Your Rights After Your Car is Impounded – VC 22852

Under the Safe Streets Act of 1994, law enforcement is permitted to order the towing and impounding of a vehicle involved in a crime.  The act also states in great detail how such a vehicle can be determined to be forfeited and sold.

Vehicle Code § 22852 provides the owner of the car certain rights, but to understand such rights, it is first important to under § 14607.6.

Vehicle Code § 14607.6, as part of the Safe Streets Act, provides at subsection (a) that: “a motor vehicle is subject to forfeiture as a nuisance if it is driven on a highway in this state by a driver with a suspended or revoked license, or by an unlicensed driver, who is a registered owner of the vehicle at the time of impoundment and has a previous misdemeanor conviction for a violation of Vehicle Code §§ 12500(a) (driving without a license) or 14601 (driving on a suspended or revoked license).

However, Vehicle Code § 14607.6(c)(2) states that “a peace officer shall not impound a vehicle pursuant to this subdivision if the licensee of the driver expired within the preceding 30 days and the driver would otherwise have been properly licensed.”

Subparagraph (c)(3) of 14607 provides that the officer has discretion not to impound the vehicle when the unlicensed driver is driving in the capacity as an employee in a vehicle registered to the employer.

A judge has discretion to order that a car not be forfeited even when all elements of § 14607.6 are met.  People v. One 1986 Cadillac De-Ville (1999) 70 Cal. App. 4th 157.

Vehicle Code § 14602.6 authorizes a 30-day impoundment for anyone driving under suspension, revocation or other license offenses.

Under Vehicle Code § 14607(c)(4), “the registered or legal owner at the time of impoundment may request a hearing to determine the validity of the impoundment pursuant to subdivision (n).”

Subdivision (n) provides for a “post-storage hearing to determine the validity of the storage.”  It must be requested within ten workdays, or three days if the registered owner was the driver at the time of impoundment.

Under § 14607(d)(1), if the registered owner, who was the driver at the time of impoundment, gets legally licensed to avoid further proceedings, however, the vehicle must also be properly registered, which may be impossible if the registration has expired and a smog check is needed.

Section 14607(e)(2) provides that “the impounding agency, within two days of impoundment, shall send a notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to all legal and registered owners of the vehicle, at the addresses obtained from the department [DMV] informing them that the vehicle is subject to forfeiture and will be sold or otherwise disposed of pursuant to this section.  The notice shall also include instructions for filing a claim with the district attorney and time limits for filing a claim . . .”

Subparagraph (3) states that no processing charges shall be imposed on a legal owner who redeems an impounded vehicle within 15 days of the impoundment.  If no claims are filed and served within 15 days after the mailing of the notice in paragraph (2) above, the district attorney may then file a written declaration for forfeiture of the vehicle.

Vehicle Code § 22850 authorizes police to order that vehicles impounded by towed to private garages. Section 22851 authorizes a “garage man’s lien” on such vehicles for towing and storage charges. 

In 1977, in Stypmann v. San Francisco (9th Cir., 1977) 557 F. 2d 1338, the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rendered the seminal opinion on the due process rights to notice and an opportunity for a hearing in connection with a garage man’s lien for towing and storage where the vehicle was towed without the owner’s consent.  Stypmann was a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights class action against the city of San Francisco and several towing companies.  It looked at the way vehicles were towed, stored and redeemed in California under Vehicle Code § 22851, particularly by police and recognized that such towing and storage fees increase daily despite an owner demanding a hearing.

Stypmann recognized that “Loss of the use and enjoyment of a car deprives the owner of a property interest that may be taken from him only in accordance with the Due Process Clause.”  The court also recognized that there was no provision in the law to prevent the forfeiture of the car, for example by posting a bond.

The court then held that § 22851 “does not comply with due process requirements.”

In response to Stypmann, the California Legislature enacted § 22852, which provides for a post-storage (post-towing) hearing.  Notice of the right to a hearing must be personally delivered or mailed to the vehicle owner within 48 hours, excluding weekends or holidays.  It sets a 10-day time limit from the date of the notice to request a hearing and provides for a hearing within 48 hours of the request, excluding weekends and holidays.  The hearing may be conducted by the police, but not the cop that ordered the tow.  Finally, it provides that the police must pay the towing and storage charges if “reasonable grounds for the storage are not established.”

Los Angeles Municipal Code § 80.77.1 puts the burden of proof on the government to prove probable cause for the removal of the vehicle.  Goichman v. Rheuban Motors Inc. (9th Cir., 1982) 682 F.2d 1320.

What exactly must then take place for there to be a meaningful hearing?  If the impounding agency is the California Highway Patrol, the Administrative Procedures Act (California Government Code §§ 11340, et seq.) applies, but if the impounding agency is local police department or county sheriff, there is not much guidance on how the hearing should proceed.

As such, the law seems to fall short on protecting a car owner’s rights and all such statutes and cases are only a mirage of protecting one’s property rights.

For more information about having a car towed or impounded, please click on the following articles: