U-Haul's New "U-Prison" Proves Unpopular With Customers
U-Haul apparently knows about Ryder's initiative to outdo it on suckage, so they've introduced a whole new class of customer abuse: false imprisonment. Best of all, the employee who was sent to let Jessica and her friend out of U-Haul Prison told them that if they hadn't wanted to get locked in after 5pm, they should have paid for 24 hour access. (They were taking advantage of a complimentary offer from the company.)
Here's the letter Jessica's friend is sending to U-Haul. We want to caution them that technically they may just be out on furlough, and could easily end up back in U-Haul Prison if they're not careful.
I am writing to alert you to a dangerous policy/practice at your West Allis, Wisconsin storage facility (924 S 108th St, Milwaukee, WI) which results in customers being trapped in the gated storage area.
Yesterday myself and a friend who was helping me move arrived at your facility just before about 4 pm to utilize some free storage that was included with the price of the rental truck. I was given a code to get past the security gate and we went in and unloaded the truck.
At about 5:40 p.m. we attempted to leave. The security gate requires a code to open the door to exit. The code I was given did not work. Without a working code there is no way to exit the facility, even by foot, without climbing a fence, which I am unable to do. The only method of contacting the outside world which is provided by Uhaul inside the gated storage area is the intercom which connects to the office, which is closed at 5 p.m. on a Sunday.
Fortunately for me, my friend had brought her cell phone with her and we were able to call the phone number for the office, which was forwarded to the national office. The woman who answered the phone said that this (being locked in) a storage area has happened to others before and she contacted someone else, who contacted someone else, and eventually (about a half hour after we realized we were locked in) a worker came back and opened the gate.
A half hour may not seem that long, but any amount of time a human is held without knowing when they will be freed is an anxious and unpleasant time.
We asked the worker what happened to us and why were we locked in. Tanya was rude and said that she told us that the facility closed at 5 and if we wanted access when the facility is closed we should have bought the 24 hour access. She also told us that she couldn't be expected to look in all of the units to make sure that everyone has left. (She wouldn't have needed to look in the storage locker to see us, she could have seen the giant truck in the middle of the isle.)
Nothing on the paperwork I was given warned of being locked in if I stayed past the office hours, and even if it had, it is unsafe and unacceptable to imprison people. Any solution to this issue that requires a code to exit will not be sufficient either since it is possible to misplace a code. The door to exit must not be locked from the inside.
After we were released from the facility we went straight to the nearest police station to report this.
As I will eventually need to return to the storage facility to retrieve my belongings I will want to know when this problem is fixed. I had other problems with my service with Uhaul this past weekend but this issue is paramount.
Frankly, we're just thankful U-Haul doesn't rent out freezer space.
(Photo: Stuti ~)
Post a comment
Comments:
Im pretty sure using the U-Haul truck you rented to bust open the fence would not be a crime, and it might actually improve the appearance and ride of the truck you rented.
How hard would it be to wire up a crude intercom that announces that the front gate will be closed in 15 minutes ? All visitors without 24 hour access should be outside the gate in 15 minutes,thank you.
Bookstores do this near closing time
Supermarkets do this near closing time
Big Box retailers do this near closing time.
So ,it can be done.
This is so damn avoidable.
This is just one more reason to stay physically fit...
Uhaul=epic fail!
Wow, that's a class act. False imprisonment is a felony...even in Wisconsin. Tanya is very lucky she's not in jail.
@Snarkysnake: Its called laziness. And as "Tanya" pointed out in the article, they obviously don't care to check because its too much hassle already.
@admiral_stabbin: I would imagine there has to be an element of malice or something for that to qualify.
@joshuadavis: Of course it couldn't be she was hurt in an accident or have some medical problem like carpal tunnel that might prevent her from climbing.
It must be that she's fat.
@joshuadavis: I'm hoping your post was sarcasm. And that's not always a viable option - what if the victim had some kind of eating disorder?
I personally would have rammed a truck through the gate.
Deduct it from the ass-load you sue them for for false imprisonment and kidnapping. . .
I don't think I'd utilize a U-Haul location that remote, I mean... even if they made it past the fence, the ferry probably stops running at 5, too, so they'd have to swim for shore as well. Seems like a lot of extra effort involved in having a truck rental business on an island.
Instead of announcing the place is closing, why not just put an "Exit" button on the keypad on the inside???
Are there any fire-code regulations that you could invoke to get this fixed?
"A half hour may not seem that long, but any amount of time a human is held without knowing when they will be freed is an anxious and unpleasant time."
Ok, I am in no way trying to defend U-Haul here, but anyone else think she's being a bit overly dramatic? Being trapped in an elevator would make for an anxious and unpleasant time, being trapped in a plane on the tarmac for 8 hours would make for an anxious and unpleasant time. Being locked in a parking lot for a half hour is an inconvenience.
@joshuadavis: What if it was a really high fence? "I am unable to do" doesn't mean she's fat or has any medical condition. What if the fence is merely unclimbable? I mean, unless you're Jason Statham.
