NC attorney general says office got state’s first judgment involving discrimination in towing

CHARLOTTE — It was the beginning of the pandemic. Truck drivers like Dimetrius Wingo were delivering supplies. He said he parked in a Home Depot parking lot and that the store had given him permission, but that he “came back the next morning and all the trucks were gone.”

The North Carolina Attorney General at the time, Josh Stein, sued David Satterfield. Satterfield owned or owns A1 Towing Solutions and Automobile Recovery & Parking Enforcement.

The AG’s office accused him of illegal booting and towing, price gouging (saying he charged upwards of $4,000 to release the vehicles), and other allegations.

ALSO READ: New bill aims to regulate predatory towing in North Carolina

The AG’s office also accused Satterfield of racial discrimination against Black drivers. Now, both sides reached an agreement that resulted in a consent judgment.

Attorney General Jeff Jackson sat down exclusively with Action 9 attorney Jason Stoogenke on Monday to discuss the case. Jackson said this is North Carolina’s first judgment in a ‘discriminatory’ towing case.

“We’ve got pretty solid precedent to apply to the towing industry, definitely. But also service industries across the state,” he said. “I want towing companies to hear me on this. If you’re obeying the rules, great. If you are breaking the rules to make a buck, we are going to come after you, and we’ve got a new powerful play to do it with.”

According to Jackson’s news release:

Satterfield and any current or future towing companies he owns or manages are prohibited from taking several actions. Drivers whose vehicles were unlawfully towed or who were required to pay excessive fees to recover their vehicles will receive restitution totaling $30,000.

In addition, the defendants:

Cannot tow vehicles without first getting permission from the owner of the property that the vehicle is on.
Cannot charge excessive amounts for towing.
Cannot put boots on commercial vehicles – like the trucks used to deliver food and water during the pandemic.
Cannot threaten vehicle owners/drivers.
Cannot tow vehicles from private lots unless the lots are clearly marked with signs.
Cannot hold onto commercial cargo obtained through a nonconsensual tow.
Cannot charge separately for towing and impounding the separate parts of a tractor-trailer.
Cannot boot a vehicle while the driver is in it without first informing the driver or giving the driver a chance to move the vehicle.
Cannot charge DMV filing fees when no such fee is required.
Cannot require consumers to schedule a time to pick up their vehicle and then charge them for a delay in the pickup caused by the defendant.

Plus, Satterfield will have to pay the state $110,000 if he breaks any terms of the judgment.

As part of the agreement, Satterfield doesn’t admit doing anything wrong. Stoogenke reached out to his lawyer on Monday afternoon and received the following response:

“My clients have consistently contended that all of the subject consumer complaints resulted from the lawful booting/towing of illegally parked vehicles from private lots and have denied the Attorney General’s allegations that they engaged in unlawful business practices associated with their towing business. Vehicle owners are rarely overjoyed to see their vehicle booted or towed over their objection and at their expense, even when they fail to comply with “no parking” signage. Both sides ultimately agreed to substantially compromise their respective positions in order to conclude this litigation and avoid a protracted and expensive trial and appeals process.”

VIDEO: New bill aims to regulate predatory towing in North Carolina