On March 25th, Jonathan Welsh wrote in the Wall Street Journal about devices used by dealerships, financing companies and leasing companies to disable vehicles if the drivers are behind in their payments. Rob Robertson of Austin, Texas, a member of the ABA Family Law Listserv, wrote today with this thought: How long will it be before we see this technology used in a divorce situation? Many family lawyers have clients with car loans that cannot be refinanced, and/or unhappy former spouses with credit woes when the ex doesn't make the car payment as ordered in the judgment.
The devices and their use are described as follows:
"The repo man has found a new hiding place: inside your car. Increasingly, used-car dealers are installing remote disabling devices that keep the cars from starting if the buyer gets too far behind on payments."
Welsh writes:
Remote surveillance and privacy issues are of great concern as Welsh makes clear in his article.
Some of the companies making these devices are
Sekurus Inc -- On Time [See also a GPS vehicle tracker, iLocator, made by this manufacturer. It works, they say, in 98% of the US, Mexico and Canada.]
Pay Technologies, LLC -- PayTeck
You may read the Wall Street Journal article "Late on a Car Loan? Meet the Disabler" here.
This is not limited to private entities. Senate Bill 102 would allow the Michigan Friend of the Court to order the Secretary of State to revoke a parent's license automatically and immediately upon failure to comply with a repayment plan order, and the paying parent would be required to obtain a certificate of compliance and pay various fees in order to obtain a license again. If passed, parents who are the innocent victims of mistake of fact or fraud will have to find a way to survive without a driver's license until they can prove those facts to a court which has already imposed a punishment on them.
Posted by: DougDante | 03/30/2009 at 07:27 AM
The far reaching and abusive powers granted to FOC in Michigan are an example of the erosion of liberties. At the hands of vindictive FOC personel, the vicitims are ultimately the children whom they "profess" to be working to protect. They work for no one but their own jobs. There should be accountability and transparency in these agencies. If a parent can't drive, they can't find work, and they get deeper in debt to the state. What happens when they get a job? The state takes its money first, and IF there's any left over the child gets a little share. This system is broken and needs to be fixed. Read Carol Rhodes book about FOC and you'll see what has happened in Michigan, and probably every other state in the country.
Posted by: Gina Bond Fody | 12/02/2009 at 07:22 PM
Gina, your comments are similar to those that have been expressed previously. The problem is, of course, that states will lose their federal welfare supplements if they cannot and do not put in place and keep in place state agencies for the collection of child support. That has been true since August 22, 1996 when President Clinton signed into law the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.
I agree that the system is imperfect, but it is perhaps the best that we can come up with.
Posted by: Jeanne M Hannah | 12/10/2009 at 09:10 AM