TOTAL *beep*

I didn't understand why (they sort of glossed over it), but apparently the state gave title of the car to the towers because it sat on their lot as if abandoned. (???) 

I don't think JM had the power to reverse that, so she ruled that the car was worth the "storage fees" the towers were asking.

At least, the poor bastard didn't have to pay the storage fees (over $2,000) as well.

DUPLICATE POST...

The Plaintiff's argument was that he called when he got back to town a few days later and was told it was towed for not having an appropriate parking permit, he told them he had a permit, they went out and checked, and then came back in and told him it didn't have plates.

Initially, this seems to be what happened because the paperwork backs it up. The tow happened, the driver wrote "no permit," then a few days later the Plaintiff called and asked why his car was towed, the manager said it was because there wasn't a permit, the Plaintiff said he had a permit, the manager went out and checked, then crossed it out and wrote "no plates, flat tire."

As JM confirmed, the paperwork filed with the police that night said that it was towed because it didn't have plates. So the conversation on the phone wouldn't have happened like that. Since the paperwork had already been sent to the police saying "no plates" the paperwork in front of the owner when the Plaintiff called would have had "no permit" crossed out, and "no plates" would be written there. The manager would have told the Plaintiff right off the bat that his car was towed for not having plates.

Is it possible that the driver towed the car, wrote "no permit," realized there was a permit, then took off the plates and crossed out "no permit" and wrote "no plates," then sent it to the police? Of course it is. But the Plaintiff has no proof that it happened like that, and his story about talking to the manager suggests that the alteration to the document occurred days later when he called, which can't be true.


However, JM wasn't happy about the tow company's practices of not taking pictures of the car and filling paperwork out at the end of the night instead of at the moment of the tow. So she estimated the value of the car to cover the tow fees, since there was no glaring proof they were scamming him.

The judge got it right, as others have explained, but I gotta say I just loved the look of bewilderment on the guy's face during the interview. He absolutely could not grasp what had just happened to him. It was a sublime moment.