The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC 3 CLAIM #88-3 05-16-88AprLl 27, 1988 CONSENT CALENDAR- NO. 3 m ~ ~ 5-16-88 'Inter-Corn $ U~J ECT: CLAIMANT.: FELDSTEIN, I~%~PH M.; D/L: 10/6/87; DATE F/L~) W/CIT~: 1/18/88; c~AIM NO: 88-3; CARL H%~REN ~ NO: ~30101~ After investigation and review it is rec~,~;e~ded that the above- referenced ¢1~m be rejected and the City Clerk directed to give proper notice of the rejection to the claimant and to the claimant' s attorney. City Attorney JGR(F4.se) Enclosure: Copy of Claim · CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY ~ 'TUSTIN ('For Damages to Person Or Personal Property) !ceived by ~i-~~ via ..S. Mail- Inter-office Mail Over the Counter The law provides generally that a claim must be filed with the City Clerk of the City of Tustin within 100 days after which the incident or event occurred. Be sure your claim is against the City of Tustin, not another public entity. Where space is insufficient, please use additional'paper and identify informa- tion-by paragraph number. Completed claims must be mailed or delivered to th{ City Clerk, The City .of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92680 TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, City of Tustin, California: The undersigned respectfully submits the following claim and information rela- tive to damage to persons and/or personal property: NAME OF CLAIMANT: Ralph M. Feldstein a. ADDRESS OF CLAIMANT: '~ ~ ? b, PHONE NO: ( c. DATE OF BIRTH: ~ SOCIAL DRIVERS d. SECURITY NO: e. LICENSE NO: . Name,. telephone and post office ~ddress to which claimant desires notices to be sent, if other than above: Same as above ® This claim is submitted against: a. The City of Tustin only. b. The following employee(s) of the City of Tustin only: c · XXX The City of Tustin and the following employee(s) of the City of Tustin only: DOES 1 THROUGH 10. INCLU~IVE~ o:~cer ~ucera, sa=ge ~ u~u o: '£'us=in F.~. ~ary Howar= =Da uary's Towing service as Agent of Clty OI TusCan. .Occurrence or event from which the claim arises: Based Upon Date of Notice Received October 9, 1987 : a. DATE: Unknown b. 'TIME: Unknown c. PLACE (Exact and specific location):front of 1~0£ cnar£oma Drive d. HOW and under what circumstances did damage or i cular occurrence, event ion you claim caused the injury or damage (Use additional paper if n essary). Vehicle lawfully parked was taken without contactinq owner in violation of Cal. Veh. Code § 22651 et. sec., as amended 1986 Police acted in violation of sta~ an~ ab~ What par ion by the City, or its employees, caused the alleged ~amage or injury? Venicle was towed in violation of state statutes, no notice re- ceived. ~"m4'~m'~ ~gfuli~ ~1'2 at.a~iun ~nd ~iolation of Cai. ~ -~'i 523 ana Civ. '5. ~Give a description of ~he injury, property damage or loss so far as is 'nown at the time of this claim. If =here were no injuries, sta%e "no njuries#' Conversion, pursuant to Cal. Civ. Code ~ 3336 by an unlawful and the pe.rma~ent dep~ivat~oD of the descr£bedDropert¥. 6. .~%Ee the_name(s) of the city employee(s; causlng the damag~or~n~ury: uzzicer Ancera, and others not yet ascertained. 7. Name and address of any other person injured= None 8. Name and address of the owner of any damaged property: 0 Damages claimed: Special & Compensatory damages as of this a. Amount claimed as of this date: date estimated at $15,000. b. Estimated amount of future costs: Court Costs, loss of use, unknown c. Total amount claimed: $ 15,000 estimated d. Basis for computation of amounts claimed (include copies of all bills, invoices, estimates, etc.: 10. Names and addresses of all witnesses, hospitals, doctors, etc.: a. Presently unknown, other than officer Ancera, b. C. 11. Any additional information that might be helpful in considering this claim: Vehicle was, to the best m~ my knowledce and belief, fully at the time, Darked in front of the address wher~ it wa~ registered. Damages are based on the. replacement v~ nf a h t' f a ' and o ot ' u e d i i n s%a%u~or~n~ c~n~%~tlona~ ~o~ent~} ~lo~a~n~ ~ damaces for other causes oI action. ~ Tustin P.D. Case No. 87-10240 WARNING: IT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE TO FILE A FALSE CLAIM! (Penal Code Section 72; Insurance Code Section 556.0) I have read the matters and statements made in the above claim and I know the same =o be =rue of my own knowledge, except as to those matters stated to be upon information or belief and as to such matters I believe the same ~o be true I certify under Penal~y of perjury that the foregoing is TRUE AND CORRECT. Executed this 18th day of January, , 1988 , at Tustin, California. 