This is also why you want uninsured motorist coverage.

It means that your insurance company is responsible if they can't get the other guy to pay.

What kind of repo man can't tell a Saab from an Audi?

Oh, yeah. Audi, Saab. Totally the same thing. Made by furriners.

(Rolls eyes)

@nweaver:
I do not think this would apply under uninsured motorist coverage.
This would be a claim against the theft portion of you insurance.

As an Audi owner, I noticed this part of the article immediately. Tow truck driver too stupid to tell :

"My Audi is an all-wheel-drive car. It cannot be towed without damaging the transmission. Not even for a short distance. The car had been towed for about five miles while it was still in park."

Dude is looking at about $5-8k in repairs. Transmission - toast. Rear differential and center differential - probably toast. And most Audi shops have a $100/hr. labor rate.

Too bad the tow truck driver wasn't a little better at deiscerning the subtle differences between all them furrin cars!

Audi vs. Saab. Just the placard on the car should tell you the difference, never mind the styling.

And wouldn't the repo guy have an address of where the Saab owner lived? Surely the bank would have provided that information.

(I've watched that repo show on TLC or whatever too many times!)

I was thinking all along "wow, he should call his insurance company." Good to know that he did.

It's good to have a big company with mean lawyers in your corner. :) It sounds like they are handling this claim very, very well. I'm also glad they're subrogating & going after the company for their loss.

@kenposan: When people know that the banks are going to pursuing their car, often times people will try to "hide" their car to avoid a repo guy taking them-- for instance at a cousin's house or down the street. (This told to me from an ex-repo guy)

The repo guy probably assumed it was a situation along those lines.

How does a tow truck operator, who presumably tows vehicles...oh about...all the time, not know the difference between an Audi and a Saab? You could almost see mixing up say an A4 and Jetta. But an A4 and ANY Saab? They don't even look remotely similar.

Also, I thought the creditor would want the car repo'ed in the best condition possible and I also can't imagine that the same tow truck operator doesn't know for the most part which cars are AWD, FWD and RWD.

If this was my car, which is paid in full, I'd have called the cops. Wouldn't them taking the wrong car be theft? I'd assume that just being a repo man would not be enough to get you off the hook. I'd want this guy to be put away for grand theft.

I would screamed theft as well. I thought repo guys were supposed to get VPNs before they could tow anything?

@mewyn

I'd assume it could be considered theft. Its like stealing a car and your defense is your friend let you borrow his car which is the same make but the key wouldnt fit so i broke the window and hotwired it.

You would think the tow company would offer to just pay for repairs. The fear of having charges pressed and an insurance company with their high paid lawyers doesnt sound too appealing to me.

heh Virtual Private Networking aside, A repo guy is supposed to get the car's VIN when checking for authenticity. But there's always bad apples out there.

You don't need "Uninsured Motorist Coverage" to get your auto insurer to bludgeon towing companies for you.

I had an analogous problem 7 years ago: I hired a towing company to haul my convertable from Chicago to San Francisco, and they managed to shear the top off the car against the roof of an overpass. The towing company at first refused to pay, then offered me the top off a convertable of a different model car.

I argued with that company for several months before I learned the magic words: "I'd like to subrogate a claim". Once spoken to my auto insurer, I had my car repaired within a week; they subsequently sued the crap out of the auto insurer, presumably by pushing the "execute lawsuit" button mounted under the desk of every insurance company call center rep. Not that I cared; I got my car fixed, didn't pay a cent, and never thought about it again.

Moral of the story (I think): if there's a company to sue, and you know which one it is, you can get your insurance company to do the dirty work. They don't care; they're getting paid too.

AFAIK, it's not "legal stealing", it's only legal when you take the intended car, just because it's a repo company doesn't mean that they have carte blanche to take any car and then say "oops!".

Very good getting the insurance company chasing them down. Insurance companies have lots of high priced lawyers. Those guys know a thing or two about getting paid.

I would ask them (your insurance company - since you've now subrogated to them...) if they mind if you file a police report (if you haven't already).

One possibility that hasn't been mentioned is that, perhaps, the tow driver was deliberately stealing the Audi, knowing full well that he could claim mistaken identity if caught. The fact that the sheriff wouldn't arrest the tow driver is proof that such a strategy could work--and even if it didn't that wouldn't mean that the tow driver wasn't hoping it would.

