City of San Antonio SCRA Case: At Least 227 Servicemembers' Vehicles

What happened

The United States sued the City of San Antonio in federal court in San Antonio, in the Western District of Texas, on September 3, 2020, submitting a proposed consent order alongside the complaint; Judge Fred Biery signed it on September 17, 2020. According to the complaint, police tows went to a city-owned storage facility on Growdon Road, where a private contractor ran storage and auctions as the City's agent: United Road Towing, doing business as UR Vehicle Management Solutions, from October 1, 2011 until a bankruptcy court approved its sale on April 12, 2017; its largest creditor, Medley Capital Corporation, through September 30, 2017; and Alanis Wrecker Service from October 1, 2017 (complaint paragraphs 12 to 19).

Under the Texas abandoned vehicle provisions the complaint cites, notice went to the registered owner and any lienholder by registered or certified mail, a vehicle not reclaimed within twenty days of the notice could be auctioned after a newspaper advertisement, and proceeds left after fees were held 90 days and could then cover fees on other vehicles or go to the City's general revenue account. The complaint says no written SCRA policy governed these auctions and the City at no point determined whether the owners were protected (paragraphs 20 to 27).

An Air Force staff sergeant deployed from Joint Base San Antonio-Fort Sam Houston to Afghanistan in April 2016 for a 179-day tour, leaving her 2015 Hyundai Sonata's keys with her roommate. After the roommate had an accident in it on or about August 18, 2016, police had the car towed to Growdon Road with military equipment that had been furnished to her still inside. She executed a special power of attorney in Afghanistan so the roommate could retrieve it, but facility employees refused to accept it, a military legal assistance attorney who called could not get it released, and her First Sergeant was refused access to the car in person. On September 21, 2016 it was auctioned for $6,600 with no court order; she still owed approximately $19,000 on the car loan (paragraphs 28 to 39). DOJ received an Air Force attorney's referral on December 22, 2016 (paragraph 11).

An Army specialist left his 2007 Yamaha Warrior motorcycle, registered to an address on Fort Hood, at his San Antonio apartment complex during several weeks of field training at Fort Hood in late summer 2015. It was towed on or about September 1; believing it stolen, he filed a missing property report with the police department, which never told him it had been towed. It sold on or about October 21, 2015 for $1,432 while he owed approximately $8,300 on it (paragraphs 40 to 47). The Department counted at least 227 vehicles auctioned since October 24, 2012 whose registered owners were serving on the auction date, had left service within the previous 90 days, or were reservists with orders to report; at least 27 were registered to barracks or on-post housing addresses naming the installation (paragraphs 48 and 49).

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 .

When servicemembers are fighting for our country, they should not have to worry that their vehicles will be gone when they return home.

Who was covered

The staff sergeant and the specialist, paid by name, and the Potentially Aggrieved Servicemembers on a list the United States gave the City (consent order paragraphs 13 to 15). The notice the City had to mail them, after a National Change of Address search, says a servicemember may qualify if the City or its contractors auctioned, sold or otherwise disposed of a vehicle during the owner's military service or in the 90 days after it ended (paragraph 17 and Exhibit D). Its definition of a protected servicemember also covered a reservist between the day an order to report arrives and the day of reporting (footnote 1).

What the settlement paid

• $29,000 to the staff sergeant and $18,000 to the specialist, payable within 30 days of entry through counsel for the United States, who could deliver each check only after receiving a signed release (consent order paragraphs 13 and 14). DOJ's release gives these as $47,000 for the two servicemembers.
• $150,000 encumbered by reserving it in the City's self-insurance fund as the Settlement Fund (paragraph 15). The United States had 180 days for preliminary determinations of who was aggrieved and how much each should get, the City had 30 days to submit anything it believed refuted a claim, and checks could not exceed the fund. Whatever remained when the order expired was to escheat to the City, and the fund was then to be closed (paragraphs 18 to 25).
• A civil penalty of $62,029, owed to the Treasury within 30 days of the effective date (paragraph 28). The order ran 18 months from entry (paragraph 39).
• DOJ's case page describes the order as providing a total of $259,000 in monetary damages and civil penalties. The order states no total, its four figures do not add up to that amount, and DOJ's release gives no total either, so this record lists the figures separately.

Why this case matters

A power of attorney is supposed to let someone at home act for a deployed servicemember. The complaint says this one was signed in Afghanistan and refused at the City-owned lot, along with a legal assistance attorney's call and a First Sergeant's visit, before the car was sold. The order changed what the City had to check before any auction: what owners or third parties had told it, such as an APO or FPO address or an installation address; the vehicle and its contents, such as uniforms, equipment or military registration stickers; and the DMDC or a comparable database (consent order paragraph 7(a)). Its waiver form had the City give up any deficiency, towing or storage charges and related fees in return (Exhibit A).