From Del. Rick Impallaria:
When a towing company, and this includes police-authorized tows, takes possession of a vehicle, they are required under Maryland State Law to return both the unattached personal property and the vehicle’s tags and registration to the vehicle owner upon request. Unfortunately, they are instead withholding the property and using the threat of fines by DMV over failing to return tags as a method of extorting money from the public. When this occurs, and the victims of these crimes call 911, and are referred to the Harford County Sheriff’s Department, not only does the Sheriff’s Dept. refuse to send an officer to assist, they falsely inform the victim that this is a civil case, and the Sheriff’s Department has no authority over it. This has been the policy of Sheriff Jesse L. Bane for at least two years, possibly longer. Due to his non-enforcement of the law, towing companies have become even more brazen in committing criminal acts against the public.
We will hold a press conference Thursday, December 15, 2011, at 11 am in front of the Harford County Circuit Court, directly across the street from the Sheriff’s Department
Despite all best efforts to compel the Sheriff Bane to uphold his oath of office to protect citizens from theft and extortion by towing companies, the Sheriff has steadfastly refused to enforce criminal theft and extortion law in Harford County.
The case will be tried in the Circuit Court for Harford County on Thursday, December 15, 2011, at 1:30 pm.
Sheriff Bane’s legal arguments as to why he cannot be compelled to enforce these laws are as follows. He is protected by “separation of powers”. The case is not justiciable, meaning that a judge has no power to compel him to enforce law. Victims of thefts allowed by his policy, citizens, and lawmakers have no standing to bring a case against him. He has the right to mislead and misinform the public that these are not criminal matters. He has no authority to regulate or control police towers. The advice and opinion of the Maryland Attorney General on the relevant law means nothing. He claims that he has discretion to blanketly nullify sections of the criminal code as he sees fit by non-enforcement policy.
I do wish Delegate Impallaria would save us all the expense of this lawsuit by dropping it and quietly going away.
His complaint is short on facts, thus becoming a mere allegation.
Furthermore, the “theft” charge is not going to stand under the commonly accepted definition, “Unauthorized taking property of another with the intention to permantly deprive the owner of said property.”
For the theft charge to stand, it is necessary for the court to determine that the towing company intended to keep the property for their own use.
he matter of “extortion” is also highly arguable; it could be claimed by the towing company that they had performed a service on behalf of the complainant or his insurance company, and that they therefore held a mechanic’s lien on the property. This should prompt a civil action, and would therfore not be under the jurisdiction of the Sheriff.
Hey Coledata,
“I do wish Delegate Impallaria would save us all the expense of this lawsuit by dropping it and quietly going away.” – Why would you wish this? I think this should go to court so a final determination can be made either way, after all, that is the function of the courts.
“His complaint is short on facts, thus becoming a mere allegation.” – All complaints are accusations and the facts are brought out during discovery, not in the complaint.
“Furthermore, the “theft” charge is not going to stand under the commonly accepted definition, “Unauthorized taking property of another with the intention to permantly deprive the owner of said property.”” – At common law that is the definition of theft. However, in Maryland, there is also a statutory crime of theft. The mens rea for the statutory crime of theft is “With the purpose of depriving the owner of property or in such a manner as to deprive the owner of property, or with knowledge that it would deprive owner of property; deprive = withholding (1) property permanently, (2) for such a period as to appropriate portion of its value, (3) with purpose of restoring it only if there is payment of reward or other compensation, or (4) disposing property and using or dealing with property so that unlikely owner will recover.”
“For the theft charge to stand, it is necessary for the court to determine that the towing company intended to keep the property for their own use.” – Only under common law. Under the statute, the theft charge can stand if it can be proven that the possessor would not relinquish the property until some sort of payment was made. In this case, one could deduce that the towing company possesses the property in the car and won’t release it until the tow/storage payment was made.
“The matter of “extortion” is also highly arguable;” – Maryland Code Criminal Law, 3-701, Extortion, states, “A person may not obtain , attempt to obtain, or conspire to obtain money, property, labor, services, or anything of value from another person with the person’s consent, if the consent is induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened:(1) force or violence; (2) economic injury; or (3) destruction, concealment, removal, confiscation, or possession of any immigration or government identification document with intent to harm the immigration status of another person.” So I could see an argument for…and against a charge of extortion.
“it could be claimed by the towing company that they had performed a service on behalf of the complainant” – Yes, that could be claimed. It could also be claimed that the service itself was something other than a service and therefore, part of the extortion. Lots of things could be claimed.
“or his insurance company,” – The insurance company does not own the property and therefore has minimal, if any, authority over the property.
“and that they therefore held a mechanic’s lien on the property.” – The mechanics lien would be, if at all, against the car itself, not the personal property inside that car.
“This should prompt a civil action, and would therfore not be under the jurisdiction of the Sheriff.” – There could be a civil action as well as a criminal action.
Anyways, have a nice day.
Paul:
Thank you for that valuable input.
My real problem is with the use of the court as a method of resolution. This action, which commenced as a civil matter, is being escalated to a criminal issue, whereupon, not only do the taxpayers of the County face some, or all, of the costs, but subsequently legislators will pontificate for hours drafting new legislation to paper over cracks in existing legislation.
The court action, and subsequent legislation are performed at the expense of the taxpayer; at a time when the taxpayer has nothing left to give.
I do not know, as I have obviously never been privy to any of the issues involved in this action, but I really do suspect that the matter could have been resolved, had it not been for egos getting in the way.
Hey Coledata,
“My real problem is with the use of the court as a method of resolution. This action, which commenced as a civil matter, is being escalated to a criminal issue, whereupon, not only do the taxpayers of the County face some, or all, of the costs, but subsequently legislators will pontificate for hours drafting new legislation to paper over cracks in existing legislation.” – The action filed is a mandamus action. The purpose of a mandamus action is to have a court order a lower court, or a government officer to perform mandatory or ministerial duties correctly. I think this is the correct action to file and I would classify this action as civil or administrative, not really criminal. As for the costs, I really can’t comment on this because I don’t know really how much this will costs anyone. My guess would be that the costs really wouldn’t be that much because of the nature of the action. Though, you may indeed be correct, it may cost the taxpayers, but, if Impallaria is correct, would it be worth it? I don’t know. In fact, I don’t know if Impallaria is correct or not in pursuing this action, though, it is the correct action to pursue.
“The court action, and subsequent legislation are performed at the expense of the taxpayer; at a time when the taxpayer has nothing left to give.” – There is indeed a fine line when it comes to what a legislator should do. The next election will tell the tale.
“I do not know, as I have obviously never been privy to any of the issues involved in this action, but I really do suspect that the matter could have been resolved, had it not been for egos getting in the way.” – I suspect it could have as well and I agree that the egos of those involved probably got in the way of settling this without having to burden the courts. That’s what happens with politicians, both Impallaria and Bane.
Anyways, have a nice day.
@Coledata, court is where one goes to seek resolution, especially when a recalcitrant party like Sheriff Bane has rebuffed all other requests for a resolution.
Sheriff Bane’s argument with regard to enforcing existing law is simple and weak…he doesn’t have to and doesn’t want to. It is the argument that one would expect from a two year old child regarding eating their
peas.
Sheriff Bane could have settled this matter at the outset and he chose to fight instead.
Del. Impallaria deserves his day in court to prove that Harford County has become the Wild West for Towing Companies. If he is able to prove his allegations, and the court rules in his favor, we should all be the better for it.
Well, the Tow Companies operated very well under the law when it was overseen by Lt. Wes Picha and then Sheriff Joe Meadows. What has changed?