I read the linked article. The guy whos car was stolen was not quite all there.

He asked the guy who owns the tow truck company to pay for all the damages and admit guilt before knowing and reviewing the facts.

The he got irate when the owner didn't immediatly respond. From there he called him a number of times that morning and got offended that the owner was "dodging " him.

When the car owner kept up his blustry language he refered him to his companies lawyer.

Seems like the tow driver was a complete screw up but the manager many not have been. The customer was so irate and unreasonable that passing him to a lawyer was the right thing to do.

I think that calling the insurance was the right thing to do. It lets the car owner get his car fixed and lets the level headed people work things out.

@Techguy1138: If someone takes my subaru (awd as well) and screws up the car but not towing it on a flatbed I'll be irate as well. The towing company stole the mans car and caused a ton of damage to the drivetrain of the car, they should have been kissing his ass to avoid a lawsuit. Stories like this are the reason i have a sticker above my vin # saying "this vehicle is equipped with awd flatbed tow only" If the towing company decides to ignore that, fine they'll buy me a new drivetrain.

I thought it was interesting that the tow-company owner tried to argue thae the company was not responsible for the damages b/c the tow-company employee was negligent. Depending on state law, the tow-company is 100% responsible for damages inflicted by employees who are on the clock and performing services associated with their job. For example, no the tow-company might not be responsible for a bank robbery performed by their employee while on the clock but they would be responsible for damages resulting from a car accident on the clock since driving around in a tow truck is part of the driver's work responsiblities. Companies have even more responsiblity when they entrust a dangerous instrument (here the tow truck) to an employee and they have not done a complete back ground/driving check.

My husband's truck was hit by a a truck that was bought by a used car company while it was being driven by one of their employees. It was a complicated situation b/c the truck was still titled in the old owner's name, but was owned by the used car company, being driven by one of their employees who was supposed to take it out to be cleaned but may have been somewhere else at the time of the accident. The used car company's insurance company did not want to pay the damages but they did eventually after we repeatedly followed up, documenting all communication, etc.

@ Techguy1138

The customer was so irate and unreasonable that passing him to a lawyer was the right thing to do.

Ahhem. The theft victim is not a "customer" of the repo company.

In addition to denying responsibility, the repo company allegedly demanded that the car be examined only by their mechanic but when the victim said he'd take it to a dealer the repo company said they'd take the car without permission from the dealer and take it to their mechanic. If true, the repo company threatened to steal his car. That is hardly the action of a reasonable and legal company.

I this case, the employee was in the act of carrying out his normal duties when the theft occurred. Clearly, the liability lies with the company. They don't get to take all the credit for when the employee does his job right but dodge any blame for when he does wrong.

Sceptic- you are correct in this case. It was an omission on my part. He infact was a victim.

From the tone of the guys complaint, while valid. Did not give a reasonable amount of time for the owner of the company to understand the facts. Regardless of how badly things went without any information all he has is a very pissed off person telling him that he owes him money.

I do agree that the dealership should have been an acceptable place to bring the car. Given the tone and pace that the victim set I can see some getting skiddish about any terms.

I think that both parties in this dispute made mistakes. The company owner did the right thing. When under attack and starting to do crap like deny responsibility he got a lawyer to deal with the situation. It's not right but, when you get in on Monday morning and somene says that your employee, that you haven't seen, stole, then returned and damaged a car I've never seen or heard of and makes refernce to a police report that I haven't seen and expects to be fully reimbursed by noon, I'd get defensive to.

He should have said no comment and gotten the victim to the lawyer right away. The incident was much to big for him to handle.

I had a similar situation with a homeowner's claim - I had a pellet stove malfunction and catch fire a few years back, and my insurance company replaced it and told us they would file a product liability suit against the manufacturer on our behalf. They even paid for a house cleaning - fire extinguisher residue gets *everywhere*.

