When the Connecticut General Assembly overhauled the state’s towing laws last spring, lawmakers came up with a hopeful idea. It brings together towing companies, consumer advocacy groups and state officials to hammer out some arcane details that could have big implications for some Connecticut drivers whose cars are towed.
The ambitions of the special committee, convened in response to the Connecticut Mirror and ProPublica investigation, grew rapidly as it began meeting in September to formulate recommendations to Congress. Perhaps it could make it easier for low-income people to get their trucks back, or even prevent them from getting towed at all. Perhaps we could change the administrative processes that sometimes made it difficult to find car owners and frustrated drivers and towing companies alike.
But the committee has made little progress in reaching a consensus, even as the deadline for its recommendations approaches on February 1.
This could pose a hurdle for lawmakers who say the towing practices remain unfair and want to pass further reforms in parliament, which begins in February.
“We remain anxious and eager to hear from the task force on its recommendations,” said State Sen. Kristin Cohen (D-Guilford), co-chair of the Transportation Committee.
Until a few months ago, a Connecticut resident’s car was being towed from his apartment complex without warning for minor issues like an expired parking sticker.
When these residents went to pick up their cars, towing companies often refused to accept credit cards or even allow owners to remove their belongings from the cars.
Additionally, towing companies may seek permission from the Land Transport Authority to sell some vehicles in as little as 15 days if owners don’t have the cash to pay the ever-increasing tolls.
Much of that has changed since the new law went into effect in October, following a CT Mirror and ProPublica investigation that exposed how state law has favored towing companies over vehicle owners.
Towing companies are now required to warn people before removing vehicles from apartment parking lots unless there is a safety issue. The tower should accept credit cards and allow people to retrieve their belongings. Additionally, the sales process for vehicles valued at less than $1,500 can begin after 15 days, but towers must wait 30 days before selling.
Part of the new law also required the DMV task force to examine the process companies use to remove tow trucks. Lawmakers said they wanted the group to specifically consider what would happen to profits from the sale of tow vehicles. Currently, towing companies are required to retain profits for one year for claims by owners and lenders. Unclaimed funds, minus towing costs and fees, must then be turned over to the state. But CT Mirror and ProPublica revealed that that never happened because the DMV had never set up a system to recover the funds.
The working group met four times. They discussed stopping collecting towing fees if the car owner indicates they want the car back. They are also discussing changing the way cars are evaluated, which determines how quickly towing companies can begin the sales process. DMV Commissioner Tony Guerrera proposed eliminating the appraisal system and allowing companies to sell all vehicles after 30 days.
Additionally, both consumer advocacy groups and tow truck representatives complained about the process for notifying owners that their vehicle has been towed or is about to be sold. This system relies on vehicle registration information, which can often include old addresses. CT Mirror and ProPublica interviewed several people, particularly low-income residents, who said they were not informed that their cars would be sold.
But at their most recent meeting on Dec. 15, task force members couldn’t even agree on how many letters should be sent to vehicle owners. The meeting became heated several times, despite President Guerrera’s warning that the deadline for the report was approaching.
The working group did not discuss how the proceeds should be given to the state.
Still, Guerrera expressed confidence in the interview that the two sides would reach a compromise.
“We have two positions here that are very passionate about what they believe in, and like any good bill that people try to write, it takes a lot of time at the table to come up with a bill that you can ultimately get individuals to sign,” he said.
At Monday’s meeting, consumer advocate and attorney Rafael Podolsky said he was concerned the commission was missing some important issues, such as ensuring people can get their cars back.
“My concern is not how to sell the car, but how to prevent it from happening,” Podolsky said.
Members of the towing industry opposed the DMV’s proposal to require companies to send a second certified mail when selling a car notifying the car owner of the auction date and location.
Eileen Colonies, secretary of the Connecticut trade group Towing and Recovery Professionals, said more letters won’t solve the problem of incorrect addresses.
“We have to find out who owns the car,” said Colonies of Farmington Motorsports. “If we don’t solve that problem, everything else is really a waste of everyone’s time and money.”
Towers and Guerrera proposed creating a DMV portal where towing companies would list all the cars they tow and where they are stored.
Colonese said it would be difficult for the towers to agree to most proposals because of the cost to the company. Rep. Kathy Kennedy (R-Milford), ranking member of the Transportation Committee, is also considering the issue. “It’s their livelihood,” she said of the towing companies.
Cohen and her co-chair, Rep. Amy Berger Gilbarro (D-Ridgefield), said they also want greater transparency at the DMV after news outlets found that DMV employees had suffered little to no harm for five years after an internal investigation found they had abused their power in exchange for deep discounts on tow trucks. The employee was fired last month. He appealed the decision, saying he had done nothing wrong.
Guerrera said he hopes the task force will submit at least three recommendations before Congress begins its three-month session. He said the group may need to meet two more times in January to reach an agreement. He warned that unless the group reaches an agreement, neither side will be satisfied with the report he plans to submit and Congress’s actions from it.
“We’re going to submit a report after the next one or two meetings, so they can come back and go to Congress and say, ‘We still don’t like it,'” Guerrera said. “But I’m going to write down what I believe is fair.”