Did you read the article? If the same things were occurring under Pica and Meadows, then nothing has changed.
He is correct many of the towing Companies are corrupt. I had my car illegally towed from Festival Shopping Center by Henry’s towing. After 2 hours of looking for my car we found it had been towed to Henry’s. I went there and asked for my car back. The owner was a big wise guy who bragged about the fact that his daughter and her boyfirend needed some spending money so he told them to cruise by Festival and “Pick up some spending money”. He claimed my sticker was missing from the licence plate. The car was properly registered but Henry had scrapped off the year sticker themselves on the licence plate. I had to pay $230 to get my car back that night. Festival refunded my money and stopped using Henry’s after a written complaint by myself.
Ed, Thank you for sharing your story. At least the Festival understands the difference between right and wrong. Too bad others in our county do not. Kudos to the Festival for assisting you, and making it right on your behalf.
They should have towed him away and left the car.
That said, it is unbelievable that a towing company can charge $200 or more (in cash) from those owners who’s cars get towed. The state should set a max of $50 for the tow and a storeage charge of say $5 day.
That sounds all well but you cannot run a business and make a profit with only charging $50.00 a tow. With the rising cost of fuel, insurance and labor rates, it cost about $85.00 per hour just to keep the trucks on the road. For every five police tows the tow company might be paid for two of them you do the math the tow companies are just happy to break even with them. The $5.00 a day storage is just a dumb statement. If you only charge five dollars a day no one would be motivated to pick up there car. You cannot even park your car in a parking lot for that. You need to do a little more research before you just go and spout off in a public forum.
That sounds all well but you cannot run a business and make a profit with only charging $50.00 a tow. With the rising cost of fuel, insurance and labor rates, it cost about $85.00 per hour just to keep the trucks on the road. For every five police tows the tow company might be paid for two of them you do the math the tow companies are just happy to break even with them. The $5.00 a day storage is just a dumb statement. If you only charge five dollars a day no one would be motivated to pick up there car. You cannot even park your car in a parking lot for that. You need to do a little more research before you just go and spout off in a public forum.
ok Ted, I’ll acknowledge that $5/day storeage is way too low. Let’s compare what premium parking per day costs in say Baltimore….anywhere from $10 – $20. Its fair to keep this storeage fee in line with those rates.
As far as a tow truck company charging each car towed $200 +, that is just price gouging. The state should set a max fee that can be charged. A savvy tow truck operator can tow about 3 to 5 cars per hour. Lots of profit there. I don’t buy the statement that “…For every five police tows the tow company might be paid for two of them you do the math the tow companies are just happy to break even with them.” Prove what you say. Furthermore, tow truck companies are on contract with so many businesses and apartment complexes to tow cars that don’t belong.
Ease up on the socialism comments. The public should not be abused by anyone just because they seek PROFIT!
It is called capitalism. THe market dictates a going rate. People pay the rate for the tow. Are you in favorof the governmetn regulating the cost of other services? Maybe you can work a job in a service where the government regulates how much you can make!
This is not the law of supply and demand where people pay the market rate, which is based upon choice or people’s willingness to pay X amount for a product. What you have here in this example are greedy business owners who set a price and the public has no recourse and must pay that amount in order to “free” their cars from the impound lot. Those who’s cars have been towed have no choice…its pay or you don’t get your car.
Well that is how healthcare works! Sounds good for towing too!
Wow we want government regulation of private companies and how much they charge? Sounds like socialism!
And who voted to put Jesse in office? Oh, that is right…..NOT ME!!! He has always been underhanded and doing just what he wanted regardless of how it affected other people. And you expected that to change when he got in office?
I don’t know that Jesse is “underhanded”. More like he is just unaware or not capable.
When a family member from out of town had his minivan stolen in Edgewood (surprise, surprise…), the towing company that recovered it refused to allow access to the registration paperwork in the glove box to prove he owned the vehicle.
The owner had to borrow a car to drive two hours home, get the title and drive back to prove it was his vehicle. Of course, by the time he returned, the business was closed for the day and tacked on an extra day’s storage fee.
Towing companies are the closest thing to pirates today (and I do not mean baseball.) That being said, Delegate Impallaria is the closest thing to a village idiot today. So it’s even-steven, let it go to trail and let us enjoy the show.
Another reason to vote in another sheriff at the next election.
Another reason to vote in another Delegate at the next election.
A thought keeps reverberting in my mind, beneath the tin foil beanie, that our court’s time could be spent better than on this Delegate’s personal endeavour
Can anyone go to the trial? How do we go about doing that?
Hey Firstname,
“Can anyone go to the trial? How do we go about doing that?” – Yes, nearly all trials are open to the public. There are very, very, very few trials that are closed to the public. The hearing is on 12/15/2011, at 1:30 p.m. at the Circuit Court for Harford County, though it appears that a Baltimore County judge will be conducting the hearing. If you want to attend, just go to the court and find out what room the hearing will be, then watch and enjoy.
Anyways, have a nice day.
Shame on Sheriff Bane for not resolving this matter by changing the Sheriff’s Department’s policy and enforcing the law. There is no question that towing companies are illegally and criminally holding citizens private property that is unattached to their vehicle causing them financial harm and risk to private party.
Why is it that Bane thinks his unreasonable use of discretion is consistent with Maryland State Law?
Finally congratulations to Del. Impallaria for championing the rights of Harford County residents’ property rights and pushing the Sheriff’s Department to enforce the law. The sheriff’s department and towing companies are not above the law.
There has been several occasions that I am aware of, when Deputies have interceded on behalf of citizens, to retrieve personal property from their towed vehicles. I do not know if this has been done in violation of an order from the Sheriff not to intercede or, in all probability would be the case with Jesse, the absence of any order or policy not to intercede.
Paul MC, thanks.
Sheriff Bane could end all of this right now by simply clarifying that it is a criminal act for tow companies to keep unattached personal property of vehicle owners and enforce the law when tow companies violate it.
It won’t take but one incident of a tow operator being charged with criminal theft for them to get the message and respect Harford County citizen’s property rights.
I agree with Paul. Tow companies think they are above the law. it is time someone disabuse them of that notion.
Well, he got his date in court and like they say you can’t fix stupid. The Judge threw the case out in a matter of minutes. So, I guess the Sheriff isn’t doing anything wrong and Del. Impalaria like most state elected officals waisted more of the courts time, Officers time, and most importantly the tax payers time/money just to grandstand his own personal grudge. Score is Sherrif Bane 3 Impalaria Brothers 0
@Really, the judge did rule in favor of Sheriff Bane. The judge did not rule that Bane’s non-enforcement of the law was correct. The judge ruled against Impallaria’s argument, gave him the opportunity to appeal and agreed that Impallaria had and has standing to bring suit.
Impallaria was successful in bringing to light Bane’s misguided practices and that tow operators are violating law. Impallaria has done a great service for the citizens of Harford County. I applaud him for his efforts in championing personal property rights.
We all need to keep a close watch on whether Sheriff Bane sees the light and changing his ways.
PAUL: What don’t you understand about this? The court has ruled against Impallaria and that means that the Sheriff did not have “…misguided practices and that tow operators are violating law.” You do not like losing but learn to live with it. We do not need to keep a close watch on anyone as there is no light to see, unless you mean Impallaria not acting like a fool.
Hey all,
The following was on the Maryland Judiciary site:
“Matter before the court (Howe/Lansella) for Hearing on a Writ of Mandamus on 12/1511. Plaintiff’s counsel entered his appearance on the record. Plaintiff’s counsel requested postponement, Deft counsel objected, court denied postponement. Deft’s counsel requested dismissal with prejudice, court denied at this time. Argument taken from each counsel. Court ruled Plaintiff has standing as private citizen, not as Chair of Delegates from Harford County. After argument taken court rules sheriff does not have a ministerial duty as outlined by Plaintiff in his Writ, court dismissed case with prejudice.”