I'm not sure that I agree with the claims that this was theft. While I completely agree that the driver was a screw-up, if he took any sort of reasonable care to make sure it was the right car, and he did not intentionally take the wrong vehicle, it is in no way theft. First off, consider the environment that he works in, it's night, probably shady neighborhoods, and the guy is likely used to guns and baseball bats from angry "owners". While the towing company is 100% responsible for the damage, the car was not "stolen" and should not be considered so. Even if the driver was lazy and didn't check the VIN (or the MAKE in this case), that does not escalate it to theft. It was an accident, and should be treated as such. The tow company should pay any and all damages, as well as rent the victim a similar vehicle for use while his is at a shop of his choice being repaired.

"First off, consider the environment that he works in, it's night, probably shady neighborhoods, and the guy is likely used to guns and baseball bats from angry "owners"".

I'm not sure where you live, but most people who live in shady neighborhoods don't drive Saabs and Audis. Even gangstas wouldn't consider those cool cars.

In fact, I suspect a lot of repos happen in the suburbs, where a high proportion of people have overextended credit.

.....I have a buddy who did repo and insurance investigation work for a while. His solution for repoing cars (and not getting shot) was to follow them to the grocery store, and take the car while they were inside buying a whole cart full of groceries. It's a mean business!

.....He also solved several disability cases by setting a heavy flower-in-dirt basket (complete with pretty bow and card) on the front porch, ringing the doorbell, and videotaping the supposedly disabled person lugging the planter into the house...

I'd have to agree that technically it is theft in the letter of the law...if not the spirit. It was returned, although not in the condition it was taken. If I were the owner and this person had called me on Monday morning, I would have had that driver in my office in five minutes and found out what the hell was going on before calling the atty, just so that I would have some information to give the attorney. The towing company is completely responsible and should pay for the car to be fixed at the car owner's choice of places and rent him a comparable vehicle. The driver is human and should be reprimanded and should make necessary apologies to the car owner. What else can you do when you make a mistake but try to come up with a solution that is to the satisfaction of all parties involved? The insurance company handling the claim is probably the best route to go although I would have to question if it would put points on his insurance acct. They do have a nationally shared database on drivers that insurance companies can reference (can't remember the name of it) to see what their past claims have been. Also, will it increase his premiums? Just a few things I'd want to know before I made a decision.

//bradg33:
Even if the driver was lazy and didn't check the VIN (or the MAKE in this case), that does not escalate it to theft.//

Fine, how about criminal negligence? I'm sure that such carelessness resulting in ~8 thousand dollars in damage qualifies, and is a felony as well in that range.

@Scuba Steve: I'll be real impressed if my car can log into my VPN.

@Skeptic: Threatened to steal his car? They already did that. I would have pressed charges against the driver. Not good to have a felony on your record. Let's see, trespass + auto theft + destruction of property. Yeah. The judge will look on THAT real nicely.

And if they took the car from the dealer without permission, yeah, I'd be pressing two different charges.

Lawyers? Forget lawyers. This is a crime. Treat it as such.

After reading the whole article, I've lost a lot of respect for the "victim" in this case. His expectation that the owner of the tow company would bend over for him before even talking to the driver, or do anything without a police report is ridiculous. And the fact he expected all of this to be taken care of before lunch the day after it happened? Come on. And his assertion that if he got a new transmission that the car would get a salvage title is completely wrong. Having the transmission, or the entire engine replaced for that matter, has absolutely nothing to do with the title. A Title would only be put in "salvage" status after a theft recovery, or after being "totaled" due to flood, etc. and re-purchased. While I do feel for the guy (I had an Audi A4, a 1999 actually), he comes across like a moron. To respond to the criticism (if that's the right word) of my comment about the "shady" neighborhood comment, I probably could have phrased that better. Perhaps it is not the "shady" neighborhood that they must be afraid of, it is the "shady" people that will do anything to keep the vehicle that they don't want to pay for. I think the part about repo'ing from the Grocery store is hilarious. I love creative solutions like that.

@cde: While I'm not entirely certain I would go that far, I would certainly say that Criminal Negligence is closer than outright theft. I still think that a reasonable person would conclude that this is just a huge, though preventable, mistake and as long as the tow company makes good on the repairs, that there was no "crime".

@bradg33: He can't claim he took reasonable care if he can't even read the badging on the grille/trunk/hatch.

