+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    LMZ
    LMZ is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    4

    Parking tickets issued by LA Parking Bereau after car stolen. Police report no good.

    What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
  2. #2
    CdwJava is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    California
    Posts
    27,374
    Please provide some details.

    What do you mean that the police report is "no good?"

    Understand that parking enforcement does not regularly run a license plate to check if it is stolen or not, so if it got a parking ticket, so be it. But, you have a great argument to show that you are not responsible ... provided it was reported stolen prior to the time the parking cite was issued.
    A Nor Cal Cop Sergeant

    "Make mine a double mocha ...
    And a croissant!"

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM
  3. #3
    LMZ
    LMZ is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by CdwJava View Post
    Please provide some details.

    What do you mean that the police report is "no good?"

    Understand that parking enforcement does not regularly run a license plate to check if it is stolen or not, so if it got a parking ticket, so be it. But, you have a great argument to show that you are not responsible ... provided it was reported stolen prior to the time the parking cite was issued.
    Thank you very much for getting back so quickly.
    It is in Los Angeles CA.
    The car was stolen 8/24/12 and parking tickets were issued 8/30/12 by LA Parking Bereau.
    After I got the ticket, I sent them the report soon after I received the ticket. They wanted additional evidence. Then I sent them a copy of the insurance check after they paid me. I thought that took care of it. Later like this April or May they sent me a bill for $275. I went to Chino PD (where the police report of the stolen car was issued) and they suggested me to contact LAPD dispatch. I did, then they told me to call Transportation Bereau. I did. They told me to call LAPB western division. I did. No good. I sent them the police report again. And I was able to speak to an agent and then a supervisor. They both said I have to pay them, because they did not receive the 2nd letter with insurance co's check, only twice the police report. I have passed the time for a hearing and I must pay them now. They threaten to report to credit bereau if I don't pay. I guess I'm left with only one way, to go to court. Do you think I can win? And which court to go to? Also civil or small claim court?

    Thank you very much
  4. #4
    Zigner is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    53,524
    It would be cheaper to simply pay the parking tickets. Seriously.
  5. #5
    CdwJava is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    California
    Posts
    27,374
    Small claims court is civil court, and yes, I believe you would probably win. However, until you have suffered a loss, you have no damages to sue them for. You may have to continue the frustrating phone calls from hell until you can speak with someone who can address the issue.
    A Nor Cal Cop Sergeant

    "Make mine a double mocha ...
    And a croissant!"

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM
  6. #6
    Antigone* is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    In honor of JetX ~ Somnambulist University
    Posts
    21,221
    Quote Originally Posted by CdwJava View Post
    Small claims court is civil court, and yes, I believe you would probably win. However, until you have suffered a loss, you have no damages to sue them for. You may have to continue the frustrating phone calls from hell until you can speak with someone who can address the issue.
    Meaning the OP would have to pay the ticket first and then sue to be compensated for his/her loss.
  7. #7
    LMZ
    LMZ is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by CdwJava View Post
    Small claims court is civil court, and yes, I believe you would probably win. However, until you have suffered a loss, you have no damages to sue them for. You may have to continue the frustrating phone calls from hell until you can speak with someone who can address the issue.
    Just not fair. Not fair at all. I did nothing wrong!
    I cannot go to court to have a court order not to pay this ticket?
  8. #8
    Zigner is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    53,524
    Quote Originally Posted by LMZ View Post
    Just not fair. Not fair at all. I did nothing wrong!
    I cannot go to court to have a court order not to pay this ticket?
    Are you employed?
  9. #9
    LMZ
    LMZ is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Zigner View Post
    Are you employed?
    Yes, I do have a job. Not a high pay one. My wife doesn't have a job, so I really don't want to pay this $275 for something I didn't do.
  10. #10
    Zigner is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    53,524
    Quote Originally Posted by LMZ View Post
    Yes, I do have a job. Not a high pay one. My wife doesn't have a job, so I really don't want to pay this $275 for something I didn't do.
    Yet, you want to obtain an order from the court saying you don't have to pay this. It will cost you much more than $275 to do that.