The court ruled that the sheriff did not have a ministerial duty as outlined in the Plaintiff’s writ. That is pretty strong wording from the court.
This case, like any other, can be appealed, though I am not sure what the standard of review for this action would be. I think it might be on the record, meaning what was already heard in the trial, as opposed to de novo, meaning a new. If it is on the record, then I don’t think it would be overturned, though I did not attend the trial, because judges usually have great discretion in their rulings. If it is de novo, there is a better possibility for it to overturned, if the reviewing judges believe the Plaintiff was correct.
Also, this was dismissed with prejudice, meaning the plaintiff can’t bring this action again on the same claim.
Paul,
“The judge did not rule that Bane’s non-enforcement of the law was correct. The judge ruled against Impallaria’s argument, gave him the opportunity to appeal and agreed that Impallaria had and has standing to bring suit.” – Even though the judge didn’t rule on Bane’s enforcement, it seems rather apparent that the judge, as he ruled in favor of the sheriff, did not think the sheriff was in the wrong. As for the opportunity to appeal and the standing, well, everyone has the opportunity to appeal and every citizen would have standing. The judge did say that as a chair of the delegates, he does not have standing, though.
“Impallaria was successful in bringing to light Bane’s misguided practices and that tow operators are violating law. Impallaria has done a great service for the citizens of Harford County. I applaud him for his efforts in championing personal property rights.” – Delegate Impallaria did bring to light some things, though a better process may have been to enact legislation which made what the delegate believes Bane is doing to be a criminal act.
Anyways, have a nice day.
Impalallaria was a loser twice in Annapolis. A loser in bringing a bogus poorley written complaint and now the Judge ruled him a loser! It is time for Del Impallairia to move on…
Ruth K –
If you’re going to launch a personal insult at Delegate Impallaria the least you could do is spell his name right instead typing it wrong twice and differently each time in the same post.
I may be a bad name speller, but that doesnt change Ricks loser status
@Ruth K – It’s not Ricks, but rather Rick’s and you aren’t even arguing the matter of tow companies illegally withholding personal unattached property and license plates.
I get it you don’t like Impallaria, but it doesn’t mean he isn’t right about the abusive conduct of tow companies and Sheriff Bane’s non-enforcement of existing law.
While I’m not a fan of Impallaria’s politics I see this towing situation as nonpartisan and I think the public should thank him for his work on righting this despicable and tragic wrong.
To Mr. Bane please clean up your act.
Citizen Democrat: “After argument taken court rules sheriff does not have a ministerial duty as outlined by Plaintiff in his Writ, court dismissed case with prejudice.” As we have just read, the Sheriff does not need to “clean up his act.” The only “…despicable and tragic wrong….” here is Impalliria being his usual idiot self. BTW if you are a Democrat, I am Batman.
Hello Batman, and good night to you.
Good night!
This suit should have been directed against the towing company not the sherriff. Impallaria abused his position as a delegate by bringing it as such.
I agree if there is a problem with specific tow companies target them. This was nothing more than a personal attack against the Sheriff. This is coming from the same guy that is targeting a grocery store for claiming to be from Bel Air. Seriously with all the stuff that is screwed up you are worried about their sign out front. Nevermind the economy being in the dump. Maybe he should be more worried about Wegmen’s hiring more people and putting more people to work that are within his district, oh wait Bel Air is not his district. Bottom line Ricky’s little brother Timmy didn’t get promoted, and had his shift changed. So, Ricky uses his position (how many other people involved in suits call a press conference on the steps of the courthouse) and trys to attack the Sheriff. All for not, it failed. The voters need to send a message next time around and send this goof packing. A source close to the Sheriff’s office has told me that Tim Impallaria is running for FOP president. Yet another attempt to bring controversy and dismay to that agency. If the fop members are even considering voting this guy in take a look around I’m sure the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.
@Herbert: Since you have sources close to the Sheriff’s Office, you should mention that Sheriff Bane has not promoted Sgt Impallaria even though Impallaria was number one on the promotion list.
The HCSO has established written policy and procedure to provide for a fair and IMPARTIAL promotion system within the HCSO. This system was devised to produce the most worthy candidates for advancement to the next higher grade, and to end the “good ole boy system” that had existed before. Sheriff Bane has decided that this fair and impartial procedure does not select the people he wants, so he deviates from the promotion list and promotes the person he wants. Is it his right as Sheriff to do so? I suppose it is, after all he is the Sheriff, however it calls into question, why have the fair and impartial system if you don’t intend to use it?
What does a civil service promotion have to do with towing vehicles
@Kennet Pttman: My comments are in reply to Herbert comments, should you care to read them. Herbert makes the case that the court action brought by Del. Impallaria was somehow connected to the Sheriff not promoting his younger brother Tim, a member of the Sheriff’s Office.
Then to Herbert, what’s a civil service promotion got to do with this waste of the court’s time. If you are implying corrption then say it.
Impallaria discovered tow companies were withholding vehicle owner’s unattached private party and when they reported it to the Sheriff’s department they were incorrectly told it was a civil matter and that the Sheriff’s would not act to get their property returned.
Cdev let’s pretend for a moment that you owned a restaurant and while you were on your way to deposit the money from the day’s business you were in an accident. You were unconscious, taken to the hospital and your totaled car was towed away. Then later that day you were released from the hospital and went to retrieve the $3000 in cash from the car only to be told you can’t have anything out of your vehicle?
I have to agree with Paul on this one: tow companies are acting above the law and should be held accountable. It is a shame this issue could not have been resolved by a grownup. Impallaria used this as a personal attack on the sheriff instead on the onerous practices of towing companies.
It is my understanding that before the Writ of Mandamus suit was filed Impallaria sought resolution of the matter of towing companies withholding vehicle owner’s unattached personal property including license plates only to be rebuffed by Sheriff Bane.
And even after the suit was filed Impallaria reached out to Bane to avoid court and resolve the situation and once again was turned away.
Then in that case I would file a suit against the tow company to compell them t release the items. Not sue the sherriff because the tow company withheld items. Furthermore I beleive the tow campany said they held the items because they had no one promising to pay for the tow they preformed.
@Cdev, you are clearly a fool.
If you are incapacitated in an accident, your car is totaled, an insurance company will be paying for the damages/tow and you later want your personal unattached property and license plates back the tow company cannot not withhold the property.
Paul that is what should happen. According to Impallaria when this story started he said the tow company was holding his stuff because no insurance company had indicated they where paying for the tow. His own court fillings indicate that it had not happened.
@Cdev – Get it through your thick noggin that tow companies cannot withhold, quarantine, sequester or otherwise restrain a vehicle owner’s access to their personal unattached property and license plates. The vehicle is their security.
So his recourse should have been to sue the tow company not the sherriff!
@Cdev
This matter is about the sheriff not enforcing the law and aiding vehicle owners when tow companies take their personal property and hold it hostage.
Paul: What does “Matter before the court (Howe/Lansella) for Hearing on a Writ of Mandamus on 12/1511. Plaintiff’s counsel entered his appearance on the record. Plaintiff’s counsel requested postponement, Deft counsel objected, court denied postponement. Deft’s counsel requested dismissal with prejudice, court denied at this time. Argument taken from each counsel. Court ruled Plaintiff has standing as private citizen, not as Chair of Delegates from Harford County. After argument taken court rules sheriff does not have a ministerial duty as outlined by Plaintiff in his Writ, court dismissed case with prejudice.” mean to you?