@bradg33: Given that the company stole the guy's car and tried to do so with such haste that they dragged the stolen goods through a ditch in an effort to get away from the house (that's proof that they knew that what they were doing was wrong - if you are afraid of being caught you know you're doing something wrong) I'd say he's justified in wanting resolution quickly. Besides. It's his car, the company committed a crime, and it's the company who now needs to bend over and ask "how far"?

If they can commit theft in less than 5 minutes they can surely give the owner the money he needs to fix his car, in a method of THE OWNER's choosing, at the THIEVES' expense. Oh, and give him the use of an EQUIVALENT rental (no econocar crap; an Audi A4 is NOT an econocar) for as long as it takes to repair the CRIMINAL DAMAGE correctly.

Three words: Small Claims Court

@Buran: I think we almost completely agree on what needs to happen as far as restitution. I think that he should expect incredibly fast resolution, but to think it will occur before lunch, before the guy writing the check even knows both sides of the story, and before he can confirm what happened is absurd. I think to expect it to occur in less than 48hrs is reasonable, but less than 8 is not. Unfortunately, it takes some time to check things out, and when someone comes to you asking for thousands in damages that you can't (right at that moment) even confirm beyond his insistence that it happened, it is only reasonable for the owner to be diligent. As for the "dragging it through the ditch" to get away, I imagine thats not totally uncommon in a repossession. I'd think they want to get in, hook up, and get the f**k out before Jimbo comes running out with two barrels of buckshot locked and ready to fire. With regard to the method of the repair, I absolutely agree that it should be done by a shop of the "victims" choosing (he's right, Audi's are strange beasts to work on) and the rental should, but in all reality probably won't, be equivalent. It's a shame that the insurance companies (I'm sure the tow companies insurance will be footing the bill) are incredibly unwilling to bend with regards to equivalent rental car accommodations. Wreck a mid-sized four door, get a mid sized four door. Makes no difference if my mid-size four door is a semi-luxury Audi and they give me a damned Malibu, it's still enough to "make me whole".

@Bay State Darren: Based on the damage to the car, this will likely exceed the maximum amount allowed in small claims court by at least a few thousand. Most states only allow $2-5000 in small claims. That kind of damage to a AWD Audi will be very expensive, especially if it is done by a reputable shop.

There was a similar story on the SomethingAwful forums a couple years ago where a guy's Evo got wrongly towed (not repoed, it was a parking enforcement error) and damaged to the tune of 7,000 dollars.

Sued, won, got the car fixed. That seems to be the pattern with these incidents.

@Electoral College Dropout: If he was car-autistic like I am, he could have at least checked the logos/badges whatever they are on the car to see it's the right one. This was just pure carelessness.

All comments about the owner of the Audi aside, the repo guy took the wrong fucking car, which in my book, makes him guilty of negligence and at least theft by unauthorized taking. Not only did he take the vehicle which didn't belong to him or the bank he was working for, he did thousands of dollars worth of damage to it and then tried to play it off his mistake as a "prank". I don't know about any of you, but I woke up one night and I saw some sleazebag ripping my car out of my driveway, I'd be pretty pissed and not at all reasonable about it. The fact that the cop wouldn't do squat about it didn't help either.

The towing company is 100% liable here..clearly, their guy caused the damage and they should make good on it. And if the repo company can't hire people smart enough to tell the difference between and Audi and a Saab and who can't be bothered to double-check the address, VIN, and/or plate number of the vehicle, then maybe they shouldn't be doing repo work. With any luck, the insurance company's army of lawyer's will sue WAR into the ground.

And I know...I know that somebody has to repossess cars, and it's certainly never pretty, but certainly there has to be some kind of balance between somebody doing a job like that responsibly, and hiring some bozo who goes about yanking random cars from people's driveways until he finds the right one.

it sounds like the repo man was a tool. I did repo work for awhile in college and you always vin verify. Even if plates matched, as soon as i'd set hooks, i'd do a quick vin verify and then haul ass to get the vehicle off of private property. If i'm on private property and the owner asks me to leave, i have to leave. If i can get the car hooked and dragged onto a public street, it's mine. Once its on the street, then i'd usually stop and once again vin verify, pop the door, put it in neutral and straighten out the wheels.

Alot of it depended on the type of repo, most of the time it was people who knew it was comming and just couldn't make ends meet. I'd generally hook it up and then go knock on the door and trade keys for contents and let people get their stuff out of the vehicle. It was only the people who were obviously avoiding repo who got their rigs just outright snatched.

