Pelkey brought suit against Dan’s City Used Cars. Pelkey’s landlord had asked Dan city to tow his car after he had failed to remove it from the parking lot according to the instructions. After sometime without communication from the plaintiff, the defendants went ahead and put the car up for auction to cater for the towing fees and storage. Pelkey was not informed of the intention to auction his car and neither was he given any compensation from the money acquired from the auction. Pelkey further claimed that Dan’s City did act according to the expectations outlined in chapter 262 of the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated. The statute provide guidance with regards to the disposal of abandoned vehicles. The defendants also violated New Hampshire’s Consumer Protection Act as well as breached the towing company’s statutory and common-law duties as a Bailee.
New Hampshire Superior Court delivered summary judgment in favor of Dan’s City accepting the argument that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA) preempted Pelkey’s claims. New Hampshire Supreme court reversed this decision on the grounds that the FAAAA preemptive clause did not apply to claims as to conduct in the charges after the disposal of the vehicles or any action that followed. This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court who agreed that the action of towing the car ended long before the action upon which Pelkey based his claims happened.
The appellate rulings were fair and just in that they took into account the full facts of the case and recognized Dan’s City exceeded their authority as the FAAAA preempted that towing companies had the authority to transport abandoned cars only but not to sell Pelkey’s car without his consent and due compensation
The decision by the high court will go a long way in defining the actions of towing companies as well as their limitations. The limitations will be with regard to the actions that such a company may take when handling abandoned property.
References
Dillon Horne, Mathew Soars, Summary judgment retrieved from: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/12-52