THE DELEGATE WAS TOLD HE COULD HAVE ACCESS TO THE VEHICLE. HE WAS ALSO TOLD HE COULD HAVE ALL OF HIS PERSONAL PROPERTY. HE WAS ALSO GIVEN A PHOTO COPY OF A MEMO FROM MARYLAND STATE POLICE STATING THAT PERSONAL PROPERTY CAN NOT BE HELD HOSTAGE, IT MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR THE OWNER OF THE VEHICLE. THE DELEGATE’S VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE. THE INSURANCE COMPANY FOR THE OTHER DRIVER CONTACTED THE TOW COMPANY AND ADVISED THAT AN ADJUSTER WOULD STOP BY AND DETERMINE WHETHER THE VEHICLE WAS CONSIDERED A TOTAL LOSS OR IF IT WAS TO BE TRANSPORTED TO A BODY SHOP. THE INSURANCE COMPANY REQUESTED THAT THE TAGS STAY WITH THE VEHICLE UNTIL THAT DETERMINATION WAS MADE. ALSO IN THE MSP MEMO, IT STATED THAT VEHICLE TAGS ARE NOT CONSIDERED PERSONAL PROPERTY BUT PART OF THE VEHICLE. DELEGATE IMPALLARIA WAS ASKED IF HE WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE INSURANCE COMPANY. HE SAID NO. HE SAID HE WANTED TO CALL THE POLICE. THE POLICE DID NOT GET INVOLVED IN THE MATTER AND THE DELEGATE WALKED OUT OF THE OFFICE. HE WENT TO HIS VEHICLE AND REMOVED HIS PERSONAL PROPERTY AND HIS VEHICLE TAGS.
@Citizen
So were you there as witness or a participant to these events as you recalled them?
Paul
Help me understand Citizen why would Mr. Impallaria be constrained by third party insurance co. under your scenario “THE INSURANCE COMPANY FOR THE OTHER DRIVER CONTACTED THE TOW COMPANY AND ADVISED THAT AN ADJUSTER WOULD STOP BY AND DETERMINE WHETHER THE VEHICLE WAS CONSIDERED A TOTAL LOSS OR IF IT WAS TO BE TRANSPORTED TO A BODY SHOP. THE INSURANCE COMPANY REQUESTED THAT THE TAGS STAY WITH THE VEHICLE UNTIL THAT DETERMINATION WAS MADE.”? They don’t insure his car and the insurance company has no legal authority.
There is no Maryland State Police memo stating “THAT VEHICLE TAGS ARE NOT CONSIDERED PERSONAL PROPERTY BUT PART OF THE VEHICLE.”
Del
Citizen – did he have access to his Caps Lock key so he could stop screaming at us like you are? Sheesh…
No Paul, he doesn’t the court said as much. The remedy to his alleged problem is sue the person who actually “stole” his stuff. Do you blame the police if someone breaks into your house or the thief?
Delfino if he is filing a claim with them then he does things their way. He can not declared his car totaled.
Insurance companies do not identify cars by licence tags. They confirm the vehicle by its Vehicle Identification Number or VIN. So it is doubtful an insurer would require tags be kept on a car for an adjuster.
@Cdev
You’ve been wrong on every aspect of this issue.
Understand that Impallaria’s goal has been to champion individual property rights that are being abridged by tow companies and aided and abetted by Sheriff Bane.
What about the towing company that is not paid for their work. Again did the sherrif take his stuff? He sued the wrong person.
CDEV: If someone breaks into my house and takes my property, I blame the thief. If I notify the Sheriff that my house was broken into and property taken, and the Sheriff fails to take my complaint and does not investigate the complaint, then I blame the Sheriff.
Suppose you had a theft of your property, and then located the property at a local pawn shop. You notify the Sheriff, and the Sheriff tells you that it is an issue between you, the pawn shop and the thief to settle. Now stealing your property is wrong, just like a tow company withholding your property, but after all your issue is with the thief who took it and the pawn shop, not the Sheriff. Good grief, he didn’t take your property, he’s just not helping you get it back. What you need to do is sue the thief and pawn shop owner!!
Retired that is what I have said from the begining sue the tow company not the Sherrif. Just like you sue the pawn shop owner and thief when the sherrif has assited you in retrieving items and searching for the thief.
@Cdev, writes “What about the towing company that is not paid for their work.”
They tow company has no right to the unattached personal property or the license tags. They cannot hold them hostage for payment. The have the automobile as security.
Cdev writes “Again did the sherrif take his stuff? He sued the wrong person.”
The suit was against the sheriff for not enforcing the law and aiding and abetting tow companies in violating it. You can’t sue a tow company to cause the sheriff to enforce the law and cure a systemic and institutionalized wrong. Sheriff Bane could fix this issue but chooses tow companies over citizens.
Shame on you, Cdev for covering for Sheriff Bane and supreme shame on the Sheriff.
Paul you can sue a towing company to get your stuff back. Or did he get that. The towing company was holding the tags as the insurance company who was making the determination of a total loss requested it do. If the delagate wants to be the Sherriff’s boss he should seek a position which allows that. Short of that if he is in need of his stuff he should sue the person who has it!
Cdev, you just can’t admit that Sheriff Bane is wrong for not enforcing laws and not protecting people.
@Cdev
Now you just making stuff up.
There is no proof that the insurance company of the party-at-fault for the accident demanded the license tags stay with the vehicle. Especially when they are not needed for identification purposes which is done from the VIN number.
Impallaria sued to get Sheriff Bane to enforce the law, he sued the right person.
A tow company cannot keep people’s unattached personal property/license tags for any reason, even if the reason is to get paid for a service. It’s illegal.
I believe that information was presented at the press conference!
@Cdev
So you really have no clue, do you.
@Cdev
So you really have no clue, do you?
No that would be the Delgate who just makes things up. This was stated at his press conference by the owner of the tow company who is going to be sueing the delagate for defemation of character.
Cdev, the owner of tow company made no statements in conjunction with the Impallaria’s press conference.
Not according to the Aegis!
@Cdev
You should go back and read the Aegis article on the press conference again.
@Paul: From reading all of these posts, I’m pretty sure CDEV does not read very well. His reading comprehension skills are very questionable. Sad.
Delegate
I did vote for you last election, however your behavior has been such that I am embarrassed to admit that. This entire matter was a result of your imperialistic attitude. You should have sued the Sheriff as a private citizen. However, you chose to invoke your position as a delegate in your initial correspondence, which is without a doubt an abuse of office. If you had handled yourself as an adult in your dealing with the tow company the entire episode could and should have been avoided. Resign your office and avoid the embarrassment of a loss.
Sheriff Bane stop the egregious and criminal acts of tow operators it’s not only the law it’s the right thing to do.
Del
Dan Rodricks December 18, 2011 – Towing the line on property-rights…
Who’d a thunk Dan Rodricks would take the side of Delegate Rick Impallaria?
Paul: Yes, even Rodricks understands how simple this is. The Sheriff’s Office should assist citizens if the Tow Companies refuse to return, or allow you access to your personal property or the car tags which are the property of the MVA. This is especially true if the Sheriff’s Office, by way of the on scene Deputy, is the one who requested and authorized the tow!
Dan Rodricks kicked Bane’s butt today in the Sun. Shame on Bane!
Delegate Impallaria has a huge problem. He lies and many people believe his lies. I have observed him deceive the public for almost two years. Is the truth not interesting enough? The truth aould never get him all this news coverage. The truth would expose him as a bully. I have never been involved in politics but someone needs to expose him.
