In the state of Arizona there is a law that gives the police the power and authority to have your vehicle impounded for 30 days if you are caught driving the vehicle with a suspended licence. You can get the vehicle back if you pay a $250 fee to have a hearing before a judge and the storage and tow fee. This is usually around $900 to $1100. In most cases a person can not afford to get their vehicle out and in 30 days the vehicle title is transferred to the tow yard or it is sold by the tow yard. Incidently most of the tow companies are owned by ex-cops or police. This seems to be a direct violation of our constitutional right to due process in that it is a taking of property.
-
Welcome to our legal community! Click here or the create new topic button to ask a question and receive answers and comments from our friendly and helpful legal community.
Articles that answer frequent legal questions are in our Law Guide. Important legal news is reported in The Law JournalYou can find a lawyer near you in the Lawyer Directory. If you know that you need to hire an attorney, you can submit a case review from a lawyer.
Vehicle impoundment law
- Thread Starter Lugnut
- Start date
- Status
army judge
Super Moderator
The state would argue that such impoundments are done in the interest of public safety. An argument could be made, that a person driving with out a license, or while revoked or suspended, place their property in jeopardy.
The crux of such an argument is the "but-for" test. But for the unlicensed driver putting his car on the road, the police would not have been able to take it.
Bottom line, the dirty little secret is that this generates revenue, too. Add it all up, this is an argument you won't win. In fact, it's been argued before and justified as meeting minimum due process standards. It's about obeying the law and NOT driving without the proper documentation, and money, honey!!!!
The crux of such an argument is the "but-for" test. But for the unlicensed driver putting his car on the road, the police would not have been able to take it.
Bottom line, the dirty little secret is that this generates revenue, too. Add it all up, this is an argument you won't win. In fact, it's been argued before and justified as meeting minimum due process standards. It's about obeying the law and NOT driving without the proper documentation, and money, honey!!!!
CdwJava
Moderator
I don't know how much revenue it might actually generate for state or local government since the bulk of the money paid by the owner of the vehicle goes to a private entity -the tow company.
They are lucky in AZ. In CA you don't get a hearing before a judge, and a 30 day impound will usually result in payments in the ballpark of nearly $3,000.
They are lucky in AZ. In CA you don't get a hearing before a judge, and a 30 day impound will usually result in payments in the ballpark of nearly $3,000.
mightymoose
Moderator
The vehicle would not have been towed if the driver had not been served notice of the suspension.
Since the driver was aware of the suspension, and therefore aware of the potential consequences for driving, the driver has nobody to blame.
It seems to me that due process was met when the driver received notice of the suspension.
Since the driver was aware of the suspension, and therefore aware of the potential consequences for driving, the driver has nobody to blame.
It seems to me that due process was met when the driver received notice of the suspension.
CdwJava
Moderator
That's how it works here, but does it work the same way in AZ? (I suspect it does, but not all states hold to the same standards.)
Yep. This is almost certainly perfectly lawful for as AJ has pointed out "but for" the suspended driver unlawfully operating his vehicle the vehicle woul dnot have been impounded.
Impoundment Law
For some reason you all miss the point. The Courts, or should I say the Judicial Branch of the government is suppose to take the view that we a presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This law completely ignored that little clause in the Constitution and has in effect stated you are guilty and we will take your vehicle because we, the state, have inpowered the police to act as judge, jury and exicutioner. Some of you said that the impoundments are done in the interest of public safety and it generates revenue. A good 60% of the people who have a suspended licence is because they failed to pay a fine, not because they are a threat to the public safety. They are usually the poor or people who are living on a fixed income. The revenue that is generated goes to the tow company and or private individuals, not to the state.
For some reason you all miss the point. The Courts, or should I say the Judicial Branch of the government is suppose to take the view that we a presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This law completely ignored that little clause in the Constitution and has in effect stated you are guilty and we will take your vehicle because we, the state, have inpowered the police to act as judge, jury and exicutioner. Some of you said that the impoundments are done in the interest of public safety and it generates revenue. A good 60% of the people who have a suspended licence is because they failed to pay a fine, not because they are a threat to the public safety. They are usually the poor or people who are living on a fixed income. The revenue that is generated goes to the tow company and or private individuals, not to the state.
CdwJava
Moderator
The presumption of innocence has to do with criminal matters. This is not a criminal hearing. In this case, it is about due process - a process which you took advantage of.
