During this past weekend's storms, a tree on city owned property fell and damaged our fence. The tree also damaged an adjoining fence on coty owned property. We have taken pictures, moved the tree and crudely sealed the fences well enough to keep the dog in the yard. What are our next steps?
My vehicle was damaged by a water main burst around 2 am this morning and I'm not sure who i need to make a damage claim to. My windshield was broken as well as multiple scratches to the paint. I do have video of the water main spraying my vehicle and photos of the damage made from it. I thank you for your time and appreciate your feedback
This is more of a question really. A neighbor has claimed quite a bit of land that is listed as city property, but claims because she mows it, it is hers. It seems the city agrees, because for years they've allowed only her to use the site. Is this true? I have close to half an acre behind my house the city isn't using it maintaining at all. I would really like to expand my current property into that area. I'd hate to put all that work in though before knowing if I would get the same deal with the city my neighbor has.
To whom it may concern, The following describes multiple code violations from Chandler Automotive that I noticed/experienced during the process of retrieving my towed car from their site. I have video/audio evidence of the violations, and I would prefer if someone reached out to me so I can submit these as proof. It will only allow me to upload images through this submission form. Thank you: BMC 4.32.140(b): Called the number at around 5:30pm to ask to retrieve car, employee stated that she will not be able to get my car until about 9:30/10pm. This is in violation of part 1 of section B, as well as violation of part 2 of section B, since this was well outside the sixty minutes. I recorded the phone call where the employee told me 10pm. Please reach out if you would like this evidence. BMC 4.32.140(f): The invoice, see attached, is not itemized correctly pursuant to the requirements of I.C. 24-14-5-1. The invoice is missing/incorrectly accounted for the following: - I.C. 24-14-5-1(4)(D) - No VIN number. - I.C. 24-14-5-1(4)(C) - No year. - I.C. 24-14-5-1(5) - License plate # is incorrect. - I.C. 24-14-5-1(C) - No explanation is given for the additional charges incurred, which is required here. BMC 4.32.130(a)(2) - The company attempted to charge me $185 for the tow. One $25 charge being a go jack fee, and the other being a dollies fee. Since a go jack fee is a special fee, the total for those should not be $50 according to the code, but a maximum of $25. They corrected this upon me providing them a copy of the code. However, I have audio recording of them attempting to charge me that amount, and being unable to explain these additional charges. BMC 4.32.120(a) - As stated above, the towing company failed to comply with applicable state law in the invoice. BMC 4.32.120(e) - The vehicle was not able to be claimed upon calling at 5:30pm on 4/18/2024. Please reach out for a copy of the evidence as I am not able to upload it here. These laws were created by the legislature with the intention to be construed strictly due to the stated purpose of this chapter being to protect the public from unconscionable practices (BMC 4.32.010). Please reach out to me if you have any additional questions. I plan on following up in fourteen (14) days if I have not heard back from the city on this matter by that time. Thank you for taking the time to read this complaint, and I appreciate your enforcement of the laws of our wonderful city. Respectfully, Matt Shelton
Background: My girlfriend and I went to The Chocolate Moose to get ice cream on August 20th, 2022. I parked in a parking lot outside of Bedrak Café, which is a cafeteria that’s next to Chocolate Moose. The parking lot is in between Bedrak Café and iMechanic. We arrived at the parking lot at approximately 9:20 pm. Around 9:50 pm, we exited The Chocolate Moose. Right after exiting the shop, I noticed from approximately 50 meters away, that my car was lifted and was getting ready to be towed. All wheels were raised, the front wheels were on a dolly, the back ones were on a mechanical arm. I ran to the driver while shouting: “Hey.” I questioned as to why my car was being towed. The driver said that I was parking in iMechanic’s parking lot, and I was taking up two spots. In fact, I was not taking up two spots. The driver then said that the green lines on the ground indicated iMechanic’s parking. In fact, at night, it is very hard to determine the color of the line. I then asked: “What do I need to do for you to release my car.” He told me that I must pay him $160, cash or Venmo only. I then pulled out my phone and started taking pictures. He continued to put straps on my wheels while saying: “You can take as many pictures as you want, I already took them, but if I get these straps on these wheels, I’m towing your car and you won’t get it until tomorrow.” I then venmoed Stryker Towing $160, and he started to unhook my car. He lowered the mechanical arms to let down the rear wheels. He then kicked the dolly to remove the latch on my right front wheel, the car dropped abruptly. I said: “Dude, can you lower it slowly?” He said: “Why don’t you go ahead and put your hands under there and let your hands be crushed by 500 pounds.” He then said: “I do it 25 times a day and it doesn’t damage the vehicle, if you continue to have a shitty attitude, I am going to keep hooking it up and dropping it again and again.” I then said: “Okay, do it.” He then kicked the dolly to remove the