@Citizen – Which Impallaria lies do people believe?
I wonder if the three stooges are still in district 7?
PAUL, THE LIES REGARDING HIS PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH A TOW COMPANY IN HARFORD COUNTY 2 YEARS AGO.
@Citizen: So share the truth with us, and tell us how your know it to be the truth.
@Citizen
Are you saying the towing company did not withhold Rick Impallaria’s property and tags and did not demand payment in order to release his stuff?
How would you know? Were you there?
Floyd The Barber
I AM AT WORK RIGHT NOW AND THE FACTS FROM BEGINNING TO END WILL TAKE SOME TIME TO WRITE DOWN BUT I REALLY WANT TO TELL THE REAL STORY. I THOUGHT MAYBE HE WOULD STOP LYING BUT HE WILL NOT.
Why not just call AAA towing instead of one of these bandits? The participating towers are bound by their agreement with AAA, and I always have a positive experience when I contact AAA for service.
@BRAC Family
This matter was an “unauthorized tow” where the vehicle owner was injured, taken to the hospital and the police arranged for the totaled vehicle to be towed.
Okay just read this. I have one question. Are the tags being held for evidence in a court trial?
To RETIREDCOP
First of all, the Delegate left the tow yard with his tags. The memo sent to all tow companies from MSP dated 2/2009 stated that the tags were considered part of the vehicle. Until recently, that was the only written statement given to tow companies regarding vehicle tags. The insurance company representing the other driver was sending out an adjuster to determine the damages to the Delegate’s vehicle. The agent asked the tow yard to wait until a determination had been rendered. The insurance company was taking financial responsibility for the vehicle. The Delegate refused to call the insurance company to discuss the issue. At that time, the tow company followed the regulations as they were given out in black and white.
@Citizen
Once again the insurance company of the driver responsible for the accident has no control over Mr. Impallaria’s license tags.
Additionally, the adjuster MUST identify the vehicle being appraised by its VIN number not the license tags.
Furthermore, we don’t have any evidence that a conversation between the tow company and the third party insurer about Mr. Impallaria’s license tags even occurred.
Finally, if it did happen, then why was the adjuster able to appraise the vehicle as totaled absent the license tags if they were essential to insurance adjuster’s appraisal?
Rick Impallaria left the tow yard with the tags, so that is a mute point. And of course Rick Impallaria was a perfect gentleman to the employees at the tow yard. He’s always a wonderful upstanding citizen! (just don’t run his name in maryland case search)
@NH Cobras
We could only hope that you and “Citizen” were mute.
However, it is not a moot point when were are talking about tow companies illegally holding vehicle owner’s unattached personal property and license tags. It is theft and a form of extortion used by tow companies that Sheriff Jess Bane refuses to do his duty and enforce existing law.
Sheriff Bane is the bad guy here and the people of Harford County suffer by his inaction.
Yes it is a moot point since the case has been dismissed!
@Cdev
Go play in traffic!
With Prejudice!!!!!!
@Cdev
Go play in traffic…exclamation points ad nauseum.
Paul, What evidence do you have that anything the Delegate claims happened is real and true. His good and honorable word? The Delegate’s truth is fantasy. I am sure he believes what he says, pathological liars usually do.
@Citizen
There is no question that unscrupulous tow companies are withholding unattached personal property and license tags of vehicle owners in violation of the law and Sheriff Jess Bane is tacitly approving this illegal practice by not enforcing the law.
Yes we do have evidence, the tow yards statement to that effect.
FYI In 2011, when Delegate Impallaria testified before the Harford Delegation and again before the Senate Hearing Committee he lied. Again and again, he lied. I know that is not really news worthy. However, I did some research and no one is under oath when testifying for these legislative hearings. The Delegate was there to promote his towing legislation. The Delegate can lie and he does not have to face any legal consequences. Let’s put some honor back into the title Honorable Delegate and NOT re elect this politician.
@Citizen: What did he say that was a lie?
RETIREDAWHILE, Are you serious? Go back and read all the comments here.
@Citizen: Yes, I am serious. You stated that he lied in testimony before the Harford Delegation, and the Senate Hearing Committee. I am asking what he said before those people that is a lie.
@Retiredawhile
Citizen can’t point to lies that don’t exist. All he wants to do is defend the tow companies practice of withholding personal unattached property and license tags from vehicle owners.
The tow companies are being dishonest and Sheriff Jess Bane is wrong.
@Paul: Yes, I agree. And let me say that I am not a big fan of Del. Impallaria. But in this instance regarding the towing companies, I’m in agreement with him. Simply stated, the Sheriff’s position should not be one of indifference.
@Retiredawhile
You’re right! It’s about the personal property rights, illegal behavior of tow companies and non-enforcement of the law by Sheriff Bane.
Citizen obviously has some direct stake in this issue for him to go such great lengths to impugn Del. Impallaria’s character and misdirect the conversation.
This matter is about facts. Tow companies are withholding personal unattached property and license tags, Sheriff Bane is helping tow companies by not enforcing the law and Del. Impallaria is doing the the right thing in trying to correct this injustice.
To Paul & Retiredawhile, If I was the type of WOMAN to wager a bet, I would say neither one of you are interested in whether the Delegate lies or not.
@Citizen: What I am interested in is when a Man or Woman states in writing, that one of our Delegates lied before a Senate Hearing Committee, that the Man or Woman who made such a statement, back it up by telling us, when we ask, just what the Delegate said before the Committee, that was a lie. Your failure to do so reflects upon your veracity.
Well im not one to do this but im going to post my thoughts on this as a person that has been in the towing industry for over 20 yrs and working in and industry that can be dangerous and rewarding. we go out at all hours of the day and night not to mention the weather but people on here say that we should do it for nothing or little cost and dont realize one bit of what it take to run a business like this. alos to go deal with people that can be the rudest in the world for something they did wrong and give crap to us oh but thats ok right??? so for all of you know it alls the issue at hand with delagate tags not personal property. tags according to the DMV belong to the vehicle that it is tagged to not the PERSON meaning the DMV owns them. there might be crooked tow companys out there i dont disagree with that but one bad apple theres a lot of good honest tow companys out there and this delagate is way out in left feild and needs to go somewhere and woory about what this state needs then his OWN PERSONAL CRAP.
@Rickybobby: I don’t recall any posts that said tow companies should provide a tow for free.
I just don’t agree that tow company’s should be permitted to keep someones personal property, other than the towed vehicle, until the fee for the tow is paid. The towed vehicle is the held chattel for your towing fee.
I don’t agree that a tow company should be able to keep someones personal property just because the person was rude to them.
I don’t agree that a tow company should be able to keep someones personal property just because the tow truck operator feels unappreciated, or feels their job is dangerous.
For my part, I always appreciated tow operators. The faster they came, the faster I could get back on patrol.
obviously you didnt read what i wrote i never said anything about holding personal property i know thtat you cant do that it is illegal but my comment on TAGS ARE PROPETY OF DMV just like you drivers license is property of the dmv and it and your tags can be taken at any time by them. im not being rude but maybe you should read what i wrote and not make an assumption your thoughts are yours and its a free world but i didnt say a damn thing about holding personal property
Rickybobby: And if you read what I wrote, you would see that I didn’t say that you said anything about withholding personal property. I stated my position with regard to Delegate Impallaria’s position.
I’m sorry you feel so unappreciated. I will say again; I always looked forward to seeing the tow truck operator.
i feel very appreciated there retired to long on my stance with the with idiot that is a delagate he was tryin to make a personal issue out to be all out blown issue which wasnt i can tell you i didnt vote for him and i pretty sure that others will too the idiots that run this state are the crooked ones. not just does this idiot want to make a small business in county be wrong he wants a major company like wegmans pay taxes on them using the words bel air in the title come on this ass needs to go hes wasting my tax dollars on his salary if he and his colleges want to do something for the great state of maryland they should give back there pay to helps us all out.
