Victimized Twice!?

[bicker]

I didnt read the whole thread, but heres a problem we have had in my town. The towing company (under contract with the city), would drive around and find cars that were "illegally" parked. No official police involvement.

That wasn't the case here. The car was on blocks.

 

[bicker]

Then if the car owner is still responsible the owner should be contacted when it's recovered and the owner should be responsible for the recovery of the vehicle.

In an ideal world, I'd like to see the car owner contacted and given a few hours to move it or pay the consequences.

I'm glad you agree with me that the city's procedure here is flawed.

Our whole world is flawed. However, some flaws, like this one, are reflections of how much we all want to keep our costs down.

 

[leighe]

Exactly WHAT are my taxes for?!?

Apparently to make sure cities have enough money to be super viligant about keeping all neighborhoods clear of abandoned cars at all times.

I find this ridiculous and yes, I do believe she was victimized by the city. By having AAA she did have a way to take care of it. I don't see why since her car was stolen she couldn't have been the one to decide how to handle the situation once the car was discovered.

 

[magicmato]

Of course, if someone has a car stolen, the police find it and notify the owner of where it is and in the time it takes for the owner to get there, the car is damaged further or stolen again or whatever, then we would see people filing complaints about how their property was not guarded by the police.

It is a lose-lose situation for the city and they do the best they can.

 

[car55]

I don't deny that the person was the victim of a crime by the car thieves. I wouldn't deny that this will be a major inconvenience. However, I do not agree that she is a victim twice because of what the city did. That proposition is simply absurd.

I didn't intend to imlpy anyone's denial of her being a victim of a crime. But to point out how much of an inconvenience it is for her. As for the City Of Hartford Police check my post #46. That said, some years ago I worked for a service station, and one of my jobs was opperating the tow truck. The DMV regulates the tow opperators. It is sometime difficult for the tow opperator to dispose of a unwanted car. A possible solution is for the owner of the car to make arrangements with a wrecking company to take it, or possibly donate it to the local fire department for training. And use it as a tax deduction for the value of the car, they may take it away. If a wrecking company takes it she may be able to recoup some of the storage fees if they buy the car. Not knowing the tow company, they may be limited on space and want to get rid of an unwanted car as soon as possible. Our yard was very small and the sooner they were gone the better.

 

[bicker]

Apparently to make sure cities have enough money to be super viligant about keeping all neighborhoods clear of abandoned cars at all times.

Actually, the way Hartford has it arranged, that's something that they don't have to pay their taxes to get. To a great extent, that operation is self-funding -- a boon to taxpayers. That leaves the city with more money for sanitation, security, education, etc., just as their procedures leave their police officers more time to fight crime.

 

[DawnCt1]

All this hoopla over a 13 year old car?!?! Good grief, if this were me, I'd be sending the thieves a thank you card!

I am sure you would if you could afford another, but if that was your main source of transportation and you had limited assets, that 13 year old car could be important.

 

[DawnCt1]

Why is it the police dept. responsiblity to call her in the first place? Are they now required to check out every abandoned car, try to determine who the owner is, spend time contacting them to give them first crack at removing the car?

Actually yes, they are required to run the plates and determine if the car has been reported stolen. If the plates are removed, they are required to run the VIN, right there in the drivers side of the windshield.

 

[DawnCt1]

Taxis, rental cars (Enterprise will pick you up!), friends, neighbors or family, bikes, or even walking. There are always options... you just have to be open to them.

I see, Let them eat cake!

 

[DawnCt1]

It's not just Hartford.

Imagine having your house broken into, and your valuables stolen and your home ransacked. Then, the police tell you it's YOUR fault because you should've had a better alarm system. THEN, they charge you $50 for the police report you need to give to the insurance company.

Exactly WHAT are my taxes for?!?

Unbelievable!

 

[magicmato]

Actually yes, they are required to run the plates and determine if the car has been reported stolen. If the plates are removed, they are required to run the VIN, right there in the drivers side of the windshield.

Which they did and they told her where it was and how to get it. My uncle is a tow operator and you would not believe how many people try to not pay for the tow. The tow drivers have expenses too and if no one pays them, why would they bother towing the cars? Imagine how much taxes would go up if taxpayers had to pay for the cars to be towed every time one was left there.

