• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

lo/Jack

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Koodog

Junior Member
It is NOT an individual LEO thing, it's a company thing. It is how Lo-Jack works. It works the same in Sacramento as it does in New York City, and the alphanumeric code is only activated when the vehicle has been entered into SVS. Even if a code is accidentally triggered, absent a paired stolen vehicle report in SVS (the national stolen vehicle database in NCIC), it would not come back as valid and there would be no reason to try and triangulate ... not to mention they would not know what they are looking for.


If so, it is as I previously mentioned, it is a code that is so much meaningless gobblygook, or, it is a code of another stolen vehicle (which would seem pretty odd, but would also be a vehicle with a different description and likely would not result in your vehicle being stopped). It would also run out of juice over time. (Yes, they can lose power when they have been activated.)


And in those parts of the country, they would not even be able to see the errant device's code, much less act on it.

Many departments have gone away from it as it does not seem to be nearly as popular as it was a couple of decades ago.
I based my entire post upon this email I received.

"Hello
This is a follow up to the voice mail message I left on your cell phone just a little while ago.

This truck which is registered to your company was equipped with a LoJack stolen vehicle recovery system in 2008 at the request of the trucks first owner.
Something has affected the unit in the truck and it is now turning itself “on” and sending its homing signal to the police as if it were reported stolen, which of course it is not.
In order to prevent you or whoever drives this truck from being contacted by law enforcement and to keep this unit from sending any more false alerts to law enforcement please contact me at your earliest convenience."
 


Colorado777

Junior Member
Thank you for your reply.
Do you have any idea of why Lo/Jack would have told me I could be stopped? They also mentioned locations and dates which were very close to the actual location of truck at those times.
Perhaps their desire was to merely solve their problem quickly and not have to deal with any responsibility in replacing it. I agree that good money was spent for this device. In my mind the correct thing to do was to replace it. However that was not the route they choose.
If the police were to somehow know with 100% certainty a signal was coming from a specific object (such as a vehicle), they would then follow or watch the vehicle until the code was confirmed as both listing to that specific make/model of vehicle and also verified as being stolen, a process which only takes a matter of minutes. They are not going to start pulling over every vehicle in sight when a signal is received. They have to verify it is stolen and the correct vehicle.

The locations and dates are different locations police officers picked up the signal.

Yes, they just want to fix the problem of it going off in error.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
I based my entire post upon this email I received.

"Hello
This is a follow up to the voice mail message I left on your cell phone just a little while ago.

This truck which is registered to your company was equipped with a LoJack stolen vehicle recovery system in 2008 at the request of the trucks first owner.
Something has affected the unit in the truck and it is now turning itself “on” and sending its homing signal to the police as if it were reported stolen, which of course it is not.
In order to prevent you or whoever drives this truck from being contacted by law enforcement and to keep this unit from sending any more false alerts to law enforcement please contact me at your earliest convenience."
I will repeat...that sounds like a hacker/scammer. Please find a way to contact Jo/Jack directly to inquire about the emails/phone calls you have been receiving.
 

Koodog

Junior Member
I will repeat...that sounds like a hacker/scammer. Please find a way to contact Jo/Jack directly to inquire about the emails/phone calls you have been receiving.
...and I will repeat. I did confirm with Lo/Jack.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
...and I will repeat. I did confirm with Lo/Jack.
Look, it's simple...take them up on their offer to remove it, or have it repaired and pay them for their service. Yours is not a legal matter.
 

Eekamouse

Senior Member
I based my entire post upon this email I received.

"Hello
This is a follow up to the voice mail message I left on your cell phone just a little while ago.

This truck which is registered to your company was equipped with a LoJack stolen vehicle recovery system in 2008 at the request of the trucks first owner.
Something has affected the unit in the truck and it is now turning itself “on” and sending its homing signal to the police as if it were reported stolen, which of course it is not.
In order to prevent you or whoever drives this truck from being contacted by law enforcement and to keep this unit from sending any more false alerts to law enforcement please contact me at your earliest convenience."
Not how my lo jack works. Scam. Plain and simple.
 

PayrollHRGuy

Senior Member
Their website says in great big letters the following.

How the LoJack System works

Notification
Owner reports the theft to the police

Activation
Police enter the vehicle in the National Crime Database, activating the LoJack System

Recovery
Police pick up the signal using one of over 14,000 tracking computers in police vehicles to locate the vehicle*
 
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Colorado
Is they any legality in requiring car dealers to inform customers that vehicles are equipped with Lo/Jack?

I've just been notified by Lo/Jack that a truck I purchased a year ago has a defective device transmitting a stolen vehicle code. I'm being told I/we stand a good chance of being stopped and detained by police because of this. I'm also concerned to learn that my company vehicle(this truck) has been tracked and monitored without my companies consent. I was never told this equipment was on this truck when I purchased it.
I based my entire post upon this email I received.

"Hello
This is a follow up to the voice mail message I left on your cell phone just a little while ago.

This truck which is registered to your company was equipped with a LoJack stolen vehicle recovery system in 2008 at the request of the trucks first owner.
Something has affected the unit in the truck and it is now turning itself “on” and sending its homing signal to the police as if it were reported stolen, which of course it is not.
In order to prevent you or whoever drives this truck from being contacted by law enforcement and to keep this unit from sending any more false alerts to law enforcement please contact me at your earliest convenience."

No there's no legal requirement for a used vehicle dealer to disclose the presence of an item they didn't know about. You bought it used, the original owner installed the device 9 years ago.
 
Sponsored Ad

Top