0f~-ice of the City Clerk, T ~.n, California CLAIM NO: 88-3 - CLAI~%NT ~S SIGNATURE Ralph M. Feldstein DATE FILED: January 18, 1988- Revised 8/05/81 JGR:se:R:8/5/81 (A) January 18, 1988 Ms. Mary Winn, City Clerk City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way T~stin, California 92680 Dear Ms. Winn: Attached herewith is a notice of claim filed against the City of Tustin, Officer Ancera of the Tustin Police De- partment, and unascertained individuals referred to as DOES 1 through 10, inclusive. After carefully reviewing the facts of this case as they are presently known to me, and upon review of the applic- 'able law including, but not limited to the California Vehicle Code, Tustin Municipal Ordinances, and provisions and cases set forth at Title 42 U.S. Code § 1983 et seq,, the undersigned is of the following opinion: ~1 Ordinance 600, codified at S 4500, et seq. has not been amended since 1973, although the vehl'--~cle code sec- tions upon which it is based have been amended as re- cently as 1986. This includes the provisions set forth at CVC § 22651{kl and (n). Sections 22661 and 22669 of the Vehicle Code apply to removal of abandoned vehicles and require municipal ordinances to contain certain pro- visions regarding procedures and notice to owners of in- tent to remove allegedly abandoned vehicles. ~2~ The attached claim involves the removal and storage of my former 1972 Mustang Convertible. At all times re- levant herein, that vehicle (license number 644LFI) was fully operational to the best of my knowledge and belief. It was neither abandoned, nor disabled. As far as I know, at the time it was removed, it contained an engine, transmission, wheels, etc.... It was removed from a place where it was lawfully parked, in front of the residence to which it was lawfully registered and in my name. -1- City of Tustin January.18, 1988 Page Two (21 Upon learning that the vehicle had been removed, I demanded its return both from Gary's towing and a Tustin Police traffic sergeant, who albeit info~ally, but nonetheless, denied the vehicle had been improvidently removed and stored. C4k I am further aware that at no time did the city attempt to comply with the aforementioned provisions of the vehicle code regarding actual notice of its intent to remove the vehicle. ~) I am informed and believe that on about November 13, 1987, the vehicle was sold to pay for impound charges to a bona fide purchaser. Based upon the foregoing, the basis of my claim is that due to a violation of a number of statutes intended to pro- vide notice of the intent to remove, and/or to abate a "nuisance", I was denied due process intended to be com- plied with under the aforementioned sections; the applic- able Tustin Municipal Ordinances are statutorily invalid, and I have been deprived of my vehicle. Penal Code Section 530 involves the taking of property un- der false pretenses. My contention is that due to the aforementioned errors and omissions, the property was taken under false pretenses, and/or constituted a "conversion" under ~ 3336 of the California Civil Code for Which the City is liable. Although I have twice attempted to discuss this with James Rourke, the City Attorney, I have been unable to do so. Prior to your denial of the claim, if you wish additional information or to discuss the matter further whiCh might preclude c~=uencement of a civil action, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. P.O. Box 12552 Santa Aha, California 92712 /~~ - Ralph M. Feld~tein