of the rotunda of lovely Escondido City Hall.

Feast your eyes on this, folks! Your tax dollars hard at work building this spectacular temple to the glory of municipal bureaucrats.

(Do not click "Read More")

Escondido, Calif. Continues To Rake In $$$ From Abusive Towing Checkpoints


Flickr.com photo

An article by reporter Edward Sifuentes of the North County Times gives more details of the checkpoints in Escondido which I blogged about earlier, click here and here, plus the article sparked a fiery discussion in online comments...

Some of the comments provided interesting details and arguement about the situation with the checkpoints, though it was mostly an unproductive debate about immigration policy; with the usual sides staking out their usual positions. As I've said before, with the Abbey Court situation in North Carolina: don't get sidetracked by who is being targeted and all the other issues wrapped up in that targeting. Instead, focus on whether the towing practice is INHERENTLY ABUSIVE AND PREDATORY.

But first of all, before I start digging around in the virtual muck, let us pause for a serene moment of reflection and architectural appreciation. CHECK OUT this gorgeous Escondido City Hall building! Would you think a relatively small city like Escondido would have something this nice? I tell ya, a lot of city revenue must have gone into THAT.

Now back to pawing around in the muck. Here is a sifting of the commentary which resulted from Sifuente's informative article.

* One commentator was gleeful there was finally a [financial] upside from "illegal alien drivers," and said "Let's have more of these checkpoints all across the country."

* A particularly informed commenter called "Escondeeter" said tow company fees and city fees are not BOTH revenue to the city of Escondido. The towing and storage fees go to the tow company. So any reference to "three million dollars" worth of business is money going to the towing companies, not the city.

Further, says "Escondeeter," since the towing companies pay a fat fee to the city they are NOT paying the city a "per vehicle fee" or a "percentage of their tow fees" as is the practice in some other cities. Escondeeter asserts (but does not provide proof) that the "bulk" of the towing companies' business with the city "comes from towing vehicles disabled as a result of traffic accidents or mechanical failure and from towing abandoned vehicles."

Sounds like "Escondeeter" knows quite a bit about the local towing industry. Hmmmm. Hmmmm. Things that make you go hmmmmmm.

* One poster asserted--without hard proof--that after 30 days the towing companies were releasing the vehicles to drivers with a valid license, even if those drivers weren't necessarily the registered owner of the vehicle. The poster asserted these vehicles were ending up right back on the road without a licensed driver behind the wheel.

Well, that means the city has a chance to catch the vehicle AGAIN and both the city and towing companies have another chance to make revenue. (I direct your attention, once again, to that really lovely city hall building, above) From a certain point of view you might say, "Everybody wins." But especially the towing companies (first) and city hall (second).

* A poster named Deatris was supportive of the checkpoints, but had a problem with the towing companies using the checkpoints to rake in money "hand over fist." Deatris said, "They [the towing companies] are the biggest crooks out there." (Apparently Deatris meant even in comparison to drivers without insurance or a license)

Deatris said, "I was recently in an accident and had to have my vehicle towed to El Norte tow yard. I had the vehicle removed from their yard not more than a half hour later. They not only charged me a $75 towing fee for towing [the vehicle] two miles but they stuck me with a $300 storage fee...for having the vehicle on their lot for a half hour. What a bunch of [mild expletive]."

* A poster named "januaryM" asserted the City of Escondido had incurred a bill of $50,000 for a study about parking problems, only to discover there were no parking problems. The poster asserted "election games" were being played around the issue of parking.

* Another shill for a towing company said, "How about costs" and listed some of the costs of operating a towing service. Flying in the face of common knowledge about world scrap metal prices versus junked vehicles, the shill said, "Then there's the problem of write-offs...people with a five hundred buck car bought on a street corner who just walk away and leave the tow company stuck with the costs of disposing of the car."

Here are the facts: My own brother manages to make a very good living by paying $200 per vehicle, stripping out copper radiators (on older model cars) and catalytic converters, plus oil and gasoline, and selling the vehicles for scrap. So being able to haul off one of those $500 cars is a bonus, not an unexpected expense.

Sure, one might have to "write off" storage fees, but those weren't real costs, anyway, just outrageous revenues which weren't collected. The junk vehicles are still a sweet little source of profit, and it's insulting to the intelligence of the public to pretend otherwise.