    I understand you didn't do this. I understand you don't want to pay for something you didn't do. But, from a economics point of view, it sometimes makes more sense to do just that.
  11. #11
    LdiJ is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    65,549
    Quote Originally Posted by Zigner View Post
    Yet, you want to obtain an order from the court saying you don't have to pay this. It will cost you much more than $275 to do that.

    I understand you didn't do this. I understand you don't want to pay for something you didn't do. But, from a economics point of view, it sometimes makes more sense to do just that.
    While I absolutely agree with you from an economics point of view, I find it infuriating that any city would have record of a stolen car, and would actually issue parking tickets to that stolen car, without impounding the car as stolen!..and would then attempt to collect the parking tickets against the victim of the crime!

    I think that I would go to the media on that one...and hopefully put some egg on the face of the city government.

    I once had a car stolen, and the police stopped the people driving it for an infraction and LET THEM GO. They did apologize after the fact, but it still left a very bad taste in my mouth, and at least they didn't try to hold me responsible for the infraction.
  12. #12
    CdwJava is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    California
    Posts
    27,374
    Quote Originally Posted by LdiJ View Post
    While I absolutely agree with you from an economics point of view, I find it infuriating that any city would have record of a stolen car, and would actually issue parking tickets to that stolen car, without impounding the car as stolen!..and would then attempt to collect the parking tickets against the victim of the crime!
    I fear he is a victim of the monstrous bureaucracy. The machine wants specific items of evidence, and no one is entirely sure who shoul dhave those documents or by when.

    As for not impounding it as stolen, parking agencies rarely run vehicles they cite for parking violations as that would be a huge drain on the telecommunications system in some jurisdictions. It just is not practical to run each and every vehicle cited in counties like Los Angeles.

    I think that I would go to the media on that one...and hopefully put some egg on the face of the city government.
    Yeah. Aren't there some sort of "Action Line" programs on the local news stations where reporters pick up on these things and solve them for you?

    I once had a car stolen, and the police stopped the people driving it for an infraction and LET THEM GO. They did apologize after the fact, but it still left a very bad taste in my mouth, and at least they didn't try to hold me responsible for the infraction.
    I can only suppose that the car did not come back as stolen or it was the CHP ... they don't often put out their stops to their dispatch so they won't get a "hit" from SVS until they enter information later - if at all. Or, the information on the stolen vehicle was not entered into SVS until after the stop.
    A Nor Cal Cop Sergeant

    "Make mine a double mocha ...
    And a croissant!"

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM
  13. #13
    LdiJ is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    65,549
    Quote Originally Posted by CdwJava View Post
    I fear he is a victim of the monstrous bureaucracy. The machine wants specific items of evidence, and no one is entirely sure who shoul dhave those documents or by when.

    As for not impounding it as stolen, parking agencies rarely run vehicles they cite for parking violations as that would be a huge drain on the telecommunications system in some jurisdictions. It just is not practical to run each and every vehicle cited in counties like Los Angeles.


    Yeah. Aren't there some sort of "Action Line" programs on the local news stations where reporters pick up on these things and solve them for you?


    I can only suppose that the car did not come back as stolen or it was the CHP ... they don't often put out their stops to their dispatch so they won't get a "hit" from SVS until they enter information later - if at all. Or, the information on the stolen vehicle was not entered into SVS until after the stop.
    Actually, in my case, which was in Indiana, the officers flat out admitted that they didn't run the plates...hence the apology. What happened was that they stopped the car, issued a warning, and then later on ran the plates and discovered that the car was stolen. It was actually pretty gracious of them to admit that fault and apologize, which is why I didn't take it further.

    And yes, most TV stations have those "action lines" and those lines generally do cut through a lot of bureaucracy.