I feel sorry for her, but it is a part of life. She should have paid the $95, gotten her stuff and sold the car to a junkyard.

Maybe I did not read the article closely enough, but we do not know where the car was left. Maybe it was left in the middle of a business driveway. Maybe it was left in front of a fire hydrant. Who knows? Should the city let it sit there and be a hazard until they can contact her and she can arrange it to be picked up?

I am not saying she should not be upset, but in the end, she should have just paid the money instead of trying to wrangle out of paying.

 

[DawnCt1]

I A possible solution is for the owner of the car to make arrangements with a wrecking company to take it, or possibly donate it to the local fire department for training. And use it as a tax deduction for the value of the car, they may take it away. If a wrecking company takes it she may be able to recoup some of the storage fees if they buy the car. Not knowing the tow company, they may be limited on space and want to get rid of an unwanted car as soon as possible. Our yard was very small and the sooner they were gone the better.

She knew that without the wheels and tires, the car was totaled. She offered the towing company the title to the car to gain access to her personal belongings in the car. They refused the car, they refused her access without the tow and storage fees.

 

[magicmato]

She knew that without the wheels and tires, the car was totaled. She offered the towing company the title to the car to gain access to her personal belongings in the car. They refused the car, they refused her access without the tow and storage fees.

The towing company is not required to take a car as payment. Some do, some don't. My uncle will if it is something he can fix up and sell for profit. If it is complete junk, then he won't and will ask for payment.

To state that the towing company is evil, heartless or mean to not accept a car in trade for what they are owed is just silly.

 

[MyManGoofy!]

It's not just Hartford.

Imagine having your house broken into, and your valuables stolen and your home ransacked. Then, the police tell you it's YOUR fault because you should've had a better alarm system. THEN, they charge you $50 for the police report you need to give to the insurance company.

Exactly WHAT are my taxes for?!?

Add on to that...the insurance company telling you that sure - you can file a claim, but they will not pay it. Not only that, they will drop your policy. "Would you still like to file a claim, ma'am?"

 

[lindalinda]

That wasn't the case here. The car was on blocks.

well, I know that. I was relating a story about towing issues.

 

[DawnCt1]

We sold a 1987 Monte Carlo two years ago. About 4 months later we got a call from the Hartford Police Dept. Apparently they found the car abandoned on the street in Hartford, ran the VIN and we were listed as the "last owners". It had been towed and impounded for at least a week. I was thrilled to point out to them that we had sold the car, (had the bill of sale) and cancelled the plates and we were no longers the proud owners of said car. They called back a couple of days later and said the "rightful owner" had claimed it. Apparently it had sold twice. I guess they couldn't shake down me so they moved on to the next one!

 

[cardaway]

Which they did and they told her where it was and how to get it. My uncle is a tow operator and you would not believe how many people try to not pay for the tow. The tow drivers have expenses too and if no one pays them, why would they bother towing the cars? Imagine how much taxes would go up if taxpayers had to pay for the cars to be towed every time one was left there.

The maybe the tow truck operators should think twice before they tow. If they tow first, and ask quesitons later, then I don't feel for them having to eat the costs.

 

[dcentity2000]

That's awful!



Rich::

 

[mytwotinks]

The maybe the tow truck operators should think twice before they tow. If they tow first, and ask quesitons later, then I don't feel for them having to eat the costs.

I agree!

Tow trucks are out like vultures in my area whenever there are icy streets. They look for cars in ditches and then call the cops to get permision to tow. I'm sure in most cases whoever left the car there got a ride and is planning on taking care of the car.

By the way......... Where I live owning a car is a necessity unless you don't ever need to get to the grocery store, doctor, pick your kids up at school, etc. There are probably more people living in rural areas that don't have public transportation than are living in cities with public transportation. I know families that would feel very fortunate to have a car that was only 13 years old.

 

[magicmato]

The maybe the tow truck operators should think twice before they tow. If they tow first, and ask quesitons later, then I don't feel for them having to eat the costs.

Then I guess nothing will ever be towed and the cities will have to hire employees to tow everything and pay for space to house said vehicles and employees to watch over them day and night, etc. Yep, much better option. And no, they should not have to "eat the costs". This is similar to when you abandon your car on the highway in a snowstorm. The state contacts a company to remove your vehicle as it is a danger and you then have to get it back from that company.