Is it legal for private citizens to “impound” e-scooters?Can a public school “edit” a transcript from a private institution?Can a Californian be in legal trouble for physically restraining a dangerous child not his own?Accident with borrowed car — whose insurance will apply to satisfy legal requirements?question about abusive landlordIs it legal for a car to have a paper license plate in California?Is it illegal to order food and then not pay for it when it arrives?Can private schools in CA require a uniform?Is it enforceable contract to withdraw private prosecution charges for payment?Can a S.Korean game have the right to steal money and items and close your acct for no reason?Is it illegal to ask a company for money in exchange for information on a bug in their software?

What are the exact meanings of roll, pitch and yaw?

Why are there not any MRI machines available in Interstellar?

How can I receive packages while in France?

"I you already know": is this proper English?

What is the meaning of "you has the wind of me"?

How do campaign rallies gain candidates votes?

Spacing setting of math mode

Area of parallelogram = Area of square. Shear transform

How did C64 games handle music during gameplay?

How can I stop myself from micromanaging other PCs' actions?

Terence Tao - type books in other fields?

Very basic singly linked list

Where to place an artificial gland in the human body?

Grid/table with lots of buttons

401(k) investment after being fired. Do I own it?

Character Frequency in a String

Why do people say "I am broke" instead of "I am broken"?

A planet illuminated by a black hole?

Is the apartment I want to rent a scam?

Problem loading expl3 in plain TeX

Other than a swing wing, what types of variable geometry have flown?

The seven story archetypes. Are they truly all of them?

No-cloning theorem does not seem precise

Why did NASA use U.S customary units?



Is it legal for private citizens to “impound” e-scooters?


Can a public school “edit” a transcript from a private institution?Can a Californian be in legal trouble for physically restraining a dangerous child not his own?Accident with borrowed car — whose insurance will apply to satisfy legal requirements?question about abusive landlordIs it legal for a car to have a paper license plate in California?Is it illegal to order food and then not pay for it when it arrives?Can private schools in CA require a uniform?Is it enforceable contract to withdraw private prosecution charges for payment?Can a S.Korean game have the right to steal money and items and close your acct for no reason?Is it illegal to ask a company for money in exchange for information on a bug in their software?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








4















This recent article from The Verge claims that two men in San Diego have create a repo company that impounds e-scooters from companies like Lime, Bird, Lyft, Uber and Razor.



However as far as I can tell these guys are doing this entirely on their own accord. They don't have a license from the city. They write "tickets" in their own system and charge their own rates. They are called not by police but by random business owners.



To me this sounds like straight theft and extortion. Is this something they are legally allowed to do? The article claims that they are now being sued by all these big corporations, but it's unclear to my why this is being treated as a civil matter and not a criminal one.










share|improve this question






















  • Interesting related stories: nbcsandiego.com/news/local/… smdp.com/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago












  • And another pair: richmondbizsense.com/2019/07/11/… & columbiatribune.com/news/20190626/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago












  • This one is even more interesting from a legal perspective, Scooter company made a DMCA claim: eff.org/deeplinks/2019/01/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago

















4















This recent article from The Verge claims that two men in San Diego have create a repo company that impounds e-scooters from companies like Lime, Bird, Lyft, Uber and Razor.



However as far as I can tell these guys are doing this entirely on their own accord. They don't have a license from the city. They write "tickets" in their own system and charge their own rates. They are called not by police but by random business owners.



To me this sounds like straight theft and extortion. Is this something they are legally allowed to do? The article claims that they are now being sued by all these big corporations, but it's unclear to my why this is being treated as a civil matter and not a criminal one.










share|improve this question






















  • Interesting related stories: nbcsandiego.com/news/local/… smdp.com/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago












  • And another pair: richmondbizsense.com/2019/07/11/… & columbiatribune.com/news/20190626/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago












  • This one is even more interesting from a legal perspective, Scooter company made a DMCA claim: eff.org/deeplinks/2019/01/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago













4












4








4








This recent article from The Verge claims that two men in San Diego have create a repo company that impounds e-scooters from companies like Lime, Bird, Lyft, Uber and Razor.



However as far as I can tell these guys are doing this entirely on their own accord. They don't have a license from the city. They write "tickets" in their own system and charge their own rates. They are called not by police but by random business owners.



