Car towed from apartment lot - pursue or not?

FWF - apologies, couldn't think of a better title for this. Anyhow, I got scrooged by a towing company contracted to the condo complex in which I live. Here's the long and short of it -

Dragon parks car in spot with back-end in first. Dragon wakes up in morning, sees car missing, calls up tow truck number posted on signs (which do not, by the way, state that back-end-in parking is against the rules, etc - see below). Dragon pays $125 to get car released from lot and proceeds to work in a huff.

Dragon then reviews "condo rules and regulations" document provided by landlord (LL) as well as lease. Both have various provisions for car, but nothing relating to back-end-in parking. Dragon calls up management company for condo complex, and mgmt company rep explains that in addition to the lease and the copy of the rules and regs I was given, there's an additional online addendum (from 2009, wtf hasn't this thing been put into the rules and regs??) which is complementary to the rules and regs. The rule was clearly posted on the mgmt company website... a site I was never told to look at, ever, not by the LL or as far as I can tell any of the documentation.

What should I do? Should I tell the LL I'd like him to cough up the $125 to pay the thing, having never notified me of this mysterious extra set of rules? Should I just accept the beating and move on? Clearly the mgmt company does have recourse to tow the thing, because it is actually explicitly spelled out in their online addendum hocus-pocus, and I'd be happy to pay if I had effed up a rule I knew about in advance.

TL;DR. Car towed, tenant not aware of online rules and regulations not provided by LL in lease or written regulations. Should tenant ask LL for the towing fee?

1. How strongly do you feel fighting for what you believe is right?
2. How much extra time do you have?

I have fought smaller battles tooth and nail ($38.00 for Verizon and trash company issues), but you have to decide what's right for you.

P.S. - I almost got arrested for the trash company one because I felt so strongly

move.

TheDragonn said:   Car towed from apartment lot - pursue or not?

You should pursue it down the street, yelling, "Hey! Come back here with my car!!!!"

soundtechie said:   TheDragonn said:   Car towed from apartment lot - pursue or not?


You should pursue it down the street, yelling, "Hey! Come back here with my car!!!!"

Yeah yeahhhhh, I guess I had that coming. At least my car is a beater (CROWNVIC4LIFE, big ups for my FWF homeys) - I saw some irate dude getting his Jag from the lot and he was apoplectic about a scratch that he was convinced the tower had put on there.

TheDragonn said:   FWF - apologies, couldn't think of a better title for this. Anyhow, I got scrooged by a towing company contracted to the condo complex in which I live. Here's the long and short of it -

Dragon parks car in spot with back-end in first. Dragon wakes up in morning, sees car missing, calls up tow truck number posted on signs (which do not, by the way, state that back-end-in parking is against the rules, etc - see below). Dragon pays $125 to get car released from lot and proceeds to work in a huff.

Dragon then reviews "condo rules and regulations" document provided by landlord (LL) as well as lease. Both have various provisions for car, but nothing relating to back-end-in parking. Dragon calls up management company for condo complex, and mgmt company rep explains that in addition to the lease and the copy of the rules and regs I was given, there's an additional online addendum (from 2009, wtf hasn't this thing been put into the rules and regs??) which is complementary to the rules and regs. The rule was clearly posted on the mgmt company website... a site I was never told to look at, ever, not by the LL or as far as I can tell any of the documentation.

What should I do? Should I tell the LL I'd like him to cough up the $125 to pay the thing, having never notified me of this mysterious extra set of rules? Should I just accept the beating and move on? Clearly the mgmt company does have recourse to tow the thing, because it is actually explicitly spelled out in their online addendum hocus-pocus, and I'd be happy to pay if I had effed up a rule I knew about in advance.

TL;DR. Car towed, tenant not aware of online rules and regulations not provided by LL in lease or written regulations. Should tenant ask LL for the towing fee?

Don't these online things need to have you click 'I have read and understand blah blah blah ...'?

You should also question if these rules are they really from 2009 or did they just put it up now and say it is from 2009. Do they have server backups that proves it? File date stamps can be modified pretty easily.

It's a dumb rule and if they are going to enforce dumb rules, they need to issue a "dumbass rule" warning first.

I can't imagine rules not delivered in writing at the time of the initial lease holding up. Report back to us after you ask the landlord in writing for the money back.

juniorjam said:   
1. How about asking to speak to the condo management rep's manager and politely and respectfully employ their help? Say that you spoke to so-and-so and their response didn't make a lot of sense considering you never had knowledge or evidence that the rules were posted due to your LL's ineptitude.

2. Talk to your landlord in a similar fashion in the hopes that their guilt prompts them to do what they feel is right (repay you/split the difference).
This. Try #1 first, followed by #2. If LL doesn't agree for full, try to split 50-50.
Talk to your neighbors to get a sense for whether this rule is commonly known and when it went into effect.

TheDragonn said:   vegas4x4 said:   Not to derail, just wondering. I've seen the signs in various lots, "no parking backing in", but I've never understood why they wouldn't want/allow that? A quick google search turned up nothing. Anyone know?

It's so the tow truck can cruise down the aisle and check everyone's back window for their registration/parking pass quickly. That way they don't have to spend 30 seconds checking my car for a registration before immediately towing the thing, rah rah rahhhhhhh.
Did you sign something with the parking rules to get your permit ?