    I do understand that its complicated dealing with bureaucracy but heck...if the bureaucracy cannot even use their own databases to determine that a car was stolen once it has been brought to their attention, then something is seriously wrong with the bureaucracy. Why should the victim even have to provide ANY proof? The info is already there in one database or another. Why shouldn't the agency be required to at least check the various databases once someone has told them that the vehicle was stolen?
  14. #14
    CdwJava is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    California
    Posts
    27,374
    Quote Originally Posted by LdiJ View Post
    Actually, in my case, which was in Indiana, the officers flat out admitted that they didn't run the plates...hence the apology.
    That's not uncommon. Not every agency will run plates on every stop for a host of reasons. It's bad practice, but sometimes is the practical reality.

    And, even if they are run, there is no guarantee that a dispatcher might get it right. Heck, I had a wanted felon in the waiting room at the hospital a couple of weeks ago .. I KNEW there was a warrant, but Dispatch said he was clear. Unfortunately, the dispatcher checked only local warrants - he did not check NCIC. He was arrested the next day by other officers, but I had him that night! Had a couple of stolen cars slip through my fingers the same way over the decades.

    What happened was that they stopped the car, issued a warning, and then later on ran the plates and discovered that the car was stolen. It was actually pretty gracious of them to admit that fault and apologize, which is why I didn't take it further.
    I am certainly glad that they did apologize. However, I doubt there would be any further action you could have taken. There is no law that requires the police to run plates and they have no affirmative duty to recover your car.

    And yes, most TV stations have those "action lines" and those lines generally do cut through a lot of bureaucracy.
    Hopefully the OP can get one of those reporters.

    I do understand that its complicated dealing with bureaucracy but heck...if the bureaucracy cannot even use their own databases to determine that a car was stolen once it has been brought to their attention, then something is seriously wrong with the bureaucracy.
    LA County is one of the largest, and who knows what division is supposed to receive what information. Yeah, it sucks, but I can understand the SNAFU. It'd be nice if there was a means to address these problems, but there may not be an easy fix for the OP on this.

    Why should the victim even have to provide ANY proof?
    Because they can't simply believe him when he claims it was stolen. ANYONE can SAY their car was stolen before the parking cite was issued.

    The info is already there in one database or another.
    Parking enforcement may not have access to the SVS. Plus, if the vehicle was recovered and he appealed the matter months or even a year later, the entry would have been purged and there'd be nothing there. Even a police department that gets a hit in SVS is required to confirm it before they can act on it.

    Why shouldn't the agency be required to at least check the various databases once someone has told them that the vehicle was stolen?
    Because after a certain period of time (I think it's 90 days for stolen vehicles ... maybe 30 ... I'd have to look that up but my NCIC manual is at the office) the record drops off. And, as I mentioned, the parking service may not have access to that database.
    Last edited by CdwJava; 06-25-2013 at 08:47 PM.
    A Nor Cal Cop Sergeant

    "Make mine a double mocha ...
    And a croissant!"

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM

Similar Threads

  1. Parking Tickets for Stolen License Plate
    By jojoisin in forum Parking Tickets and Non-Moving Violations
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-25-2012, 02:30 PM
  2. Private company-issued parking tickets in California
    By LawAdviceFan in forum Parking Tickets and Non-Moving Violations
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-22-2011, 10:17 AM
  3. NYC parking tickets issued to separated spouse
    By plaws in forum Divorce, Separation & Annulment
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-15-2010, 08:37 AM
  4. Parking Tickets Issued In Error To L.A. Drivers?
    By I_Got_Banned in forum Parking Tickets and Non-Moving Violations
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-21-2009, 01:49 PM
  5. Do you have to pay parking tickets issued to a dead registration plate?
    By nietsni3 in forum Parking Tickets and Non-Moving Violations
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-04-2008, 09:07 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

© 1995-2012 Advice Company, All Rights Reserved

FreeAdvice® has been providing millions of consumers with outstanding advice, free, since 1995. While not a substitute for personal advice from a licensed professional, it is available AS IS, subject to our Disclaimer and Terms & Conditions Of Use.