4 ms·

I had a friend in NYC just hit by a case of mistaken identify with ALPRs being used by roving repo men looking to reclaim vehicles. It certainly isn't restricte

I had a friend in NYC just hit by a case of mistaken identify with ALPRs being used by roving repo men looking to reclaim vehicles. It certainly isn't restricted to the realm of law enforcement...

dopamean 11y ago
They should be charged with grand larceny if they mistakenly removed his car.
- tonyarkles 11y ago
  Am Canadian, so my legal understanding may not match American law. My understanding of Canadian law is that that situation would not have had mens rea (a guilty mind); the repo man was repossessing a car which he believed was one that he was entitled to repossess. However, the repo man would like be guilty of civil negligence and the owner court would ensure that the owner was made whole (no towing fees, rental fees covered, maybe a bit of extra cash to cover the hassle/lost work/whatever).
  - rasz_pl 11y ago
    you need to check vin, otherwise you are straight up stealing a random car
  - apaprocki 11y ago
    Basically the repo guy was negligent. They got a reader hit for a car they were looking for and he just drove to that block and looked for a white make X model Y and went up to the first one he found (my friend's) and tried to tell him he was going to take the car without ever looking at the VIN #. The cops were called and the guy admitted he never checked the VIN, which was obviously not a match for what he was looking for.
    - tonyarkles 11y ago
      For sure... But was it civil negligence or criminal negligence? Civil negligence is exactly what I'm talking about, with the courts coming up with an adequate remedy to make the car owner whole. In Canada, criminal negligence is defined as: "219 (1) Every one is criminally negligent who (a) in doing anything, or (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do, shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons." It'd be a pretty hard sell here for him to meet that definition, but the common law/civil definition would certainly fit.

I had a friend in NYC just hit by a case of mistaken identify with ALPRs being used by roving repo men looking to reclaim vehicles. It certainly isn't restricted to the realm of law enforcement...

dopamean 11y ago

They should be charged with grand larceny if they mistakenly removed his car.

tonyarkles 11y ago
Am Canadian, so my legal understanding may not match American law. My understanding of Canadian law is that that situation would not have had mens rea (a guilty mind); the repo man was repossessing a car which he believed was one that he was entitled to repossess. However, the repo man would like be guilty of civil negligence and the owner court would ensure that the owner was made whole (no towing fees, rental fees covered, maybe a bit of extra cash to cover the hassle/lost work/whatever).
- rasz_pl 11y ago
  you need to check vin, otherwise you are straight up stealing a random car
- apaprocki 11y ago
  Basically the repo guy was negligent. They got a reader hit for a car they were looking for and he just drove to that block and looked for a white make X model Y and went up to the first one he found (my friend's) and tried to tell him he was going to take the car without ever looking at the VIN #. The cops were called and the guy admitted he never checked the VIN, which was obviously not a match for what he was looking for.
  - tonyarkles 11y ago
    For sure... But was it civil negligence or criminal negligence? Civil negligence is exactly what I'm talking about, with the courts coming up with an adequate remedy to make the car owner whole. In Canada, criminal negligence is defined as: "219 (1) Every one is criminally negligent who (a) in doing anything, or (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do, shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons." It'd be a pretty hard sell here for him to meet that definition, but the common law/civil definition would certainly fit.