* A poster named "Josh" asserts the towing and storage fees charged by Escondido ($150 towing and $30 per day storage) are "the lowest in any North County San Diego City." In Josh's argument, one sees a drastic limitation on the comparison being made. Oh, and no actual comparison figures are thrown out, either.

* "Escondido Surfer" supported the checkpoints, but thought it was "outrageous" to impound a vehicle for 30 days once the problems associated with the seizure have been solved. Who is being enriched? Private towing companies. Josh said, "[T]hese private storage yards are criminal enterprises enabled by the city."

* A poster from Oceanside asserted the Oceanside Police Department once estimated there were 10,000 unlicensed drivers in Oceanside alone. And to this I respond: Be quiet. Some politician will have a heart attack, just THINKING about all that revenue. (I direct your attention, once again, to the lovely building pictured at the top)

* Citizen X said, "I agree with taking unlicensed drivers off the streets, but why the exorbitant fees? You all know it's about the MONEY."

* A poster named Yolie wrapped up the chat with a good point: You would have to be blind to justice to ignore the excessive penalties and fees being assessed through vehicle confiscation. It's an unchecked travesty just like spiraling gas prices.

MORE PICTURES OF THE LOVELY ESCONDIDO CITY HALL TO FOLLOW!

Thursday, August 14, 2008

More On Escondito "Tow Traps" Raking In Big Buck$


Flickr.com Photo

You've heard of a "speed trap?" What we see in Escondido is a "tow trap."

According to civil rights attorney Cynthia Anderson-Barker, quoted in this article, the situation with on with Escondido's traffic checkpoints is...

..."outrageous," and completely driven by the city's desire to capture as much revenue as possible, not protect the public.

Named in the lawsuit are Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Riverside and Los Angeles counties, and the citeis of Escondido, Maywood and Los Angeles. Notably--and I really want to track this down--the lawsuit cites a case by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that "towing a vehicle merely because a driver is unlicensed is an unreasonable seizure absent a showing that the vehicle poses a threat to public safety." The defense argues the case is not applicable because it was "based on an Oregon statute and not the California law."

Escondido has feebly kicked around some ideas to lessen the impact on drivers by having a city impound lot. Of course...the impact on drivers is secondary. The real idea would be to keep as much revenue as possible. Once again, even talk of helping the drivers is completely revenue-driven.

Companies involved in the current wicked scheme are Al's Towing, A-Z Enterprises, Allied Gardens Towing and El Norte Towing. The article notes "no other city in North County appears to charge towing companies up front for [their] contract." Yeah, I thought that was unusual, too, but obviously it's not a contract so much as a hunting license.

Vehicle owners can request a hearing to get their car back sooner than the 30 days mandated by state law. Forty percent of vehicle owners do this. Only 5 percent get their car back before 30 days. (According to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit)

Not content to merely seize vehicles at checkpoints, the City of Escondido is now plotting to restrict overnight parking on city streets.

Escondido doesn't sound like a very nice place to visit.

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Escondido, California: A Firestorm Is A-Brewing Over Abusive And Predatory Towing


Flickr.com photo, firestorm in Escondido

According to this article, towing companies in Escondido are making so much money from seizing vehicles that they are prepared to pay the city government $100,000 a year for a hunting license.

Working class people and illegal immigrants from Mexico make up the vast majority of auto owners whose vehicles are seized...

It is a pure money grab, according to critics. (Critics with law degrees)

The towing is happening as a result of checkpoints designed to catch unlicensed drivers. The checkpoints generate millions for the city, and also millions for the towing companies because there is--check this out!--a "minimum 30 day storage fee" which costs $1,200 or more. The 30-day requirement is rooted in state law. Checkpoints are set up roughly twice a month, according to Escondido police.

Civil rights attorneys are up in arms and, well, they should be. Though an issue like this will generate a heated debate about unlicensed drivers (very bad) and uninsured drivers (arguably even worse) and even the hot-button issue of illegal immigration, the real injustice is charging so much to store a vehicle. What does the vehicle NEED which requires $1,200 a month? Breakfast in bed?

When the business is acting at the behest of government, the cost of storing a vehicle should be the ACTUAL COST, and then maybe a little more so the business can make a profit and have an incentive to do business with the government. What Escondido has done is basically issue a "hunting license" for cars and their owners.

And that's wrong. Even if the owners have played a role in having their cars seized in the first place--and, obviously, they have--this situation is still extortion.