It not did they have a sign saying backing in will result in towing - not just a "no backing in" sign?

If one of those didn't happen, fight it

MISTER PROSSER: But Mister Dent the plans have been available in the planning office for the last nine months!

ARTHUR DENT: Yes! I went round to find them yesterday afternoon. You'd hadn't exactly gone out of your way to pull much attention to them have you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything.

MISTER PROSSER: The plans were on display.

ARTHUR DENT: Ah! And how many members of the public are in the habit of casually dropping around the local planning office of an evening?

MISTER PROSSER: Er - ah!

ARTHUR DENT: It's not exactly a noted social venue is it? And even if you had popped in on the off chance that some raving bureaucrat wanted to knock your house down, the plans weren't immediately obvious to the eye were they?

MISTER PROSSER: That depends where you were looking.

ARTHUR DENT: I eventually had to go down to the cellar!

MISTER PROSSER: That's the display department.

In all seriousness, they should cover the towing fee. As similar issue happened to me years ago, and once the apt manager realized they were wrong to tow, they called the towing company and paid the fee.

SUCKISSTAPLES said:   TheDragonn said:   vegas4x4 said:   Not to derail, just wondering. I've seen the signs in various lots, "no parking backing in", but I've never understood why they wouldn't want/allow that? A quick google search turned up nothing. Anyone know?

It's so the tow truck can cruise down the aisle and check everyone's back window for their registration/parking pass quickly. That way they don't have to spend 30 seconds checking my car for a registration before immediately towing the thing, rah rah rahhhhhhh.
Did you sign something with the parking rules to get your permit ?

It not did they have a sign saying backing in will result in towing - not just a "no backing in" sign?

If one of those didn't happen, fight it

It's $125. Anger, moral stance, and amount of spare time will guide this man's direction. Step 2 after employing for compassionate help involves hiring a lawyer. His anger, moral stance, and amount of spare time will be the deciding factor as to whether or not he hires a lawyer for a $125 dispute.

Don't forget the probability they settle with you before the hearing

Pay via AMEX then dispute.

Lol. When you take your landlord to court be ready for the surprise increase in your rent/parking fee next chance they get.

vegas4x4 said:   Not to derail, just wondering. I've seen the signs in various lots, "no parking backing in", but I've never understood why they wouldn't want/allow that? A quick google search turned up nothing. Anyone know?

Found this: "Backing into parking spaces is considered a sign that you are interested and available"
You would probably have to be in your car for this to be effective though.
Whatever the reason, it seems likes a silly rule.

Another one:"Back-in parking is not allowed in either of Marquette’s parking structures because of the potential risk for pedestrian injury and vehicular damage."

samiam68 said:   File a small claims suit. They'll cough up the $125 + court fees just to avoid paying an attorney to show up in court.
Attorneys are not allowed in small claims.

Unless your lease says to check the website for updates, you didn't agree to their additional rules. I'd talk to whomever you signed the lease with and tell them you expect to be reimbursed.

The tow company is just going to claim management said they can tow anybody parked backwards...so I'd think you would have to sue whomever you signed a lease with because they authorized the illegal tow based on rules that you were unaware of.

Al3xK said:   Unless your lease says to check the website for updates, you didn't agree to their additional rules. I'd talk to whomever you signed the lease with and tell them you expect to be reimbursed.

The tow company is just going to claim management said they can tow anybody parked backwards...so I'd think you would have to sue whomever you signed a lease with because they authorized the illegal tow based on rules that you were unaware of.
Tow companies can't just do what a condo manager tells them. They have to follow state law as well, and there is usually a very explicit set of towing laws which are part of a vehicle code or similar regulation in every state . Proper signage is typically one requirement. An online addendum hidden somewhere is useless to anyone who enters and parks in the lot, there's usually a state regulation concerning signage .

As another example, in CA if the tow operator lifts up the car and the car is still on private property (aka condo parking lot) if the owner shows up they can demand the tow operator drop the car on the spot. That's a state law the tow company must follow , even if the condo manager is standing there insisting they take it

riznick said:   vegas4x4 said:   Not to derail, just wondering. I've seen the signs in various lots, "no parking backing in", but I've never understood why they wouldn't want/allow that? A quick google search turned up nothing. Anyone know?a majority of people who back in are morons.No, morons back into other cars in parking lots, run over their own kids in their driveway, and any number of other horrible things because you can't see out of the back of your head! And now cars will get even more expensive because back-up cameras will be mandated in 2014.

I ALWAYS back into parking spaces. It is much easier to see what is in an empty parking space behind you than it is to keep an eye on all the morons tearing through a parking lot while you are backing out of a parking space. No kids running behind your car, no shopping carts in your way, no moron backing out of the space across from you while talking on his cell phone, etc.

whodini said:   BrlDsguise said:   Dragon should know how stupid posting in the third person looks.The Dragon doesn't want to disclose that she is a girl to avoid requests for photos.

Actually I'm a dude but wanted to keep it as gender-neutral as possible to keep new-BBB from hassling me for photos.

But let me head that one right off at the pass...

pics