Committee recommends ITL on bill that would bar suspensions for unpaid towing/storage debts

The Transportation Committee voted 9–7 to recommend inexpedient to legislate on House Bill 414, which would prohibit the Division of Motor Vehicles from suspending registration or license privileges solely to collect private towing or storage debts. The committee heard detailed testimony from towing industry representatives and Division of Motor Vehicles staff about how the current statutory process operates and why towing companies rely on administrative suspension as a collection tool.

Representative Miller, the bill’s sponsor, described cases in which vehicle owners—after crashes or breakdowns—lost the ability to register vehicles or, in some cases, had driving-privilege suspensions carried over a long period. "A bad day becomes much, much, much worse," Miller said, arguing that requiring a driver to enter a business relationship with an operator chosen at roadside is unfair to consumers.

Ralph Kresser of the New Hampshire Towing Association told the committee that tow operators frequently receive vehicles under police contract and often bear lengthy storage and administrative costs while attempting to locate owners or lienholders. He said his firm handles roughly 100 abandoned-vehicle cases per year on the Seacoast alone, and described the paperwork and disposal timelines that can exceed months. "This puts a burden on all the towing companies in the state of New Hampshire," Kresser said.

Brandy Caseta of the Division of Motor Vehicles explained that the statutory framework treats license suspensions and registration suspensions differently: RSA provisions limit driver-license suspension to 12 months in the context described, but registration suspensions may remain indefinite until fees are paid or an agreement is reached. Caseta explained the administrative hearings process and the $100 restoration fee that applies if a license is suspended longer than 15 days.

Industry witnesses said suspension threats are the mechanism that often induces owners to contact tow operators to reclaim vehicles; tow operators argued that, absent the ability to escalate to suspension, many tows performed under public-safety contracts would become unpaid liabilities. Several committee members pressed for alternatives such as a state subsidy or a different collection mechanism.

Representative Gorski moved ITL and the motion passed on roll call 9–7. Committee members who supported ITL cited concern about shifting costs onto tow companies who have contracts with police and state agencies and about removing the only practical leverage for payment. Members voting against ITL said they wanted to consider an amendment to address consumer hardship.

Provenance: Discussion opened during the HB414 work session and included towing association testimony and DMV explanation of statutory suspension limits; the committee took the executive-session ITL motion and recorded a 9–7 roll-call vote.