The numbers provided by the article tell the tale: Four towing companies have contracted with the city for the right to haul away, gut, skin and dress--um, I mean IMPOUND--the vehicles. From 2004 to 2007, they paid $37,500 a year for a hunting license. This year they're happy to pay $75,000. Next year, they'll pay $100,000.

This is a real switch, it appears, on the situation in some cities where THE CITIES PAY MONEY TO THE TOWING COMPANIES FOR THEIR SERVICES. One's first thought is: well, if all the towing companies had to pay money to tow, maybe they wouldn't tow so abusively. But Escondido shows that's not true at all. These companies are willing to pay as much as $100k for the opportunity to squeeze even more out of citizens.

(Or, well, non-citizens, too)

Friday, August 8, 2008

An Insanely Abusive Towing Scheme In Poughkeepsie, New York


Pictured above: Hudson River Hospital for the Insane, Poughkeepsie, New York

Poughkeepsie, New York officials find themselves facing a $1.85 million budget shortfall, but that's OK. They plan to balance the budget on the backs of citizens who get their vehicles towed...

According to this article, the evil plan involves increasing administrative fees to get back impounded cars from $50 to $75 (ka-ching) raising the towing fee from $65 to $100 (ka-ching) and jacking up storage costs for impounded cars from $10 to $25 per day. (ka--oh, never mind)

The focus of the article is on the fact police would now be able to impound vehicles with six or more delinquent parking tickets. (Before, the law was such vehicles could only be towed when found illegally parked) There was a whole lot of talk about cracking down on ticket scofflaws, but the towing fees appear to impact EVERYBODY, not just a small number of scofflaws.

By talking a whole lot about the scofflaws while increasing towing fees for EVERYBODY, the politicians pulled a bait-and-switch. Would it have been possible to increase the various fees ONLY FOR THE PARKING SCOFFLAWS? I don't see why not. But that doesn't appear to be what happened.

Not all the council members wanted to rake the Poughkeepsie public over the coals, however. Mary Solomon (D-Ward 6) and Gwen Johnson (D-Ward 7) both thought the proposed fees were too high. I can't help but note another article from the same region of New York which talks about how the economic downturn has become a windfall...for the repo man.

One commentator on the article going by the handle "hydeparkny" wrote: Of course the (Poughkeepsie) Journal doesn't tell us *where* these parking violations occur. My guess is many of them are "alternate side" violations. Enforcement of "alternate side" is nothing but a revenue grab because the city doesn't actually clean or plow the streets to the curb, which is the whole point of the alternate side scheme."

Meanwhile, staff at the office of the City Administrator are GOING CRAZY trying to figure out how to increase more fees because of the projected budget shortfall. Prepare to kiss your hard-earned money goodbye, citizens of Poughkeepsie.

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Rising Gas Prices Are An Excuse To Raise Towing Fees Everywhere

Flickr.com photo

News coming out of Tallahassee, Florida makes it official and reveals the bigger national pattern. Towing companies are using rising gas prices as an excuse to push for fee increases all over the country.

According to an article in Tallahassee.com, the Tallahassee City Commission is considering higher prices, from $88 to $100, then another $10 added on July 1.

This is the same agenda being pushed in Alexandria, Virginia, as discussed in my previous blog posting. It is happening in some other cities I haven't gotten around to blogging about, yet, and you can expert this cost-increase rationalization for towing fees to appear at a city near you in the near future.

What about the other side of the coin? Citizens are pressed hard by rising gas prices and need a break!

Thursday, June 19, 2008

A Dark Day In Alexandria, Virginia

Flickr.com

Once again, it pains me to hear a city in Virginia is (shall we say?) pulling in the wrong direction when it comes to non-consent towing fees. First Virginia Beach went nuts on its citizens, and now word comes Alexandria, Virginia, will soon be shaking down its residents.

According to WAVY TV 10, Alexandria is increasing its towing fees on July 1 a whopping 26 percent, from $135 to $170.

How will citizens pay for the extra fees? Well, perhaps from all the money they're saving this summer on gasoline.

(My sarcasm font is broken, I will have to point it out manually)

(Do not click "Read More")

Thursday, March 6, 2008

Minneapolis: A Cap On Non-Consent Towing Fees?

This tow by Bobby and Steve's Auto World was NOT a non-consent
tow, which the original caption in the story made clear. I've
had good experiences with this business.

Here is the latest effort to deal with towing issues
in the City of Minneapolis.But contrast this article
with the one right below it.
____________________________________________________________
City of Minneapolis to Cap Towing Fee
(Feb. 11, 08 FOX9)