latch on my left from wheel, and the car dropped abruptly again. He removed the pieces of the dolly, got into his car and said that he was going to wait until he saw me back out and leave. At one point, he also said that he was just going to hook it back up and tow it anyway, after I’ve already paid him. He then pulled out of the parking lot. Below are the pictures of my car when it was on the dolly. We got into my car, and we realized that there was no signage in front my parking spot indicating that it’s a towaway zone. The closest sign indicating a towaway zone was two parking spots to the right of my spot. There was also a sign posted on the building behind my vehicle. The sign reads as “I-MECHANIC PARKING ONLY 9:00 AM – 7:00 PM; BIG RED PERMIT PARKING 24 HRS” I then took pictures of the signage and left the scene. There were also two women at the scene, they told Sheana that that had just happened to them as well. I was not given any sort of receipt. I studied relevant statutes and I believe Stryker Towing unlawfully towed the two ladies' car and also tried to tow my car and unlawfully charged me $160. I also believe that they were engaging in predatory towing, which the City of Bloomington forbids. They were also in violation of multiple Bloomington Municipal Codes and Indiana Codes. Discussion: Stryker Towing is engaged in predatory towing, which the City of Bloomington forbids. On February 19, 2020. The Bloomington City Council passed Ordinance 20-03. This ordinance amended Bloomington Municipal Code Title 4 by adding a new Chapter 4.32 to provide for the licensing and regulation of towing companies that engage in the practice of non-consensual tows. The ordinance provides that “while many companies engage in non-consensual towing in a fair and ethical way, others, especially in communities such as Bloomington where parking is limited, engage in non-consensual towing practices that might be deemed predatory. This includes, but is not limited to, refusing to release a vehicle to the owner before it has been removed from the private property. . . engaging in kickback arrangements, and charging exorbitant towing and storage fees. . . these predatory towing practices disproportionately harm the community’s most vulnerable residents. . . the City of Bloomington has a significant governmental interest in protecting the health, welfare, and safety of the community. . . .” BMC 4.32.030 provides that “‘Non-consensual tow’ means the towing, by a tow business. . . without prior consent or authorization by the vehicle’s owner. . . .” Stryker Towing is in violation of BMC 4.32.100. BMC 4.32.100 provides that “It shall be unlawful for a licensed towing company or two truck operator to tow a vehicle from a parking lot unless the parking lot owner or the owner’s authorized agent, present at the time of the tow, signs a contemporaneous specific written authorization for the tow of the vehicle. . . a towing company owner or employee, or tow truck operator, may not act as the parking lot owner’s authorized agent.” The code also provides that, “Notwithstanding the provisions above, a towing company owner or employee, or tow truck operator, may act as the parking lot owner’s authorized agent if: (1) The parking lot is for a multifamily rental dwelling which provides permit parking twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven days a week for its tenants or guests; (2) Tenant parking permits and/or guest parking permits, to be placed in vehicles, are provided to tenants at lease signing. The towing company shall obtain an affidavit from the property owner stating the same; (3) The parking permits are made to be easily identifiable and observable from outside the vehicle; and (4) Video or photographic documentation to attest to the propriety of the tow is made and kept for at least two (2) years as part of the authorization required under subsection (b) above” In my case, the driver made the representation that he was towing my car on behalf of iMechanic, and the spot I parked in was iMechanic’s parking spot. Imechanic is a phone repair shop, therefore, the building is not a multifamily rental dwelling. The driver may not act as the parking lot owner’s authorized agent. Because the driver cannot be the parking lot owner’s authorized agent, and there was no owner nor any type of authorized agent present at the time of the tow, Stryker Towing is in violation of MBC 4.31.100. Stryker Towing is in violation of BMC 4.32.110. BMC 4.32.110 provides that “It shall be unlawful for any tow business or two truck operator to tow a vehicle unless the parking lot in which the vehicle is parked has signage, posted in plain view and visible to the public at each entrance and exit. . . .” There was no signage at the entrance nor exit of the parking lot. Furthermore, the signage on the building says “I-MECHANIC PARKING ONLY 9:00 AM – 7:00 PM”. We went to get ice cream at 9:20 PM. Therefore, the towing of my car at that time is unlawful. Stryker Towing is in violation of BMC 4.32.120. BMC 4.32.120 provides that “A towing company and tow truck operator shall allow the vehicle’s owner a reasonable amount of time to inspect the vehicle or to remove or retrieve personal property or possessions that are not affixed from a vehicle. The inspection or retrieval of possessions may be at the scene of the tow or at the vehicle storage facility prior to payment. . . .” In my case, the driver did not allow me a reasonable amount of time to inspect the vehicle. Upon arriving at the scene, he continued to strap my wheels, and said: “You can take as many pictures as you