Tempe Town Lake

The woman who had her car towed while buying a cell phone in Tempe sounds like it occurred at the Jack in the Box on Mill Avenue & University. That guy is an ex-Tempe cop who runs a auto theft ring by stealing cars which are parked at his Jack in the Box when the people go to the cell phone store next to it.

It doesn't sound like government is protecting us from these thieves that steal cars like this and in fact often city laws often help the auto thieves.

Source

Towing tactics anger Arizona drivers

Private-lot removals called abusive, unfair

by Dianna M. Náñez - Jul. 4, 2010 12:00 AM

The Arizona Republic

Year after year, scores of Arizonans whose cars and trucks are towed from parking lots describe the experience as a nightmare.

They park in what they believe to be a public downtown lot only to return to see a tow truck hauling away their vehicle. If there are any signs to warn that the lot is private, they are so remote and weathered that they are unnoticeable.

Motorists plead with the tow-truck drivers to stop, but the vehicles are hauled off anyway, often to other cities and sometimes despite city ordinances that say the truck drivers should stop. The charge for getting the vehicles back reaches $150 or more. Motorists are told they can't get anything out of their car until they pay the bill. In cash.

Legislators and city leaders who have fought for new laws say the lack of state regulation of the towing industry has led to a towing free-for-all. To motorists, the experience can be maddening, expensive and unnecessary.

"They (towing companies) think they can do whatever they want," said Lindsey Eazor, whose family car was towed on Mother's Day from a Phoenix parking lacking clearly visible warning signs.

Some cities have adopted ordinances that try to limit abuses, but lawmakers say those rules fall short. Some towing companies simply ignore the rules when drivers are unaware of their rights. Without a single agency to enforce violations, cities struggle to prevent companies from manipulating the system for financial gain. That has tempted unscrupulous tow-truck companies to offer parking-lot owners a financial kickback for the rights to tow cars on their property, lawmakers say.

The push for reform at the state level has gained support from some tow-truck company owners, who blame the abuses on a few bad actors giving their industry a bad name. Still, towing legislation in 2008 and 2009 could not gain approval in the state Senate.

This year, as more cash-strapped motorists complained about being fleeced, the Legislature passed the strongest towing-reform bill in Arizona history.

But Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed it, saying it would cost too much to enforce.

Motorists who have battled towing companies say the system continues to be broken - and will remain so until the industry is forced to change.

Flouting ordinances

Several Valley cities have adopted regulations to stop abuses in the towing industry, but some tow-truck companies flout the ordinances to increase profits, lawmakers say.

To secure exclusive contracts for lots in Valley business corridors with limited parking, more companies are offering property owners a kickback, said Rep. Ed Ableser, D-Tempe, who introduced this year's towing bill. Such deals, he said, have led to an increase in towing scams where companies post little if any signage, hire people to report vehicles arriving in lots or victimize drivers who don't know their rights

"The problem is . . . (companies) are going to make sure they tow enough cars to make sure they get their money back. This is how you end up with companies doing whatever they have to . . . (for) a profit," he said.

Ableser applauds cities' efforts in recent years to crack down on unscrupulous towing companies. But disregard for those ordinances is well-known, and state regulation is needed to get the industry under control, he said.

Some Phoenix lots, for instance, fail to comply with a city ordinance requiring property owners to post tow warnings that are clearly visible and readable from any point within the parking area, as well as at each lot entrance.

Lindsey Eazor's family parked in an east Phoenix lot to join her parents for a Mother's Day lunch. The lot appeared to have no warning signs. She returned to find a tow truck leaving with her vehicle. The family tried to flag down the driver, but he didn't stop.

Upon closer inspection, the Eazors found a faded tow-warning sticker on the opposite side of the lot. They called the company and were told their vehicle was taken to Tempe.

She said the towing facility demanded $155 in exact cash to release the car even though Tempe approved a 2009 ordinance requiring companies to accept debit and credit cards.

"I called to complain and was told what they did was perfectly legal," Eazor said. "We're taking our mother out in this economy, and you're trying to get $155 from us? Really? I think that's just morally wrong."

Tempe has one of the state's strictest towing ordinances, which includes a 2007 provision requiring tow-truck drivers to release a vehicle without charging a fee if the owner returns while the vehicle is still in the lot. But some tow-truck drivers may be ignoring that regulation or are unaware of it.

Frances Ziemann parked in a lot adjacent to a downtown Tempe business where she was buying cellphones. [Sounds like it was towed from the Jack in the Box on Mill & University (721 S Mill Avenue, Tempe, AZ) and they parked there to use the cell phone shop next to it. The Jack in the Box is owned by an ex-Tempe cop who has for years run an auto theft racket stealing cars parked at his Jack in the Box] When a tow-truck driver wanted to tow Ziemann's vehicle, she pleaded. The driver said Ziemann was parked in a lot that belonged to a neighboring fast-food restaurant and he was towing her vehicle at the request of the property owner. When Ziemann persuaded the restaurant's manager to give her five minutes to move her car, the driver relented. The retired Fountain Hills art teacher thought she had escaped a costly tow.

But eight weeks later, a collection agency called Ziemann threatening her credit if she refused to pay a $155 towing bill. She wrote the Better Business Bureau for help and Gov. Jan Brewer urging reform. Ziemann refuses to pay the bill and was pleased the cellphone store agreed to let her post a photo warning people about the nearby lot.