Well said Ricky!! Looking forward to seeing you and your truck out and about.
@RICKYBOBBY
You may not like it, but it is illegal for tow companies to hold hostage or otherwise keep vehicle owners’ unattached personal property, license tags or their driver’s license for that matter.
Not according to the judge in the case. She dismissed the claim!
lets see there paul what would be your expertize in this area as about 2 weeks ago the maryland state police sent out a memo regarding tags and can be givin back to the owner of the vehicle so if its illegal tell me why that harford county sheriffs can remove your tags on your vehicle is that illegal you seem to think that tags belong to . you but your really mistaken they belong to the DMV just like your licence i guess your mistaken just like your so called delagate dipshit. i just love people that think they know it all and dont know crap get a little common sense and this world would be a little better if you dont know dont act like you do……………………….
@rickybobby
Tow companies are not law enforcement or the MVA so they have no right to vehicle owners’license tags or driver’s license.
You really have a hard time with the truth. And the truth is tow companies are breaking the law when the withhold unattached personal property and license tags from vehicle owners.
Actually the MVA is a branch of the State Police! Of course you remember it was a state trooper who administered your driving test!
The tow companies are following the memo that was issued by the State Police at the time thus they are following the law!
@CDEV: What does the law say now? Have the guidelines that were in place at the time of the Impallaria incident changed with regard to the vehicle license plates? Are the tow companies still legally permitted to prevent you from removing the plates from your vehicle?
A memo was sent out approx. 2 weeks ago advising tow companies to release tags to vehicle owners when requested. This decision was based upon the opinion of the Maryland Attorney General’s Office. This is a change from the previous memo that stated that vehicle tags were not personal property but part of the vehicle. In any case, the tow companies will do what the police dictate.
Still disappointed that the Delegate lies to everyone.
It has changed but at the time of the incident the Tow company was following the law. This is why they know have a claim against Impallaria!
@Citizen
So the way I see it MSP has confirmed by their memo clarifying that tow companies cannot withhold unattached personal property or license plates that Del. Impallaria has been right all along and the tow companies and Sheriff Bane were and are wrong.
Perhaps but at the time of the incident the memo from MSP was that the tow company was correct!!!!!! Either way Impallaria lost, sued the wrong person and demonstrated why he will not be re-elected!
I am not a big fan of Delegate Impallaria, but in this instance I agreed with him. It is nice to know that after this mess, we now know that the tow companies can not keep your vehicle tags. Hopefully, in the future citizens will not be denied access to their rightful property.
I did not vote for Impallaria the last time around, and perhaps would not vote for him if he chooses to run again. However, I appreciate his willingness to try and right a practice that was just plain wrong. My decision to vote for/against him in the future will not be based on his picking the wrong person to sue in his pursuit to right this wrong.
@Cdev
It is my understanding that last week MSP did send a memo stating that tow companies cannot withhold personal property or license tags of vehicle owners.
Yes but at the time of the incident the tow company was following the law. Despite the delagates claim to the contrary!
@Cdev
Was there a bill that passed in the state’s legislature and signed by the Governor since this incident? I am not familiar with any changes to the existing law. I see talk of some memo from the MSP, but I have not actually seen this to see what it says word for word, but it really does not matter, the MSP cannot make or change the law. Plain and simple, depriving a person of their property is a theft. What law are you saying “changed”?
@Cdev
It is clear that Del. Impallaria has been right from the beginning in that the tow companies could never under Maryland Law could withhold unattached personal property or license tags.
The MSP memo that went out statewide certainly clarifies that this is the case.
CDEV, Yes you are correct. The tow company was following the rules as they were dictated by MSP. There was no malice here. Maybe the laws need to be looked at for more clarity. My frustration is that the Delegate lied about his experience.
1. The Delegate says he was threatened by the tow company (with a tire iron) TRUTH The Delegate was not threatened, neither verbally or physically. The truth is that the Delegate verbally threatened the tow company. He said that he would put him out of business. He said he would have him arrested. The Delegate yelled profanities at the tow company owner. The tow company owner tried to resolve it by offering to call the insurance company. The Delegate refused.
2. The Delegate says the tow company tried to extort money from him. TRUTH The tow company NEVER asked the Delegate for money. Money was never mentioned. The insurance company for the other driver was taking financial responsibility for the vehicle.
3. The Delegate says the tow company would not allow him to retreive his personal items (except for the tags). TRUTH The Delegate was told he could have everything except the tags. The issue was always the tags.
The first thing the Delegate said when he walked into the tow office is, “Do you know who I am? I am Delegate Impallaria.” He was treated fairly and according to the rules as were dictated by the police at the time. I just can not wrap my head around the lies he has told. Let’s talk about the issue of tags. Maybe some “good” legislation will be written to be fair and equitable to all. But to slander the tow company and use his position as a Delegate to lie for any purpose is wrong. I must be naive to think that politicians or anyone for that matter should not behave in this manner. May something good will come of this, that is my prayer.
@OnPoint
Well said! You see Cdev hates Impallaria and is grasping for any way to not have the delegate be right in this matter.
Cdev is not interested in fact or truth, but rather disingenuousness, innuendo, hyperbole and misstatements.
@Citizen
Two items:
1. How do you know any of what you stated about the incident the day Impallaria went to the tow company to to retrieve his belongings and license tags happened? You wrote your comment like firsthand account as though you were there?
2. What happened to your earlier argument that the insurance company was called and stated that license tags must remain with the vehicle? Now you write “The tow company owner tried to resolve it by offering to call the insurance company”.
For those of you who insist that the tow companies were following the law, it should now be clear that they were only following a “memo” not the “law”. This does not excuse, in my opinion, the Sheriff’s lack of response to help a citizen resolve the issue at the time it occurred. If anyone in this county should understand the law, or at the very least, question a misguided interpretation of a law, it should be the Sheriff. Again, the Sheriff’s indifference in this matter leaves many questions in my mind as to his motivation to do so.
Citizen, so you are claiming Impallaria said I“Do you know who I am? I am Delegate Impallaria.” I find it hard to believe it was said in the manner you describe since the the tow co. already knew he was state delegate because his tag has a “State Delegate” badge emblazoned on it.
@Citizen: I see you are again alleging that Delegate Impallaria is telling lies. Perhaps you will answer Paul’s question regarding how you know this to be true, were you there? If so, say so.
Also, you still have not answered my two requests for you to be specific in your allegations that Impallaria lied before a Senate Hearing Committee. What did he say that was a lie?
It is hard to take your comments seriously when you are unwilling/unable to provide any substance to your accusations.
Again Paul the Memo is the guidance in the matter of following the law. Sherrif Bane does not have the power to override a directive of MSP. Impalaria has slandered the tow company and will be soon reappearing in court!!!!
@Cdev,
“Sherrif Bane does not have the power to override a directive of MSP.”
Also completely incorrect and/or intentionally false. Call the HCSO at 410-838-6600 and ask them if they are bound by MSP directives. Not the case.
@OnPoint
Cdev has prevarication personality disorder that prevents him from being truthful and causes him to engage in histrionics. Cdev when confronted by factual data is frustrated and prone to exhibiting anti-social behavior which only deepens his psychosis.