To me this sounds like straight theft and extortion. Is this something they are legally allowed to do? The article claims that they are now being sued by all these big corporations, but it's unclear to my why this is being treated as a civil matter and not a criminal one.










share|improve this question














This recent article from The Verge claims that two men in San Diego have create a repo company that impounds e-scooters from companies like Lime, Bird, Lyft, Uber and Razor.



However as far as I can tell these guys are doing this entirely on their own accord. They don't have a license from the city. They write "tickets" in their own system and charge their own rates. They are called not by police but by random business owners.



To me this sounds like straight theft and extortion. Is this something they are legally allowed to do? The article claims that they are now being sued by all these big corporations, but it's unclear to my why this is being treated as a civil matter and not a criminal one.







california theft extortion






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 9 hours ago









David GrinbergDavid Grinberg

2201 gold badge3 silver badges11 bronze badges




2201 gold badge3 silver badges11 bronze badges












  • Interesting related stories: nbcsandiego.com/news/local/… smdp.com/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago












  • And another pair: richmondbizsense.com/2019/07/11/… & columbiatribune.com/news/20190626/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago












  • This one is even more interesting from a legal perspective, Scooter company made a DMCA claim: eff.org/deeplinks/2019/01/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago

















  • Interesting related stories: nbcsandiego.com/news/local/… smdp.com/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago












  • And another pair: richmondbizsense.com/2019/07/11/… & columbiatribune.com/news/20190626/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago












  • This one is even more interesting from a legal perspective, Scooter company made a DMCA claim: eff.org/deeplinks/2019/01/…

    – David Siegel
    5 hours ago
















Interesting related stories: nbcsandiego.com/news/local/… smdp.com/…

– David Siegel
5 hours ago






Interesting related stories: nbcsandiego.com/news/local/… smdp.com/…

– David Siegel
5 hours ago














And another pair: richmondbizsense.com/2019/07/11/… & columbiatribune.com/news/20190626/…

– David Siegel
5 hours ago






And another pair: richmondbizsense.com/2019/07/11/… & columbiatribune.com/news/20190626/…

– David Siegel
5 hours ago














This one is even more interesting from a legal perspective, Scooter company made a DMCA claim: eff.org/deeplinks/2019/01/…

– David Siegel
5 hours ago





This one is even more interesting from a legal perspective, Scooter company made a DMCA claim: eff.org/deeplinks/2019/01/…

– David Siegel
5 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















6














Maybe, hence the lawsuits



In the absence of clear statute law these all circle around tort law. For the scooter companies, trespass to chattels and for the affected landowners (who hire the removalists) trespass to land and nuisance seem applicable.



In essence, I can’t take your stuff (trespass to chattels) but you can’t leave your stuff on my property (trespass to land) or impeding access to it (nuisance). If you do, I am entitled to the reasonable costs of dealing with it. Note that, as owner, you remain responsible for you stuff even if you rented it to someone else.



Both sides are pushing hard into unexplored areas of law so we await the judgement with interest. Then we’ll know.






share|improve this answer


















  • 3





    Folks have been having cars parked without permission on private property towed for years. Wouldn't there be a fair amount of precedent from that?

    – Charles E. Grant
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant yes, the scooter owners will be arguing it’s not applicable I’m sure. It seems like it would be but there’s enough of a difference that it might be distinguished

    – Dale M
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant A person is supposed to mitigate the damage they suffer from another's tort against them. Unlike a car, a regular person can trivially remove a scooter from their property and place it on public property. If there isn't an ordinance against them doing that or some other confounding factor, the scooter companies could argue that claiming the impound fees is an unnecessary expense and only serves to try to punish the scooter companies, which is contrary to a plaintiff's responsibility to reasonably mitigate damages.

    – IllusiveBrian
    6 hours ago






  • 1





    @IllusiveBrian that's a cogent point, or at least it would be if was a matter of 1 or 2 scooters left on private property now and then. However, (as pictured in the article linked to in the OP) it can be an ongoing problem with dozens of scooters left on private property and significantly impairing its use.

    – Charles E. Grant
    5 hours ago














Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f43175%2fis-it-legal-for-private-citizens-to-impound-e-scooters%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









6














Maybe, hence the lawsuits



In the absence of clear statute law these all circle around tort law. For the scooter companies, trespass to chattels and for the affected landowners (who hire the removalists) trespass to land and nuisance seem applicable.



In essence, I can’t take your stuff (trespass to chattels) but you can’t leave your stuff on my property (trespass to land) or impeding access to it (nuisance). If you do, I am entitled to the reasonable costs of dealing with it. Note that, as owner, you remain responsible for you stuff even if you rented it to someone else.