"I know it's only $155 . . . but it's a matter of principle," she said. "I taught my kids to stand up for what's right."

From 2004 to 2006, Glendale residents' towing complaints spiked. Residents said towing companies were charging hundreds dollars to release their vehicle and tacking on fees to retrieve medicines, car seats or other personal items. The city passed a 2007 ordinance that included a $135 cap on towing, limits on storage fees and prohibited charges for retrieving personal belongings from vehicles.

Scottsdale, Tempe and Phoenix also have set caps, but many drivers are unaware of the limits as well as unaware of an Arizona Supreme Court decision that allows them to get their vehicle back without paying the bill. The company can refer the bill to collections, but refusing to release a vehicle is considered theft.

Complaints filed with the Better Business Bureau of Central, Northern and Western Arizona against the auto-towing industry jumped from 117 in 2007 to 162 in 2009.

Such ordeals have led to calls for statewide reform.

Reining in industry

Securing consumer protections and enforcement has proved difficult.

In 2008, state Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, pushed legislation regulating towing, but it couldn't clear the state Senate. In 2009, Biggs joined Ableser in a bipartisan effort, but their bill still couldn't gain Senate approval.

Ableser said he was determined to bring back a bill this year.

"I was hearing the same story of people getting scammed by towing companies," he said. "Signs not posted legally. Illegal charges. Holding someone's car hostage. We needed to do something."

Lawmakers say House Bill 2462 would have reined in the private-property towing industry by implementing regulation in cities that lacked towing ordinances, standardizing basic towing rights and making it illegal for a towing company to offer kickbacks to a property owner. To deal with companies that ignored the regulations, the state Department of Public Safety would have been given the authority to address drivers' complaints and fine towing companies up to $5,000 for violating the law. Towing companies would have had to keep records of towed vehicles for three years.

The bill would have required DPS to set maximum towing and storage rates for the state and would have banned companies from charging fees not approved by a city, county or the state.

It would have given Arizonans many of the same rights residents in other states have, including forcing private-property towing companies to release a vehicle at no cost when the owner returns before the vehicle has been removed from the lot.

Still, the law wasn't a cure-all. It lacked some key provisions, such as those that were essential in easing widespread towing abuses in California. To protect drivers who mistakenly park in a private lot and discourage towing companies from rushing to rack up tows for profit, California established a one-hour waiting period before most vehicles on private property can be towed. California also requires tow-truck drivers to get a signed authorization from the property owner or their employee verifying towing violations for every vehicle. That law was aimed at making property owners responsible for towing standards and recording proof of violations.

While Arizona's proposed towing reform lacked those standards, Ableser said this year's towing bill would have been a major win for drivers.

But the legislation ran into a stumbling block. DPS Director Robert Halliday, appointed by Brewer earlier this year, had concerns.

"He thought it was an unfunded mandate," said Ableser, noting that Halliday balked at increased costs or responsibilities for DPS when the state is reeling from an economic crisis.

Brewer said that DPS had limited resources to manage extra work.

"The department would need to reassign officers away from law-enforcement duties to private-towing company oversight functions," she wrote in her veto letter. "Given the current state of the department's budget, I believe such a reallocation to address private-towing firms would be imprudent."

Brewer's veto letter also argued that the regulations could interfere with cities' own towing ordinances. However, the bill allowed cities to set towing and storage rates so long as they didn't exceed the state's maximum rates.

Companies respond

Some towing companies say more regulation is unnecessary.

David Sweetman of Monster Towing applauds Brewer's veto.

"We're already too regulated," he said. "This is a state where you can be charged with theft for expecting someone to pay their (towing) bill. That's ridiculous."

Sweetman acknowledges that some towing companies operate unscrupulously, but he says property owners have a right to maintain parking for their own customers.

"Look, I'm not going to say we're all perfect. But what about people who see a parking sign and still decide to park illegally?" he said. "What if your neighbor had a party and someone decided to park their car in your driveway without your permission? Is that OK?"

Other companies say tighter rules and enforcement are overdue. And a handful of companies also supported the bill because it would have required drivers who refused to pay their towing bill to fill out a receipt for their vehicle that stated whether they dispute any of the fees. The receipt could strengthen a company's legal claim for payment.

Jeff Dunn, a co-owner of All City Towing, thinks towing reform is imminent because companies are realizing it's the fastest way to improve the industry's tarnished image.

"The towing industry, due to a few rogue towers, has a bad reputation," he said. "This was one piece of legislation that would have raised the bar for the towing industry."

Ableser said he will introduce a bill next year that includes the same protections as this year's bill and could require an increase in tow-truck licensing fees to create funding for enforcement. It also could strengthen enforcement by revoking a tow-truck license for repeated violations. He invites Halliday to discuss protections for Arizona drivers and ideas to address Brewer's concerns.

Dunn hopes next year's towing bill becomes law.

"I am a Republican, but I think that some regulation is good," he said. "If a company can't meet that standard, then they will effectively put themselves out of business."

Meanwhile, Ableser continues to get e-mail from irate motorists. Last week, Lora Gennari said her daughter was wrongfully towed in Tempe. She asked about her rights.

"We paid the fee and reclaimed our vehicle . . . (but) I suppose I'm wondering if there are any laws/guidelines in place now that the towing company must follow," she wrote. "Are they required to show proof of the violation? If not, how can this be legal?"