want, I already took them, but if I get these straps on these wheels, I’m towing your car and you won’t get it until tomorrow.” Stryker Towing is in violation of BMC 4.32.120. BMC 4.32.120 provides that “When the owner or operator of a motor vehicle is present and desires to instead personally operate and remove his/her own vehicle from a parking lot before the vehicle is in the process of being towed, the vehicle shall not be towed nor shall any fee be charged. However, when the owner or operator of a motor vehicle arrives at the location of the motor vehicle when it is already in the process of being towed, the towing company shall, pursuant to Indiana Code § 24-14-4-4, give the owner or operator either oral or written notification that the owner or operator may pay a fee in the amount that is not greater than half of the amount of the fee the towing company may normally charge for the immediate release of a motor vehicle. For purposes of this section, a motor vehicle is in the process of being towed when it is attached to the tow truck and at least two tires of the vehicle are off the ground.” BMC 4.32.130 provides that “For the towing of a vehicle, the maximum fee shall be one hundred and thirty-five dollars ($135.00); fees for special treatment, including dollying, shall not exceed an additional twenty-five dollars ($25.00). In my case, my car was in the process of being towed. According to the code, they may charge me for a fee that is “not greater than half of the amount of the fee the towing company may normally charge”. However, they charged me $160, which is the maximum amount of fee they can charge according to the code. Stryker Towing is in violation of BMC 4.32.140; Indiana Code § 24-14-7-2; Indiana Code § 24-14-4-4. BMC 4.32.140 provides that “A two business that tows a vehicle under this article shall accept payment for towing and storage fees pursuant to Indiana Code § 24-14-7-2.” Indiana Code § 24-14-7-2 provides that “A towing company or storage facility, upon receiving payment for all costs and fees assessed against a motor vehicle, shall provide an itemized receipt that includes the information described under IC 24-14-5 if the information is available.” Indiana Code § 24-14-4-4 provides that “Upon the owner’s or operator’s payment of the amount specified, the towing company shall: (1) release the motor vehicle to the owner or operator; and (2) give the owner or operator a receipt showing: (A) the full amount of the fee the towing company normally charges for the release of a motor vehicle; and (B) the amount of the fee paid by the owner or operator.” In my case, I was not given any sort of receipt. Therefore, they violated BMC 4.32.140; IC 24-14-7-2; IC 24-14-4-4. Conclusion: Stryker Towing unlawfully towed two ladies' car and also tried to tow my car and unlawfully charged me $160. They were also in violation of multiple Bloomington Municipal Codes and Indiana Codes.
This picture was taken on 10/10 at 12:24 AM at the corner of Kirkwood/Dunn. The truck is called, "Smoked," and I do not see them as a registered truck on the list. I talked, "Ken," who said he and his wife own the truck and showed me a valid handicapped permit. I didn't get Ken's contact info or license plate.
CBU STORM SEWERS ON EDWARD CT, OLCOTT BLVD AND WILLIAMS CT ARE dumping street water. stones, sticks and debris on to my private property
I have contacted the city both by phone and this website to find out why contracted construction crews have no liability for damaging a resident's vehicle while they are operating. No one from the city will give me a straight answer. The damage occurred September 15th while a contracted construction crew tore out curb corners at the intersection of West Third and Buckner Streets. It is my first new car and I had just made my first payment. The street was not closed and the crew blocked all of Third Street while demolishing the curb, making the street impassable. On the phone I was asked if I could prove the construction crew did the damage. I was home the entire day of the incident and saw the damage as soon as I stepped outside. I was told someone from the city's risk assessment department would be in touch. No one ever called. No reply to my messages to this website either. What is my recourse in this? Why is there no reply to a very reasonable question? Why are construction crews able to completely block streets without closing them? I am making a copy of this correspondence for my attorney. Sincerely, Paul Walters
When is the electronic billboard case going to move forward in court? This has been non compliant for so long, is an eye sore, and sets a precedent for more distracting and tacky signage to enter this county and city. Please provide the public an update so we know that the same issues are still being addressed in the new year
This school kicked me out because basically there was rumours or "ConCeRns" that I was gay. They kicked me out or didnt let me back in because I never said they were false. They also didnt do CRAP about the bullying situations me and my friends were in. Me and my friends would get in trouble for the most stupid reasons as well. There was an assembly where the lesson was about a woman washing jesus's feet. Me and my friends started laughing because the principle was washing peoples feet for real. Then this science teacher took us into her room which had students inside and made us take our shoes and socks off. Then she basically forced us to let her wash and rub our feet in mop buckets. I deff heard snickering in the back ground but I know damn well they didnt do crap about that.