Easy enough to call 911, report it
@joshuadavis:
Indeed. Why, a fit person would be able to bend those steel bars and just walk on through. Maybe drag the truck out with their teeth too, if they ate their Wheaties that morning.
@yizzerg: Sorry. I've been slacking lately.
Aren't there any fire codes in violation here?
@Scrutinizer: This would certainly be an option if the weather was bad. I can't see if anyone (other than Uhaul) would blame you if you exhausted your options to have someone let you out or the weather was too bad to stay there in the truck.
@SacraBos: Yeah, what we call a 'buttload'. Emergency exits are required for facilities such as this one.
@Geekmom: I am physically fit. I have a proper BMI, below the national mandated weights and do yoga. I still could not climb a really tall fence due to some really screwed up problems in my back and arms. Balancing my own weight on a floor is one thing. Hauling it over a fence depending on the fence might not be possible.
@eddieck: Really. For all we know she is dying of cancer. Way for people to jump straight to some nasty judgments of the OP.
@mizike: ya, if you know your only gonna be trapped for an hour. but we normally dont know how long our being trapped will last. and if we did i guess we would just avoid being trapped to begin with.
next time call 911 direct and report the false imprisonment.
@pecan 3.14159265 (now with star power): In NYC almost all fences come conveniently topped with razor wire. If this happened here, she could've conveniently escaped AND removed any unwanted skin that's been troubling her.
@MostlyHarmless: IANAL, a quick wikipedia search turns up:
[en.wikipedia.org]
[en.wikipedia.org])
It looks like intent is required for false imprisonment which may include recklessness. Recklessness seems to mean that the person is aware of the consequences of their actions, but does it anyway without specifically meaning harm. Seems to fit the employee. They are aware that someone could be locked in if they close up without checking first and choose not to check, but don't specifically intend to lock anyone inside.
And false imprisonment may not be a felony, it could just be a tort.
again, IANAL, just a googler.
It seems like U-Haul would have put a pressure-sensitive switch to open the gates from the inside. Most people don't visit their storage units on foot.
@Snarkysnake: I think it could be easily prevented by not needing a code to exit the facility. Why would you need to keep the exit gate locked from the inside? Seems like a safety/liability issue. Can anyone shed some light on why storage facilities would do this?
@mizike: Even during the summer it gets cold at night. Would you want to be locked inside a facility with a UHaul truck to keep you warm?
@zacox: "I tried to stop, but the brakes didn't work."
Totally plausible, because we ARE talkinga about U-Haul equipment here.
It may be a bit inaccurate to call this false imprisonment. According to Wisconsin law 940.30:
"False imprisonment. Whoever intentionally confines or restrains another without the person's consent and with knowledge that he or she has no lawful authority to do so is guilty of a Class H felony."
Key word here is intentionally. Did the UHaul rep intentionally lock them in after knowing they were there, or did was this a pure accident?
Of course in this case the intent only relates to criminal liability. I can see some civil libability for reckless actions here.
@admiral_stabbin: Yeah, accidentally locking somebody in a gated lot really does not qualify as false imprisonment. You have to mean to do it for it to rise to the level of criminality.
@Geekmom:
I don't know -- I kinda agree that it's the consumer's fault. I mean, geez, who can't get over 14' chain link topped with barbed wire? Hasn't this lady ever broken out of prison?
And, heck, if that doesn't work, why not go all Great Escape and tunnel out? It's not that hard -- all you need are some bed boards and Steve McQueen.
U-Haul really deserves a higher-quality, more elusive customer.
@emmpee9: I appreciate Tekiebelu clarifying whether this was a fail or epic fail.
And thank YOU for YOUR substantial and original comment.
Bingo anyone?
@admiral_stabbin: No, false imprisonment is a tort in most cases. Civil not criminal. Even if it is criminal, it is typically a misdemeanor, not felony. Any criminal charges would require intent, which is absent here.
This probably doesn't rise to the level of false imprisonment. In most (all?) states false imprisonment requires some level of intent. Moreover, the fact they could have probably just climbed over the fence may defeat any potential false imprisonment claim, as it's not false imprisonment if you have any viable means of escape. People need to remember that things like false imprisonment are very specific legal claims that have very specific elements that must be met in order to succeed. The fact you felt "imprisoned" doesn't mean you were falsely imprisoned in the legal sense.
@RecordStoreToughGuy: If they did that, it would be easy for someone to sneak in during the day, hide out, and then open the gate at night for others to pillage lockers.
@JohnDeere: I am going with overly dramatic, but that is to be expected these days.
If someone didn't show up in half an hour or so a call to the police would have brought an officer, who could have located an emergency contact for the business (if they have an alarm the police have a list of keyholders) and failing that a nice group from the fire department with a saw.
The OP was not imprisoned, just inconvenienced. Aung San Suu Kyi is imprisoned, OP was just late for her pilates class.
@joshuadavis: I'm pretty sure this was a joke. But he has a point. A ninja could have gotten out. We should all be ninjas.
Their gate and their truck, just pretend you're rushing to get out of East Berlin.