The "victim" in this case tho, needs an attitude adjustment. He was definitly demanding too much too fast. He also has some broken views on the repo industry. Most states require that we report the vehicle as repo'd once we have it -- that way when the owner calls in the next morning and claims its stolen they don't have to treat it as a stolen vehicle. He is advocating that anytime a repo guy tries to snatch they should notify the cops and that is quite unrealistic. I'd make probably 25-30+ attempts some nights and end up only actually hooking 5 or 6 vehicles. I'd not want to waste police resources having to document each and every attempt... just the successful ones make sense.

@bradg33: Oh yeah. (Sorry, it's a good Consumerist semi-panacea.)

Should go to real court.

Hello,

I am the guy who had his Audi swiped from my carport early last Monday Morning. I was a little surprised by the incoming traffic about my post, so I came here to see what others were saying. I would like to respond to a few of the comments.

He asked the guy who owns the tow truck company to pay for all the damages and admit guilt before knowing and reviewing the facts.

Yes, I was upset when I called the manager/agent of the tow company. He had already been contacted by the police and had a copy of the police report in his hand by the time I got in touch with him, so he knew all of the details. He admitted that if his driver had taken my car by mistake, he would be liable for any damages incurred. He told me that he was eager to settle this as soon as possible and made it a point to tell me that his company wasn't "like all the others out there".

He told me that this was his highest priority and that he would call me in an hour. I waited a couple of hours and called him back. He told me he was just waiting for his driver to come back in and he would call me in another hour. He never called me.

I since found out that his "high priority" was to immediately cancel his bond and have a new one re-issued. His only intention was to protect his bond, not try to deal with this by at least trying to see what was wrong with the car.

By the next day, his attitude changed, and he was trying to say that he could not be held responsible since he never sent his driver to tow my car.

Try to understand that I wasn't expecting immediate resolution, just the steps taken in the right direction.

By the second day, he knew exactly what had happened, and that his driver had taken my car and damaged it. He also knew by then that the driver had forged a driving abstract to mask a terrible driving record when he got hired, and that this driver had been fired from numerous other tow companies over the past four years because of his record.

From the tone of the guys complaint, while valid. Did not give a reasonable amount of time for the owner of the company to understand the facts.

How much time should I have given. It was quite obvious from the start that the manager/agent was deliberately trying to cover his tracks -- even to the point of once saying his driver hadn't even been in the area at the time.

He also tried to tell me that nobody had actually seen my car attached to his truck. (never mind that a State Trooper had witnessed the truck and my car five miles away from the house)

I felt I gave the manager/agent enough time to at least take steps to try and resolve this thing. I gave him 48 hours before calling my insurance company.

Why didn't I do that to begin with?

For TWO reasons.

1. I wanted to give this company the first oportunity to make things right without causing a lot of additional financial problems for them. I am not out to punish anyone, or make life difficult for anyone. I recognize that mistakes can be made, and I hold no bad will towards the auto repossession industry at all. Call me an idealist, but if I were the company, I would want to be given the opportunity to make things right.

2. I was initially concerned about involving my insurance company because I didn't want my rates to go up, or end up with a "salvage title" on my car. But after talking to my insurance company, I was assured that neither would be the case.

@bradg33: Then they should have known "both sides of the story" before trespassing on someone's property and taking something that they had no right to take and committing several felonies in the process. If you do that to me I will be demanding what's coming to me on my timetable, not yours, and if you don't make amends for what you did, you'll be dragged into court, and then hit with punitive damages to teach you a lesson for failiing to make it right.

If they want to get "in and out before Jimbo comes out with two barreks of buckshot" they know they're committing a crime.

As for the rental probably not being equivalent? If that were my A4 I'd want equivalent or better, and you CAN rent luxury cars. I don't care if it costs the towing company a ton of money -- THEY STOLE. They lost the chance to dictate terms as soon as the tow truck driver stepped a single foot on private property -- ILLEGALLY.

A few hours to make things right is fine in my book considering this asshole took less than 5 minutes to trespass, steal, do property damage, threaten to steal again, refuse to take responsibility, leave the scene of an accident, leave the scene of a crime, the list goes on and on.

