As I mentioned in my previous post, I do not think you can assess storage fees on a forfeiture case (until such time as you elect not to proceed and notify the respondent that he can come get his car.) With that in mind, our SO and PD have secure, dedicated and enclosed warehouses where they store seized vehicles. We do not store vehicles intended for forfeiture with private towing companies, so we never encounter 3rd-party storage cost issues. The law enforcement agencies are required to keep air in the tires, turn over the engines once a month and keep them on trickle chargers. I know this sounds like a lot of work, but our policy is that if the car is not worth storing, it's not worth seizing.

We don't use 3rd-party storage either, but we just have an outdoor lot surrounded by barbed wire and covered by cc cameras. Our biggest liability exposures are hail and vandalism.

All but one of the lienholders we have dealt with have not batted an eye when we told them that there were storage fees to pay. It was just this one, where there were lots of other issues in play.

Also, it's not entirely correct to say that they have no control over the storage fees running, becuase they can always post a replevy bond to stop the meter running. That is our preference in all cases because it eliminates the bailment completely.

It is time to take a fresh look at our interlocal agreements--not just the percentages, but the content as well. Anyone willing to share their particular forms/agreements? If so, email to carl.dorrough@co.gregg.tx.us. Thanks.