Target Recovery Towing SCRA Case: Sale Notice Marked Addressee Unknown

What happened

The United States sued Target Recovery Towing Inc. and Target Recovery & Transport Inc. on August 18, 2020 in federal court in Tampa, in the Middle District of Florida. The complaint describes the first as a Florida corporation in good standing and the second as a Florida corporation inactive since September 28, 2018, both at North Florida Avenue addresses in Tampa and, on information and belief, both doing business as Target Recovery & Transport and TARGET R/T. It notes that Tampa is home to MacDill Air Force Base, staffed by about 15,000 military members (complaint paragraphs 5, 6 and 25). DOJ's release says the Marine Corps referred the case.

The servicemember was a full-time active duty Marine Corps sergeant who, from about February 2017 to about February 2019, was deployed with the 9th Engineer Support Battalion, 3d Marine Logistics Group, at Camp Hansen in Okinawa, Japan. Before leaving she put her 2011 Nissan Versa, which had California plates and at least one military decal, in her sister's care, and her sister parked it in a Hillsborough County community. Inside were a surfing long board, clothing and a bin of documents showing her Social Security number, date of birth and military employment status. On about March 23, 2018 Target towed the car from a Riverview, Florida community to its tow yard in Tampa (paragraphs 7 to 9).

On about May 1, 2018 Target sent a Notice of Claim of Lien and Proposed Sale by certified mail, announcing a May 18 auction, to her address of record, a post office box for a Combat Logistics Battalion 15 engineer detachment at Camp Pendleton, California, and a copy to her lienholder, Navy Federal Credit Union. Target's own records show the notice was "tendered to [a] military agent" at Camp Pendleton on May 7 before it was returned marked "addressee unknown" on about May 13. The complaint says a simple internet search would have identified the battalion and shown that Navy Federal limits membership to the armed forces, the Defense Department, veterans and their families. On about May 18, 2018 Target auctioned the car without a court order, and she went on making monthly loan payments to Navy Federal for a car she no longer had (paragraphs 10 to 18).

DOJ told Target on about October 30, 2018 that it was investigating. On about December 20, Target's counsel answered that without actual notice the company "had no way of knowing" the car belonged to an active duty servicemember. The complaint alleges Target never checked the DMDC or used any other means to learn an owner's status, had no written SCRA policies, and made a practice of enforcing storage liens with no court order sought (paragraphs 19 to 24). The court entered a consent order on September 29, 2020, signed that day by the judge; Target Recovery Towing Inc. did not admit or deny the allegations, and the order also disposed of the claims against the inactive affiliate (consent order paragraphs 1 and 4 and page 10).

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 .

Imagine returning home after honorably serving your country only to find that your sole means of transportation and its contents are gone and lost to you forever as a result of a towing company’s callous disregard of the law.

The SCRA exists to protect the brave men and women of our Armed Forces serving overseas and minimize undue financial burdens associated with military deployments.

Who was covered

Only the sergeant, who had left the Marine Corps under honorable conditions on about June 27, 2020, before the lawsuit (complaint paragraph 7). Only § 3958 claims the United States held concerning her were resolved (paragraph 20). Its injunction and policy terms bound Target Recovery Towing Inc. and those acting with it for three years from entry, a period that ended in September 2023 (paragraphs 5, 18 and 27).

What the settlement paid

• $17,500 to the sergeant, due as a certified check to government counsel within seven calendar days of entry and to be passed to her only with her signed release (consent order paragraphs 12 to 14).
• Target owed a $2,500 civil penalty, payable within ten calendar days of entry (paragraph 15). DOJ's September 22, 2020 release headlined the resolution as a $20,000 settlement.
• Policies within 30 days: run the VIN through a commercial public records database for each owner's name and Social Security number, or birth date where no number turns up; search the DMDC, separately under every known name variant or alias such as a maiden name; ask whoever requested the tow for ownership information; and look over the vehicle for decals, military plates, a military registration address or contents showing service. If those checks show the owner is serving or left service within 90 days, Target must get a court order before enforcing; before asking for a default it files a military affidavit executed no more than two business days earlier, attaching a DMDC status report no more than two days old; and any waiver process starts no later than 30 days ahead of enforcement, using the Exhibit A form (paragraph 6).
• Annual SCRA training for its owners and its one supervisory employee, using curriculum the United States supplies, and quarterly notice to the United States of SCRA or military-related complaints received (paragraphs 9, 10 and 17).

Why this case matters

By the complaint's account, Target's own paperwork pointed at a servicemember. Its sale notice went to a Marine Corps unit at Camp Pendleton and, by its own tracking, reached a military agent there; its copy went to Navy Federal Credit Union; and the car carried a military decal and military documents. Counsel's reply, that the company could not know without actual notice, is the argument § 3958 does not accept: the complaint states that there is no requirement that a servicemember inform the lien holder of military service (complaint paragraph 26). A notice returned from a military address is a reason to look harder, and the order made Target look in several places before any sale. Its waiver form had Target give up recovering towing, storage and sale fees and costs from the owner in exchange (Exhibit A).