@Cdev,
I just noticed this comment from you earlier today about MVA being part of the MSP. That is completely incorrect. MVA is an agency within the State’s Department of Transportation. MSP is its own State level Department. The uniformed MVA person who administers test is not a state trooper. It is concerning that you just throw comments about without any foundation in fact. Just to be safe, it remains that the MSP nor the MVA can enact their own “memo laws”. Taking someone’s property with the intent to keep it from them is a theft.
Really, When I took my drivers test both time in Waldorf it was a state Trooper in the care with me!
@Cdev,
That didn’t happen, but the fact that you did not know the difference between and MVA driving test person and a MSP trooper says much about your level of competence. What are you now, 0 for 3. There has been no law change related to towing, theft is a theft and troopers do not administer MVA driving test.
Doubters or those in search of true facts can call the MSP at 410-838-4101 and ask them if trooopers administer driving tests anywhere in the state.
Paul sounds a lot like Rick or Tim Impallaria….
Paul, You do not read very well. I eill not debate with you if you are going to twist what I said. Luckily, it is in black and white. So, go on and twist away. Do what you seem to be very good at!!!!
@Citizen
Here’s a second opportunity to answer these questions about your character.
Two items:
1. How do you know any of what you stated about the incident the day Impallaria went to the tow company to to retrieve his belongings and license tags happened? You wrote your comment like firsthand account as though you were there?
2. What happened to your earlier argument that the insurance company was called and stated that license tags must remain with the vehicle? Now you write “The tow company owner tried to resolve it by offering to call the insurance company”.
@Citizen: It would appear that Paul reads just fine. The problem here is your unwillingness to provide answers to very simple questions.
Wake up call for Harford County voters: Pay attention to who you vote for and stop, repeat, stop, voting based on your party affiliation. There are some aweful elected officials here that should be voted out. The issues these clowns get wrapped up in are so pathetic, you can’t make this stuff up. Let’s get some new officials voted in!!!
@DrivinmecrazyinHarford: I believe you mean “awful”, not aweful. An organization called “Friends of Jeff Gahler” feels exactly as you do regarding elected officials, and would be more than willing to work with you to achieve your goal!!
it seems once again paul keeps saying about unattached personal property and tags . you must be hard headed as a rock paul personal property is givin to customers the only time that personal propety can not be released is if the vehicle is stored by the police dept and they are givin the chance to take there propety at the time of the traffic stop or what ever reason but once its been towed then it can not be realesed until the police dept takes the hold off of it and there is paper work that has to be done and givin to the tow company when it comes to tags you seem TO FORGET THAT TAGS ARE PORPERTY OF THE DMV there not personal property but obviously either your just plain stupid or lack common sense the system is not perfect but we follow the guidelines set by the MARYLAND STATE POLICE. ive have had incidents where customers have tried to remove there tags at an accident scene and were told by officers they cant do that…….. like i said before the memo from the MSP just came a few weeks ago sayin customers can remove there tags when the vehicle is at the tow yard. if your a prof in this area prove it to us i honestly dont think you are. your just another wind bag know it all just what we need in this state just like the dip shit crooked politician
@RickyBobby
You just don’t seem to get it do you? Tow companies have been illegally withholding unattached personal property and license tags.
Now, when it comes to lack of knowledge all one needs to do is read your comments. You don’t have the writing ability, grammar or vocabulary of a the average 5th grader and you expect people to take what you say seriously, please?
PAUL: Well you do “have the writing ability, grammar or vocabulary of a the average 5th grader” but people can’t “take what you say seriously.”
@Poud: Yes, many people who post here can’t seriously accept hard facts.
@Ritredawhile
Don’t be to upset with Proud to be Liberal. He hates all conservatives equitably.
Proud, like Cdev just can’t accept the fact that Impallaria was right about tow companies illegally withholding unattached personal property and license tags and that Sheriff Bane has and is derelict in his duty to enforce existing law and protect people of Harford County.
Mr. Impallaria sued the right person, Sheriff Jesse Bane to compel him under a Writ of Mandamus to due his duty and enforce the law. A Writ of Mandamus was sought only after direct communications with Sheriff Bane and all other opportunities to resolve the matter were exhausted.
Mr. Impallaria’s suit for a Writ of Mandamus which asked for no monetary damages and only sought the enforce existing law was dismissed. This means only that case was dismissed before being heard and no testimony given. It did not determine that Sheriff Jess Bane was right to not enforce the law and it did not decide that tow companies could continue to break the law by withholding vehicle owner’s personal unattached property or license tags.
Mr. Impallaria has performed a public service for the people of Harford County and I hope he will continue to pursue reform of the Harford County Sheriff’s Office and reign in the rogue tow companies who are violating people’s personal property rights and extorting massive fees for their services from citizens.
Apologies for any confusion the pseudonym Wow is Paul.
WOW: I do not hate all conservatives, I hate people who are beating a dead horse and who cannot understand that they were wrong. What could be clearer than: Matter before the court (Howe/Lansella) for Hearing on a Writ of Mandamus on 12/1511. Plaintiff’s counsel entered his appearance on the record. Plaintiff’s counsel requested postponement, Deft counsel objected, court denied postponement. Deft’s counsel requested dismissal with prejudice, court denied at this time. Argument taken from each counsel. Court ruled Plaintiff has standing as private citizen, not as Chair of Delegates from Harford County. After argument taken court rules sheriff does not have a ministerial duty as outlined by Plaintiff in his Writ, court dismissed case with prejudice.”
“I do not hate all conservatives, I hate people who are beating a dead horse and who cannot understand that they were wrong.”
So what you are trying to cleverly say is that you hate people who disagree with you and will not change their opinion to match yours regardless of who is actually correct.
There have been several times on this site that you have been exactly the person you describe, only with a liberal agenda vs a conservative one.
As it regards this case, I do believe that Del. Impallaria had a potentially valid argument, but his ego and his personal animosity towards Sherrif Bane led him to pursue recompense in an improper manner and against the wrong party. Isn’t this result a month old now? Why is it still being dragged through the pasture?
@Concerned Teacher
Mr. Impallaria did not seek recompense (i.e. no money damages).
He was seeking through a Writ of Mandamus to compel Sheriff Bane to enforce existing law and halt the systemic abuse of vehicle owner’s by rogue tow companies who are withholding personal unattached property and license tags. And who are acting as though they have police powers that they do not possess.
Impallaria’s submissions to the court were sloppy and weak in legal terms and he should have availed himself of an attorney at the outset of the process. If he had legal counsel from the beginning we likely would have seen evidence and heard testimony.
If that is the case then why not name MSP in the suit since they are the ones who issued the memo? He didn’t name them since his real beef is with the Sherrif!
Quite true CDEV. His real beef was with the Sheriff. A Sheriff who should have known, or did know, that what the tow company was doing was wrong, and then refused to assist a citizen when the citizen complained.
One can only guess why the Sheriff refused to assist.
@Cdev,
The MSP is not named because the Delegate wanted the law enforced and (once again) the MSP memo is not law. Of course this is just and educated guess in response to another weak, uninformed and defensive statement from you.
@Cdev,
…an educated guess…
But as you see MSP has been enforcing the law in the same manner as evidenced by their directive, via memo to tow companies. So he only wants the Sherrif to enforce the law and not the MSP?
@CDEV: In your opinion, how will the Sheriff enforce the law today and in the future? Will the Sheriff and his Deputies assist citizens if the tow companies refuse to permit them to retrieve their personal property and vehicle tags from their towed vehicles?
@RetiredAwhile
No matter how Cdev wants to misshape this matter Mr. Impallaria was and is right and Sheriff Bane was and still is wrong. Now, Bane could come clean by enforcing existing law and protecting personal property rights of towed vehicle owners.