Both sides are pushing hard into unexplored areas of law so we await the judgement with interest. Then we’ll know.






share|improve this answer


















  • 3





    Folks have been having cars parked without permission on private property towed for years. Wouldn't there be a fair amount of precedent from that?

    – Charles E. Grant
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant yes, the scooter owners will be arguing it’s not applicable I’m sure. It seems like it would be but there’s enough of a difference that it might be distinguished

    – Dale M
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant A person is supposed to mitigate the damage they suffer from another's tort against them. Unlike a car, a regular person can trivially remove a scooter from their property and place it on public property. If there isn't an ordinance against them doing that or some other confounding factor, the scooter companies could argue that claiming the impound fees is an unnecessary expense and only serves to try to punish the scooter companies, which is contrary to a plaintiff's responsibility to reasonably mitigate damages.

    – IllusiveBrian
    6 hours ago






  • 1





    @IllusiveBrian that's a cogent point, or at least it would be if was a matter of 1 or 2 scooters left on private property now and then. However, (as pictured in the article linked to in the OP) it can be an ongoing problem with dozens of scooters left on private property and significantly impairing its use.

    – Charles E. Grant
    5 hours ago
















6














Maybe, hence the lawsuits



In the absence of clear statute law these all circle around tort law. For the scooter companies, trespass to chattels and for the affected landowners (who hire the removalists) trespass to land and nuisance seem applicable.



In essence, I can’t take your stuff (trespass to chattels) but you can’t leave your stuff on my property (trespass to land) or impeding access to it (nuisance). If you do, I am entitled to the reasonable costs of dealing with it. Note that, as owner, you remain responsible for you stuff even if you rented it to someone else.



Both sides are pushing hard into unexplored areas of law so we await the judgement with interest. Then we’ll know.






share|improve this answer


















  • 3





    Folks have been having cars parked without permission on private property towed for years. Wouldn't there be a fair amount of precedent from that?

    – Charles E. Grant
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant yes, the scooter owners will be arguing it’s not applicable I’m sure. It seems like it would be but there’s enough of a difference that it might be distinguished

    – Dale M
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant A person is supposed to mitigate the damage they suffer from another's tort against them. Unlike a car, a regular person can trivially remove a scooter from their property and place it on public property. If there isn't an ordinance against them doing that or some other confounding factor, the scooter companies could argue that claiming the impound fees is an unnecessary expense and only serves to try to punish the scooter companies, which is contrary to a plaintiff's responsibility to reasonably mitigate damages.

    – IllusiveBrian
    6 hours ago






  • 1





    @IllusiveBrian that's a cogent point, or at least it would be if was a matter of 1 or 2 scooters left on private property now and then. However, (as pictured in the article linked to in the OP) it can be an ongoing problem with dozens of scooters left on private property and significantly impairing its use.

    – Charles E. Grant
    5 hours ago














6












6








6







Maybe, hence the lawsuits



In the absence of clear statute law these all circle around tort law. For the scooter companies, trespass to chattels and for the affected landowners (who hire the removalists) trespass to land and nuisance seem applicable.



In essence, I can’t take your stuff (trespass to chattels) but you can’t leave your stuff on my property (trespass to land) or impeding access to it (nuisance). If you do, I am entitled to the reasonable costs of dealing with it. Note that, as owner, you remain responsible for you stuff even if you rented it to someone else.



Both sides are pushing hard into unexplored areas of law so we await the judgement with interest. Then we’ll know.






share|improve this answer













Maybe, hence the lawsuits



In the absence of clear statute law these all circle around tort law. For the scooter companies, trespass to chattels and for the affected landowners (who hire the removalists) trespass to land and nuisance seem applicable.



In essence, I can’t take your stuff (trespass to chattels) but you can’t leave your stuff on my property (trespass to land) or impeding access to it (nuisance). If you do, I am entitled to the reasonable costs of dealing with it. Note that, as owner, you remain responsible for you stuff even if you rented it to someone else.



Both sides are pushing hard into unexplored areas of law so we await the judgement with interest. Then we’ll know.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 8 hours ago









Dale MDale M

62k3 gold badges42 silver badges87 bronze badges




62k3 gold badges42 silver badges87 bronze badges







  • 3





    Folks have been having cars parked without permission on private property towed for years. Wouldn't there be a fair amount of precedent from that?