The towing company's position is indefensible.

And what's with the cop who tried to excuse auto theft as "just doing his job"? A citizen reports a crime, it's your duty to arrest the perpetrator. This idiot's negligence allowed a criminal to get away, and I hope the victim here files a formal complaint and goes public if the complaint isn't acted upon promptly.

Wow, bad situation all around. My best friend is was a repo man for quite a few years and I had the priviledge(?) to go along on many repos.

First, the repo man probably already knows the cop who pulled him over, he isn't getting arrested. You have to understand tow-truck companies and their drivers work with the police all the time. They know the cops and the cops know them or at least know their employer.

I'm sure that in the end he will have his problem resolved, but he probably still isn't going to be happy. I understand how upset he is, but this is just like a car accident, there are no winners.

The insurance company will pay for the damages, but unless his transmission is totally screwed or dies very very quickly, it isn't going to be covered. The transmission might not shift like it did before the incident, but as long as it works, how do you prove anything changed?

Just let the insurance companies work it out and in the mean time drive the hell out of it! You really need that transmission to die before any settlement.

bradg33: The tow driver never came back to work. That should be enough to figure out that something's wrong. Quit being on the bad guy's side.

I did give the manager/agent enough time to get the facts. He had the police report, photos, CCTV video within hours of the incident. He knew his driver had already ditched the truck by the time I called him the first time at 8:45 AM that morning.

His first action was to cancel his bond and have a new one re-issued.

Some of you might think that I was being "unreasonable" expecting some kind of action by the second day, but you are making the assumption I expected resolution by that time.

No.

I expected steps to be made towards that resolution. Even so much as a returned phone call throughout the day to keep me informed would have been enough.

Sure, I could have immediately called my insurance company, but I was trying to give the manager/agent a chance to make things right before blind siding him with a bigger financial burden.

I'm not out to punish anyone. I know that mistakes are made, and if I had been the manager/agent of this company I would have appreciated the chance to deal with this without having to involve lawsuits and the added cost of subrogation.

Instead, this company chose to try and cover their tracks and weasle out of the obvious responsibility.

I gave them 48 hours to get the ball rolling, and when that wasn't going to happen, I then contacted my insurance company.

My car is still broken, and the process with my insurance company will take a week, but I am okay with that. I would have been just as okay with the towing company taking a week, but they indicated fairly quickly that they were trying to distance themselves.

@Buran: You seem to be a bit too impatient to let justice take its course. "A citizen reports a crime, it's your duty to arrest the perpetrator." This kind of attitude it why innocent people end up in prison. The Officers duty is to investigate, determine if a crime truly was committed, and proceed from there. You cannot expect cops to just go around arresting everyone who supposedly committed a crime just because someone said so. Come on, have at least a little respect for the process. And the impatience with the tow company is unnecessary. Again, how can you expect any rational business owner to not investigate before reaching a conclusion? Again, i'm not advocating for a lengthy process, but 5 hours is a bit too short in my book, and I'd imagine in the eyes of the law as well. And to your response regarding my comment about Jimbo and his gun, they REPOSSESS CARS for a living, which is not a crime by nature, but many people are willing to resort to violence to protect the vehicle they have not paid for. You certainly do seem to have a bias against the Repo industry, or perhaps just a distorted view of it.

@matt1978: I'm not "on the bad guys side". I think the situation sucks and they screwed up horribly, but I'm not a fan of impatience. People get upset and emotions get the best of them, but even in this situation, you can't expect split second resolutions.

@DJ_Allyn: While I understand everything that you've said on here, it certainly isn't the idea that is conveyed in your post on the other site. Perhaps the original was written in haste, or while you were still very upset, but my comments are/were solely based on what you originally wrote on your blog. What you have written here clarifies lots of things, and certainly is more rational than your previous statements. I can respect you giving them a chance to make it right, and I certainly do feel your pain. I LOVED my 99 A4, and I'm sure if I was in your situation that I would be unbelievably pissed off. I apologize if any of my comments were contradictory to your intentions, but again, based solely off your blog, I feel my comments and opinion are/were justified. Good luck getting everything straightened out, and make sure you have either a Dealer do the repair work, or a VW/Audi shop with a certified Master Mechanic do the work.