Heated hearing over tow-company liens; counties and consumer groups oppose state-level lien work group

Supporters of a study on post-towing procedures and the possibility of a statutory possessory lien asked the House Environment and Transportation Committee on April 1 to form a work group to consider changes to Maryland law. Samuel Deschano, legislative director for Senator James, said the original bill was intended to clarify possessory liens for towed vehicles but was amended in the Senate to create a work group. "If the work group says we don't need a statutory change, okay, that's fine. But we need to at least take a look at this and make sure that we're doing it right," he said.

Representatives of the towing industry, including attorney Sean Malone (representing Henry's Towing) and Charles Parish of Vision Recovery Service and the Towing Recovery Professionals of Maryland, urged lawmakers to convene stakeholders. Malone described practical problems that towers face when state guidance is ambiguous and said legal uncertainty has exposed operators to suit and uneven local rules. Parish said private-property towing practice differs from municipal tows and asked that the committee pass a task force to develop a workable framework.

Opponents — led by attorneys and Montgomery County officials — argued that possessory liens are illegal under Maryland law and that creating a lien without state- or local-level due-process infrastructure would push unfunded burdens onto counties. Richard Gordon, a private-practice attorney who sues towing companies for predatory practices, told the committee that possessory liens are "manifestly illegal" without expedited hearing guarantees and that expanding statutory lien rights would encourage predatory behavior.

Kathleen Boucher of Montgomery County and Eric Friedman of the Montgomery County Office of Consumer Protection asked the committee to reject creating a state presumption in favor of liens. They urged any work group to include stronger local-government and consumer-representation, legal expertise on consumer protection and an explicit mission that does not presume a lien is appropriate. Carrington Anderson of the Maryland Association of Counties said the proposed work group appears unbalanced and warned of potential unfunded mandates if local governments were required to create expedited hearing systems.

Committee members asked whether a work group could resolve the dispute. Supporters said a work group was their hope; critics said the General Assembly has repeatedly considered and rejected statutory liens in past sessions and that the present problem stems from illegal practices, not an absence of law. The hearing record contains testimony from industry witnesses and county consumer-protection offices. No formal committee vote was taken on Senate Bill 883 during the hearing.