2005-11-30 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

completed, it becomes clear which party will prevail in all forfeiture actions, except where: . there is an 'innocent ownership' claim; . the extent or validity of a lienhold interest remains in dispute; or . a constitutional Excessive Fines, Equal Protection, Substantial Due Process issue has been raised. Forfeiting agencies promptly settle forfeiture cases the outcome of which appears questionable to avoid the daily cost most pay for the storage of the vehicle. Vehicle claimants settle is to avoid continuing legal costs. If the requirements of s169A.63 appear to have been met by the government the claimant would be well advised to stipulate to the dismissal of the Demand to avoid possible S549.211 sanctions. If a viable issue remains, a common form of settlement is for the forfeiting agency to release the vehicle to the lienholder, registered owner, or third party upon the claimant's payment of all the agency's costs of forfeiture and a percentage of the vehicle's value on a number of terms and conditions aimed at keeping the vehicle out of the repeat DUI offender's hands and holding the forfeiting agency harmless. However, until there is an administrative or judicial determination of a contested forfeiture, the agency's rights with respect to the vehicle are only possessory and it must secure the vehicle and prevent waste. (9 169A.63, subd. 3(4)). Hence, without the claimant's express representation that it is the exclusive owner and its agreement to hold the forfeiting agency harmless and defend it should a competing claim be posited, the forfeiting agency should not abandon the forfeiture and release the vehicle, even if the claimant is the titled owner. Titled ownership is not conclusive of legal entitlement. Moreover, the forfeiting agency, even where there is a settlement should apply s169A.42 prerequisites to DUI vehicle redemption, requiring the registered owner, its authorized agent or its subsequent purchaser to provide proof of ownership, proof of valid Minnesota driving privileges, and proof of insurance. The settlement must specifically either 1.) abandon the forfeiture, returning the vehicle to the claimant if legally entitled to it; or 2.) abandon the Demand contesting that forfeiture, allowing the forfeiting agency to dispose of the vehicle. Without the filing of an Administrative Forfeiture Certificate or a certified court order granting forfeiture, the forfeiting agency has no authority to sell or transfer the vehicle. Because, the title to the vehicle will have earlier been flagged and suspended at the request of the forfeiting agency, only the forfeiting agency can request that the removal of that flag as part of a settlement agreement so as to allow the claimant to transfer title to the vehicle. This is time consuming and cumbersome. Therefore, the most efficient manner of transferring title to the vehicle is to agree to allow the forfeiting agency, as a part of the settlement agreement to proceed to forfeit the vehicle administratively. The agency can thereafter effect a transfer of title. 13 63