Father & Son Moving & Storage SCRA Case: Deployed Airman's Heirlooms

What happened

On August 18, 2020 the United States sued PRTaylor Enterprises LLC, which did business as Father & Son Moving & Storage, in the District of Massachusetts. The complaint describes a Massachusetts moving and storage company in Billerica whose principal business location sits less than seven miles from Hanscom Air Force Base, home to the 66th Air Base Group. DOJ's release says the lawsuit came from a U.S. Air Force referral.

An Air Force Technical Sergeant, a full-time active member of the Air Force since June 11, 2007, was assigned to Hanscom when he received orders in December 2018 to deploy to Qatar. On February 5, 2019 he signed two contracts: the company would move his belongings from his home on the base into two storage vaults at its Billerica facility, and he would pay for the moving and for storage during the six months he would be deployed. He authorized a $2,190.64 credit card charge, and the company acknowledged in writing that he had paid it, $300.00 of it for storage. He had told the company's agent about his military status, gave his Hanscom address, and wore his uniform while its crew packed. He deployed on February 13, 2019 (complaint paragraphs 8 to 15).

On July 8, 2019 the company auctioned the entire contents of both vaults to a private purchaser without a court order. Among them, the complaint says, were military gear and mementos of a cousin killed in action, his grandfather's military service medals, a dresser his great-grandfather built by hand, and his personal photographs. On or about August 5, 2019, still in Qatar, he received the first notice that his account was allegedly in arrears, a Sale Notice addressed to his old Hanscom address. The complaint alleges the company had no procedures to stop such sales and that its procedures did not include a Defense Manpower Data Center check (paragraphs 14 to 21).

Entry of the consent order came on November 2, 2021; it stayed in effect until December 31, 2023 (paragraph 32). It names the company's two managers and PM & S, Inc., which does business as Personal Movers and received certain of the company's assets in about August 2020, and states that any sale or transfer of interest in the company does not affect its continuing obligations (consent order paragraphs 4 and 5 and footnote 3).

The law behind this: 50 U.S.C. § 3958

Enforcement of storage liens: read the statute , or read § 3958 in plain English, with its enforcement record .

This servicemember was called overseas to serve our country and returned home to find his personal possessions, family heirlooms and military awards auctioned off to the highest bidder.

The law protects servicemembers from losing their property, including items of great sentimental value, because of their service.

Who was covered

The Technical Sergeant alone. The complaint and the order concern one servicemember, the order resolves only Section 3958 claims the United States could bring about him, and DOJ warranted that it knew of no other current SCRA claim or investigation against the company (consent order paragraph 25). The order's forward-looking terms, in force until December 31, 2023, reached every storage customer: new storage contracts had to ask whether the customer or anyone in the household was serving, was a Reservist or National Guard member, or was an active service commissioned officer of the Public Health Service or NOAA, and the company had to keep a list of everyone who answered yes (paragraph 6).

What the settlement paid

• $60,000 to the Technical Sergeant in four certified checks: $35,000 within 30 days of entry, $5,000 within 90 days, $10,000 within 180 days and $10,000 within 270 days, each released to him by counsel for the United States against a separate signed release (consent order paragraphs 16 to 18). The United States agreed to consider reasonable good faith requests from the company to stretch those dates.
• The company may not pursue any deficiency left on his storage contract and must indemnify him against any third party that does. Negative reports about that contract to any credit bureau are barred, and the company must immediately seek to remove any it caused (paragraph 19).
• A $5,000 civil penalty to the Treasury within 30 days of entry (paragraph 20).
• Both managers declared under penalty of perjury that the company had the authority and the money to meet its obligations on time (paragraph 24 and Exhibits B and C). Annual SCRA training was required during the order's term for every employee involved in renting, managing or disposing of storage units (paragraph 13).

Why this case matters

The order handed the status check to the Justice Department. Until the order expired, before enforcing a storage lien against any customer, old or new, the company had to send the United States the contract, the evidence of nonpayment and its collection attempts; the United States searched commercial databases and the DMDC and answered within 15 business days, and a match meant no enforcement without a court order (consent order paragraphs 8 to 11). New contracts also had to carry a Military Notice in at least 20-point type asking customers to report a household member who joins or is called to active duty (paragraph 7). This company never needed a database: by the complaint's account, its own crew packed a uniformed airman's belongings on base.