    – Charles E. Grant
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant yes, the scooter owners will be arguing it’s not applicable I’m sure. It seems like it would be but there’s enough of a difference that it might be distinguished

    – Dale M
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant A person is supposed to mitigate the damage they suffer from another's tort against them. Unlike a car, a regular person can trivially remove a scooter from their property and place it on public property. If there isn't an ordinance against them doing that or some other confounding factor, the scooter companies could argue that claiming the impound fees is an unnecessary expense and only serves to try to punish the scooter companies, which is contrary to a plaintiff's responsibility to reasonably mitigate damages.

    – IllusiveBrian
    6 hours ago






  • 1





    @IllusiveBrian that's a cogent point, or at least it would be if was a matter of 1 or 2 scooters left on private property now and then. However, (as pictured in the article linked to in the OP) it can be an ongoing problem with dozens of scooters left on private property and significantly impairing its use.

    – Charles E. Grant
    5 hours ago













  • 3





    Folks have been having cars parked without permission on private property towed for years. Wouldn't there be a fair amount of precedent from that?

    – Charles E. Grant
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant yes, the scooter owners will be arguing it’s not applicable I’m sure. It seems like it would be but there’s enough of a difference that it might be distinguished

    – Dale M
    8 hours ago







  • 1





    @CharlesE.Grant A person is supposed to mitigate the damage they suffer from another's tort against them. Unlike a car, a regular person can trivially remove a scooter from their property and place it on public property. If there isn't an ordinance against them doing that or some other confounding factor, the scooter companies could argue that claiming the impound fees is an unnecessary expense and only serves to try to punish the scooter companies, which is contrary to a plaintiff's responsibility to reasonably mitigate damages.

    – IllusiveBrian
    6 hours ago






  • 1





    @IllusiveBrian that's a cogent point, or at least it would be if was a matter of 1 or 2 scooters left on private property now and then. However, (as pictured in the article linked to in the OP) it can be an ongoing problem with dozens of scooters left on private property and significantly impairing its use.

    – Charles E. Grant
    5 hours ago








3




3





Folks have been having cars parked without permission on private property towed for years. Wouldn't there be a fair amount of precedent from that?

– Charles E. Grant
8 hours ago






Folks have been having cars parked without permission on private property towed for years. Wouldn't there be a fair amount of precedent from that?

– Charles E. Grant
8 hours ago





1




1





@CharlesE.Grant yes, the scooter owners will be arguing it’s not applicable I’m sure. It seems like it would be but there’s enough of a difference that it might be distinguished

– Dale M
8 hours ago






@CharlesE.Grant yes, the scooter owners will be arguing it’s not applicable I’m sure. It seems like it would be but there’s enough of a difference that it might be distinguished

– Dale M
8 hours ago





1




1





@CharlesE.Grant A person is supposed to mitigate the damage they suffer from another's tort against them. Unlike a car, a regular person can trivially remove a scooter from their property and place it on public property. If there isn't an ordinance against them doing that or some other confounding factor, the scooter companies could argue that claiming the impound fees is an unnecessary expense and only serves to try to punish the scooter companies, which is contrary to a plaintiff's responsibility to reasonably mitigate damages.

– IllusiveBrian
6 hours ago





@CharlesE.Grant A person is supposed to mitigate the damage they suffer from another's tort against them. Unlike a car, a regular person can trivially remove a scooter from their property and place it on public property. If there isn't an ordinance against them doing that or some other confounding factor, the scooter companies could argue that claiming the impound fees is an unnecessary expense and only serves to try to punish the scooter companies, which is contrary to a plaintiff's responsibility to reasonably mitigate damages.

– IllusiveBrian
6 hours ago




1




1





@IllusiveBrian that's a cogent point, or at least it would be if was a matter of 1 or 2 scooters left on private property now and then. However, (as pictured in the article linked to in the OP) it can be an ongoing problem with dozens of scooters left on private property and significantly impairing its use.

– Charles E. Grant
5 hours ago






@IllusiveBrian that's a cogent point, or at least it would be if was a matter of 1 or 2 scooters left on private property now and then. However, (as pictured in the article linked to in the OP) it can be an ongoing problem with dozens of scooters left on private property and significantly impairing its use.

– Charles E. Grant
5 hours ago


















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f43175%2fis-it-legal-for-private-citizens-to-impound-e-scooters%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

199年 目錄 大件事 到箇年出世嗰人 到箇年死嗰人 節慶、風俗習慣 導覽選單