The way to avoid this situation is not to break the law by driving on a suspended license.
The way to avoid this situation is not to break the law by driving on a suspended license.
One more time. Your reasoning that due process was met when owner received notice of suspension. Then it would stand to say that because you know it is unlawfull to park in a handicap zone that all vehicles that do so will be impounded for 30 days, and again if you are caught speeding then your vehicle will be impounded for 30 days, and if you are caught driving under the influence we will take your vehicle as well as your house. You know it's against the law to shoplift so then if you are arrested for shoplifting then we will take your first born, after all you were advised that it was unlawful. A bit to far but do you get the point. You can not make laws that circumvent the constitution. "The Legal System is the most illogical science ever conceived, because what is legal is not always right and what is right is not always legal."
CdwJava
Moderator
And just what part of the Constitution has been violated by impounding your vehicle as a consequence of driving unlawfully?
Note that a lawful impound must not only meet a statutory obligation but must also meet a community caretaking standard. If the illegal driver wanted to, he or she could certainly bring a sober, licensed driver with him. Absent that, there are arguments that can and have been successfully made that the impound is lawful.
If you disagree with the interpretation of state and federal courts, speak with your legislators and see if they might be willing to change the law. Heck, I'd be for that - get convicted of driving on a suspended license, and lost ALL your cars for 30 days or more ... yeah, I could live with that! Maybe mandate jail time for driving on a suspended license as well!
Or, don't drive on a suspended license.
Note that a lawful impound must not only meet a statutory obligation but must also meet a community caretaking standard. If the illegal driver wanted to, he or she could certainly bring a sober, licensed driver with him. Absent that, there are arguments that can and have been successfully made that the impound is lawful.
If you disagree with the interpretation of state and federal courts, speak with your legislators and see if they might be willing to change the law. Heck, I'd be for that - get convicted of driving on a suspended license, and lost ALL your cars for 30 days or more ... yeah, I could live with that! Maybe mandate jail time for driving on a suspended license as well!
Or, don't drive on a suspended license.
mightymoose
Moderator
You won't find that anywhere in the Constitution.
Inability to pay the fees does not mean any rights are violated.
mightymoose
Moderator
Only if authorized by law, which these aren't... though you can certainly get towed from a handicap space.
A person who claims not to have known the consequences of driving on a suspended license has no argument to make. The law authorizes the impound. That is one of the consequences of the action.
That hasn't happened. You don't acknowledge it but due process was not circumvented. If the vehicle was impounded and the driver was neer notified of the suspension then there would be an issue.
Not illogical, just complicated.
army judge
Super Moderator
I have no problem understanding no or don't.
If your license is suspended, or you've never obtained a license, don't drive.
If you don't have a "carry permit", don't carry.
If you're a convicted felon, you can't own, transport, possess, or touch a firearm.
Adults are prohibited from having any sexual contact with minors.
If the speed limit is posted as "60 MPH", don't drive "75 MPH".
Which one of those little tidbits puzzles you?
The law isn't complex.
The lawbreakers are the ones I don't understand.
Nothing hard about the word "NO"!!!!
If your license is suspended, or you've never obtained a license, don't drive.
If you don't have a "carry permit", don't carry.
If you're a convicted felon, you can't own, transport, possess, or touch a firearm.
Adults are prohibited from having any sexual contact with minors.
If the speed limit is posted as "60 MPH", don't drive "75 MPH".
Which one of those little tidbits puzzles you?
The law isn't complex.
The lawbreakers are the ones I don't understand.
Nothing hard about the word "NO"!!!!
This law that gives the police the authority to sieze and or tow the vehical was surely in place prior to the incident you speek of. As mentioned, once you legally suspended its your responsibility to become aware of the concequences of violating a supended and/or revoked licence. As they say " Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law". So this was either done willfully or time was never taken to become firmiliar with the laws that envolve driving a motor vehical with a suspended license, (which in most states is a privalage and not a right). In either case your out of luck. It's not always easy but many laws come into effect, change or are taken of the books and no one is made aware until something happens. I'm in no way perfect, but I do go out of my way to stay up-dated on my state and local laws that could potentially cause me much grief. Not to beat this now clearly deceased horse, but it's often easier and less expensive to dispute a seemly unfair law(s) prior to becoming subject to ithem. I do however wish you the best.
- Status
Share this page
