HARRISBURG – Santander Bank argues it should not have to pay nearly $13,000 to repossess a 2019 Dodge Ram vehicle it financed the purchase of and was later impounded by the Harrisburg Parking Authority for racking up 94 parking tickets, while the company who towed it claims otherwise.
Santander Consumer USA, Inc. of Illinois filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on April 10 versus the Harrisburg Parking Authority (HPA) and Don’s & Sons, Inc. (doing business as “Don’s Towing”), both of Harrisburg.
“HPA regularly seizes vehicles as part of its law enforcement activity but has no constitutionally appropriate procedure for disposing of seized vehicles consistent with the basic due process requirements of notice and a hearing. Instead, HPA employs the outdated and constitutionally unsound practice of summarily turning over control seized vehicles to the private company that towed and stored the vehicle when HPA seized it. In this regard, HPA’s policy is to enlist a garage to tow and store vehicles and allow those garages to lien and/or sell the vehicle as a means to cover the costs of towing and storage,” the suit says.
“HPA’s policy and practice of summarily turning over seized vehicles to private tow companies is a joint enterprise from which HPA benefits by avoiding the cost of preserving the seized vehicles and by avoiding the cost of having to pay for towing services, because the tow company accepts the vehicle as compensation for the services it renders to HPA in lieu of money. The tow company benefits by using its control over the vehicle (created under mantle of authority from HPA) to profit by selling the vehicle or by conditioning release of the vehicle upon payment of money to the tow company.”
The suit adds “after seizing a vehicle on which Santander holds a lien, HPA afforded no due process to Santander and instead summarily disposed of its interests in that vehicle by giving it to Don’s Towing as payment for the services that HPA had contracted Don’s Towing to provide.”
“Don’s Towing accepted the vehicle from HPA as compensation, asserted an ex parte lien for those services, demanded that Santander satisfy that ex parte lien – which Don’s Towing insisted took priority over Santander’s lien – before it would relinquish possession of Santander’s collateral. At no time was Santander afforded notice, a hearing or just compensation for HPA’s taking of Santander’s collateral,” the suit states.
The vehicle in question, a 2019 Dodge Ram, was financed by Santander in collaboration with its owner, who later defaulted on making payments on the vehicle. Thus, Santander contests, it was entitled to take immediate possession of the vehicle.
Shortly thereafter, in October 2023, the HPA reached out to Don’s Towing to have the truck towed for accumulating 94 parking tickets. It did so and the vehicle remains in the business’s possession, which the towing company will not relinquish until the HPA approves such a transfer and Santander pays it $12,750 in storage and towing fees.
For counts of violating 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 through deprivation of property by unreasonable seizure, deprivation of property without due process of law and taking of property without just compensation, replevin, conversion and tortious interference, the plaintiff is seeking actual damages, consequential damages, punitive damages, fees and costs of suit, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
The plaintiff is represented by Rebecca J. Price of Norris McLaughlin, in Allentown.
The defendants have not yet secured legal counsel.
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania case 1:24-cv-00620
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com