So the question is when will Mr. Bane disclose his written policy regarding enforcement of existing law regarding personal property rights of towed vehicle owners? Will there be a day when a citizen can call the Harford County Sheriff’s Department for help when a tow company refuses to allow the vehicle owner to retrieve unattached personal property and license tags? All the sheriff’s department would need to do is instruct the tow company over the phone to release property and tags or face arrest for theft, pretty simple.
Concerned Teacher and Paul: What does this mean to you? “After argument taken court rules sheriff does not have a ministerial duty as outlined by Plaintiff in his Writ, court dismissed case with prejudice.”
You get an F for comprehension.
However, I will state for the record that tow companies can act as if they are above the law and hold cars and property for ransom that amounts to theft. If “The Situation” Rick sued the tow company and was not such a clown, perhaps there would have been a resolution to tow company misdeeds.
It means that you are the one currently beating the dead horse. You have decided that even my relatively mild comment regarding the lawsuit was in error and so you must once again pull out your sledgehammer to squash the insignificant ant who has crossed your path.
I DON’T CARE ABOUT THE FREAKING LAWSUIT ANYMORE. Not that I really ever did. You, on the other hand, act as if you are the aggrieved party somehow. Did I not mention that I thought the Delegate’s ego had impaired his judgment? Did I not also mention that I thought that if a lawsuit was necessary (which I am not sure it was), that it was aimed at the wrong party?
As I said, you sometimes are the type of person you rail against so vehemently, as in this case right here. Please note that a forest is made up of thousands upon thousands of individual trees.
@Proud to be Liberal
Impallaria’s suit was dismissed, but no evidence was seen or heard. Suing Sheriff Bane was the correct way to halt systemic abuse and theft by tow companies upon vehicle owners.
It is plain to see you don’t like Delegate Impallaria who is a very conservative Republican. Unfortunately for you, your personal dislike of Impallaria doesn’t make him wrong just because you have grudge against him.
paul: It dosen’t make him right because of your personal loyality of the guy either. How did that suit work out for you?
@Proud to be Liberal
No, the facts make Delegate Impallaria right. Tow companies are and were violating the law by withholding unattached personal property and license tags of vehicle owners and Sheriff Bane is and was not enforcing exiting law.
PAUL: You may think so, but a court of law does not. Sorry, but I’ll take a judge’s opinion rather than a partisan’s.
Let me give you a piece of advice: let this lie as all you are doing is making this drag out and showing that your guy, “The Situation” Rick, is a fool.
@Proud to be Liberal
I must have missed something.
Did the judge rule that tow companies could continue to hold hostage and make theft of vehicle owner’s unattached personal property and license tags?
PAUL: You did miss something. I think it was the ability to comprehend English. Allow me to re-post the ruling: “Matter before the court (Howe/Lansella) for Hearing on a Writ of Mandamus on 12/1511. Plaintiff’s counsel entered his appearance on the record. Plaintiff’s counsel requested postponement, Deft counsel objected, court denied postponement. Deft’s counsel requested dismissal with prejudice, court denied at this time. Argument taken from each counsel. Court ruled Plaintiff has standing as private citizen, not as Chair of Delegates from Harford County. After argument taken court rules sheriff does not have a ministerial duty as outlined by Plaintiff in his Writ, court dismissed case with prejudice.”
That did not address tow companies that steal from customers. You see they must have a license. The license comes from the state, or to put it in another way the GOVERNMENT. It is the role of GOVERNMENT to regulate these companies but you must file a complaint first. Did anyone do this? If they are guilty of theft or untoward prsctices, they could loose their license.
@Proud to be Liberal
So the answer is NO the judge did not rule that tow companies could continue to hold hostage and make theft of vehicle owner’s unattached personal property and license tags.
The judge did rule against Impallaria’s complaint as it was written, and dismissed the matter before the court. Impallaria should have used an attorney from the outset of the matter to effectively and properly frame the argument and represent him. Bringing an attorney in the day of court was foolhardy to say the least.
PAUL: 11.07.03.04
.04 Zones.
A. Application for Permit.
(1) A towing service company shall file with the Maryland Transportation Authority Police an application for a permit for the Authority property or zone for which the towing service company desires to provide towing, road service, and storage of vehicles.
(2) In order to provide for the highest level of service to the public, it is the intent of the Authority that a qualified towing service company shall be limited to only one Authority property or zone for which it may be issued a permit.
(3) If there are no qualified applicants for adjacent Authority properties or zones, then a permittee may apply for and be issued an additional permit.
B. The Chief of Police or the Chief’s designee may, from time to time, delineate the towing permit zones on Authority property. The zones may be published on the Authority’s website, and a copy will be made available upon request.
C. The Authority reserves the right to establish additional zones or subzones as it considers appropriate to promote safety, efficiency, economy, and service to the public.
@Proud to be Liberal
So what?
PAUL: I looked up the rules on towing companies. It seems as if the Sheriff…”9.1.2. A Notice of Deficiency will be issued by the Harford County Sheriff’s Office or any law enforcement agency for any infraction of the Harford County Code or any of the rules and regulations contained herein and may recommend the suspension or revocation of a towing license.” I would hope that he does this if the towing company is guilty. However, since I have no idea what really happen, I can’t say.
More detail: Pursuant to Harford County Code §237-3, the Department of Inspections, Licenses and Permits hereby adopts the following rules and regulations which shall be applicable to all police initiated licensed Harford County towing companies. These rules and regulations shall not be construed to relieve any person of any duty imposed by the Harford County Code.
Police initiated Licensed Harford County towing companies are reminded that the purpose for having licensed towing companies is to protect the general welfare and public interests of the community, to safeguard the public interests against fraud, discrimination and deception, to protect property from theft and additional damage, and for the expedient removal of disabled motor vehicles and debris from roadways and impact areas. In addition, all licensed Harford County towing companies and their staff members should make every effort to be courteous to persons with whom they are conducting business.
LICENSE: A license issued pursuant to the Harford County Code and the Harford County Police Initiated Towing Regulations to engage in towing of Disabled Vehicles from the roadways within the boundaries of Harford County at the request of a law enforcement agency.
6. THEFT, ALTERATION OR UNAUTHORIZED USE OF VEHICLES
6.1. If a towing company is found to be committing thefts from, changing or altering serial number of, and/or unauthorized use of vehicles coming into their control, the towing license may be suspended or revoked subject to Section 9 of this regulation.
9. SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION OF TOWING LICENSE
9.1. License Suspension and Revocation in General
9.1.1. A towing license may be suspended or revoked by the Director for a violation of any of the provisions of the Harford County Code or any of the rules and regulations contained herein.
9.1.2. A Notice of Deficiency will be issued by the Harford County Sheriff’s Office or any law enforcement agency for any infraction of the Harford County Code or any of the rules and regulations contained herein and may recommend the suspension or revocation of a towing license.
@Proud to be Liberal: Thanks for all your research. Now we both know that towing companies can’t keep your personal property or vehicle tags (except the vehicle itself until the towing fee is satisfied) and if they do so, and you as the owner lodges a complaint with the Sheriff, then the Sheriff should act to assist the complainant.
@Proud to be Liberal
Where does the code address unattached personal property and license tags?
What does a vehicle owner tow company victim do when the Sheriff’s depart will not take a complaint for a violation of the code or a criminal offense?
Proud and Cdev
I guess you guys have finally realized you are wrong on this matter. Thank God!
No I simply realized you and your many other names you post under is simply so dense that there is no use reaching you. I have simply given up and abandoned you to your ignorance!
lil Cdever I challenge to an arm wrestling match at 5:00 PM today at the Venetion Palace. I’ll be at the first table on your right.