Waitaminute. What if this whole thing is a publicity stunt?
I dunno, I’m about as bleeding-heart and liberal as they come, and this story seems awefully fishy to me.
So, he has a good electric wheel-chair that he can get around in, but he HAS to have the portable one that will travel in the van. Which is totalled. And undrivable.
I assume that if this couple can’t afford to get their van out, they also can’t afford to take taxi’s everywhere, which leaves transit or friends. Transit busses are now wheel-chair friendly so he should just be able to drive right into one. If they have friends that can drive them all around town then why can’t the friends lend them the $$ to get the van out?
It seems like they’re trying to pull a scam. It’s a real shame if they’re not but that’s how it’s reading to me. 
Spooje, the towing fee was $120 but here 5 days later the couple that couldn’t even afford that now must pay Beres over $220 to get their totaled van back and it’ll be more than that tomorrow and more still later. Is it any wonder they’d consider abandoning it? Bere’s rates force destitute people to quickly raise a lot of cash or lose their vehicle. Damn but that’s a shitty situation to be faced with.
I’m sure Beres has plenty on contingencies in matters like this, seeing as how it must happen pretty frequently. If those involved in an accident can’t pay, the vehicle cost Beres nothing yet they can sell it for parts or scrap. If they can pay, Beres gets a rate that would amount to usury by any legitimate banking institution.
Here’s the jist of it though, as absolutely everybody shared some form of guilt in this case… a handicapped guy needs his damn wheelchair. Would it kill everyone involved to keep that aspect out of the larger business dealings? Can’t they be humane first and capitalists second?
Upon posting I see Cheesesteak’s quote. I’d fully agree that offering the waiver would fulfill any decency obligations. Unfortunately though we’re back to a he said/she said sine “it was never offered because of her attitude”.
Okay, if you’re sincere then offer it again right now at $120.
See, but that’s the part that’s not quite sitting right with me. He needs A wheelchair - I’m just not convinced that he needs THAT wheelchair.
He already has a wheelchair - a deluxe electric model. The only reason he would need the portable one is if he was going on a ride in the van, which is impounded and undrivable.
Personally, it seems like they’re trying to scam the company into giving them the van without paying for it.
For those unfamiliar with the TLC series I linked, “Overhaulin’” is a show where a group of auto mechanics borrow someone’s vehicle without their knowledge. They spend a week fixing up said vehicle then return it to its rightful owner. How do they get the vehicles, you ask? They have help, either relatives or friends of the “victim”.
During the course of the week, the shows hosts give the victim the runaround, sometimes with the help of that friend or relative who’s in on it. The friend offering to pay the towing company then not being able to afford it is almost exactly what happened in the surfer kid episode.
I don’t know about Wisconsin, but in Illinois a private towing company can’t prevent you from getting your personal belongings out of the vehicle.
Is it really too much to ask that after you do some work, that you’re paid for it?
My mother requires a wheel-chair to get around (and has since her early youth). Many good decent people are similarly challenged. Good decent people don’t say “I refuse to pay you on the grounds that I’m handicapped. Gimme something for free, or I’ll sick the press on you.”
Ummm… Bill, my impression was that they’re broke and would like a needed personal item out of their vehicle until they can pay the towing fee.
Where did they say “I refuse to pay you on the grounds that I’m handicapped. Gimme something for free”?
lieu wrote
I can understand how a rational person would read it that way.
Another rational view is that they got in an accident while (illegally and arguably immorally) carrying no insurance, and totaled the vehicle. They then sought to recover their personal property from the vehicle and abandon it at the towers yard without paying him. When the owner denied them, they called the media and cried false discrimination. That’s how I read it, anyway.