Case Date:

10/20/2026

Non-consensual tows by Chandler Automotive & Towing (BMC ch. 4.32) On 10/20/2026 at about 12:15 pm, Chandler Automotive & Towing towed my 2017 Cadillac ATS (Indiana plate HAQ849) from the tenant parking lot at 508 S Fess Ave. No one authorizing the tow was present when my car was towed. The authorization form was signed afterward by Ashley Chandler, a Chandler’s employee working their front desk, after my car was already at their lot at 1107 N Jackson St. I watched her sign it and recorded it. When I called Chandler’s later that day, they confirmed they sign after the tow and said this is allowed. BMC 4.32.100(a) requires the owner or authorized agent to be “present at the time of the tow” and sign a “contemporaneous” written authorization. The multifamily exception in 4.32.100(d) allows a tow company employee to act as the agent but does not waive that requirement. The form has other problems: It has no date or time of authorization, only the time of the tow, which 4.32.100(b)(4) requires. It lists the wrong tow address. My car was parked at 508 S Fess Ave, but the form lists “Campus Walk, 520 N. Grant St.,” which is the management office, not the parking lot. BMC 4.32.100(b)(2) requires the address of the parking lot the vehicle was towed from. Taken together, this suggests the authorization was not completed for this specific tow at the time it happened. Chandler’s also first billed me $225, including a $50 dolly charge even though no dollies were used, and removed it only after I questioned it. Chandler’s also towed my car from the same lot in early August 2026, and I believe the authorization was handled the same way. Chandler’s must keep the records for that tow under BMC 4.32.150. I ask the city to investigate both tows, including the property owner’s affidavit and the photo or video documentation required by 4.32.100(d)(2) and (d)(4). If either tow violated ch. 4.32, I request a refund under BMC 4.32.130(d) of the $175 I paid on 10/20 and the fees I paid for the August tow. I can provide my recordings on request. This is not just about my money. When I called, Chandler’s told me they are allowed to sign authorizations after a tow, which suggests this is how they routinely operate. Chapter 4.32 was passed specifically to protect Bloomington residents from predatory towing, and its requirement that someone be present and sign at the time of the tow is the main safeguard against tow companies patrolling lots and towing at will. If Chandler’s is signing these forms after the fact, that safeguard means nothing, and every renter in a permit lot they patrol is exposed. Many of those residents are students and working people who will simply pay and never know their rights. I ask the city to inspect Chandler’s authorization records under BMC 4.32.150 to determine how many other tows were handled this way, to enforce the penalties in 4.32.160, and to make sure everyone towed in violation of this chapter is told they may recover their fees under 4.32.130(d). Please let me know the outcome of your review.

Case Date:

10/20/2026

Non-consensual tows by Chandler Automotive & Towing (BMC ch. 4.32) On 10/20/2026 at about 12:15 pm, Chandler Automotive & Towing towed my 2017 Cadillac ATS (Indiana plate HAQ849) from the tenant parking lot at 508 S Fess Ave. No one authorizing the tow was present when my car was towed. The authorization form was signed afterward by Ashley Chandler, a Chandler’s employee working their front desk, after my car was already at their lot at 1107 N Jackson St. I watched her sign it and recorded it. When I called Chandler’s later that day, they confirmed they sign after the tow and said this is allowed. BMC 4.32.100(a) requires the owner or authorized agent to be “present at the time of the tow” and sign a “contemporaneous” written authorization. The multifamily exception in 4.32.100(d) allows a tow company employee to act as the agent but does not waive that requirement. The form has other problems: It has no date or time of authorization, only the time of the tow, which 4.32.100(b)(4) requires. It lists the wrong tow address. My car was parked at 508 S Fess Ave, but the form lists “Campus Walk, 520 N. Grant St.,” which is the management office, not the parking lot. BMC 4.32.100(b)(2) requires the address of the parking lot the vehicle was towed from. Taken together, this suggests the authorization was not completed for this specific tow at the time it happened. Chandler’s also first billed me $225, including a $50 dolly charge even though no dollies were used, and removed it only after I questioned it. Chandler’s also towed my car from the same lot in early August 2026, and I believe the authorization was handled the same way. Chandler’s must keep the records for that tow under BMC 4.32.150. I ask the city to investigate both tows, including the property owner’s affidavit and the photo or video documentation required by 4.32.100(d)(2) and (d)(4). If either tow violated ch. 4.32, I request a refund under BMC 4.32.130(d) of the $175 I paid on 10/20 and the fees I paid for the August tow. I can provide my recordings on request. This is not just about my money. When I called, Chandler’s told me they are allowed to sign authorizations after a tow, which suggests this is how they routinely operate. Chapter 4.32 was passed specifically to protect Bloomington residents from predatory towing, and its requirement that someone be present and sign at the time of the tow is the main safeguard against tow companies patrolling lots and towing at will. If Chandler’s is signing these forms after the fact, that safeguard means nothing, and every renter in a permit lot they patrol is exposed. Many of those residents are students and working people who will simply pay and never know their rights. I ask the city to inspect Chandler’s authorization records under BMC 4.32.150 to determine how many other tows were handled this way, to enforce the penalties in 4.32.160, and to make sure everyone towed in violation of this chapter is told they may recover their fees under 4.32.130(d). Please let me know the outcome of your review.

Case Date:

8/15/2026

Joe has three vehicles that he either does not drive or does not run on the public parking street. He has said that he moves them around periodically so they are not towed. Others that live on the street cannot park because he takes up atleast 4 parking spaces with his junk and vehicles.

Case Date:

3/20/2026

1040 E. Chris is a Jeff Jones rental property that the city has a lawsuit against this landlord. The tenants have a burgundy SUV with expired plates and flat tire sitting in the drive for months. Please address and communicate info to legal for this case.

Case Date:

3/20/2026

This is a Jeff Jones rental property that the city has a law suit against. There is a vehicle in the rental property with flat tires and expired plates. Please address and communicate with City legal as well.