The ITEAM exposing a major mixup by The City of Jacksonville. The city sold a used firetruck, but turned over the wrong truck. She contacted the ITEAM when she says the city has refused to right the wrong.
@@connorstohl6050 Yeah, the city gave her the truck, They cannot say she stole it because that would be a lie any charges involved would be dropped. Then this would give additional evidence for her lawsuit.
Technically they gave her this truck and if she wanted to really get them she could start the process of claiming it as abandoned after x amount of days it could be hers too lol.
@@t-wrecks7481 "...they gave it to her." Just like she gave them the money. The city did not "steal" her truck. She never had it in her possession and she freely gave them the money for the truck, so they did not steal the money either. There are no criminal charges there, it is only a civil case. But at minimum they did damage her property and maybe even commit fraud by giving here the "wrong" truck, both of which would be criminal, if guilty.
@@zr71offroad20 You are right, they gave it to her so it would be a lie, but that doesn't always stop criminal cases, so you can't say "charges involved would be dropped." People are wrongfully convicted.
Its only fraud if it was intentional. They would still be liable for damages but, not fraud unless they can prove that they intentionally tried to deceive the buyer.
@@tradeelmundo However, removing all the other equipment from the truck before attempting to complete the transaction indicates an intent to deceive. As a juror, I would see it that way.
Yep. N ppl who say she's stupid or its her fault ecetera aren't to smart. City committed fraud. Same way a car dealership can't do this type of practice when selling cars. It's a huge lawsuit followed by fines/penalties and then loss of licenses aswell. She coulda technically asked the city for the paperwork on the truck they sent her, since her paperwork doesn't bind that truck to her and probably coulda technically owned that truck and the one they originally swindled her for.
Except it sounds like the problem is her hired transport took the wrong truck so she is now mad at the city because that truck has been used as a parts truck.
@@alphaspursncowboys city released the wrong vehicle to the transport driver. Should he have confirmed it was the right one? Sure. But the city gave him the WRONG ONE. Beleive me if he just rolled up and took a truck hed be in jail
This happened more than five years ago. Does anyone know what the outcome was? It sounds like a clear case, and the longer the fire department resists, the greater the bill
@@Victor-tl4dk She COULD potentially be liable, you cant just keep property you didn't legally buy, that truck was not the one she paid for and she cant register it as the VIN doesnt match. Stripped for parts like the one she DID buy, makes that worth scrap value now, the city should just refund her money plus her transport and misc cost, give her the stripped truck to dispose of how she likes, and call it a day
It seems pretty simple to me. She has the Title. She owns it. Not releasing it to her is the equivalent of Auto Theft. If they screwed up them that it is on them.
This is my thought as well. If I have title to a vehicle that (some person or entity) has in their possession, then they are guilty of auto theft. For the same reason, she's on the hook (no pun intended) for the truck sent to her.
I agree, she should return the truck that they delivered her and she should file auto theft charges through the state attorney for the council members that are withholding her property.
They are not asking for it back though and I certainly wouldn't incur the cost of having it transported back to them. She is owed what she bought. They handed the wrong vehicle over to her transporter. They screwed up, not her.
@@stephen4764 I just say return it that way the city can't claim they are negotiating paying the "difference" via that $1500 check they are trying to toss her.
I admire her for both saying my vehicle each time it was mentioned and the fact that she isn't backing down in the city trying to bully her! And for the reporter, I have to just say.... Say "VIN number"ONE MORE TIME!! 😡
Buyer would ABSOLUTELY notice when VINs were checked for registration, inspection, etc. I hate governments but this was not a bait and switch but an honest mistake. The fact is the buyer should have required the VIN to be confirmed by the transporter at pick up. That would have stopped everything in place and seen it rectified. She cannot have the old truck, it was stripped. She can get a $ difference for the value difference, which she can always argue, or she should be able to return it for a full refund although the transport is on her head. Of course since the transporter did not confirm the VIN a case could be made that the transporter should have to eat that, especially if they want to do business with her in the future. There is not getting the original truck, it is stripped. Life sucks, deal with it.
i think that only really applies when they seller doesn't get the short end of the stick also... they ended up giving her a truck that looked to be in much better condition and they are offering the difference in price....
@@kennethfharkin The fact that so many people dropped the ball tells you that it wasn't just the city even the lady didn't check at first. In fact it makes you wonder as to why they dropped the ball.
@SuperGoldnut they could easily change her name over to the vehicle they gave her accidentally, easy fix... but noooo she wants something that's already in pieces...
Governments have sovereign immunity and it sucks. I broke my scapula while riding my bike in 2017 due to negligent road maintenance/repairs and personal injury lawyers wouldn't even touch my case because the government is generally immune.
@@kidsafe Even when they don't have sovereign immunity, the goverment can reach down the taxpayers' pockets and just keep shoveling, until the "issue" goes away.
That is incredibly illegal, if any individual did this at an auction, they would be in prison as a result. Whoever was ultimately responsible for that should be in prison and never have control over anything or anyone but themselves from here on. Knowing government work, there are probably a chain of scapegoats that circle back to each other all of them belong in jail, for being a part of something so corrupt
City itself not need to fallow rules and thats a law lol If president kills someone then they hit hes fingers with wooden stick and repeat:Dont do it again and say sorry ^^ woops and go out playing hehe Good child,just little bit over hands hihi
Nobody would end up in prison over something like this. Worst case scenario would be a full refund plus punitive damages. Most likely just a full refund plus any expenses she incurred.
No you wouldn't, because fraud means there was a deliberate scam to advertise one fire truck and deliver a different one. That is unlikely in this case and even if it was would be very difficult to prove.
So let me get this straight. They gave her a truck she *doesn't* have the title to, and kept the truck she *does* have the title to. Even if she did take the money, if she's intending to flip the truck it sounds like a nightmare trying to resell a truck she doesn't have the title to.
@@scottb_02 I hear she now owes them the cost of 2 brand new fire trucks. She should have just been happy trying to sell a truck she doesn't legally own and can't legally sell because the vin's don't match... But what do I know...
Used fire trucks are bought by construction companies ( spraying down buildings that are being demolished to keep the dust down). I know a fire truck from my local fire department was sold to a fire company in South America. New fire trucks cost $200,000+ so buying used is very cost effective especially when the trucks are well maintained the entire time they are in service
They probably started scrapping it for parts before she contacted them, by the time they realized their mistake the damage was done. They didn't want to have to fix it back up so they tried to change the deal.
Imagine if I sold you a car and delivered a different one, then you find out I started parting out the car you legally own. Wonder how many years I’d be locked up for fraud? Apparently none if I’m the government.
There is nothing at all unusual about stripping one vehicle for parts to keep the rest of the fleet on the road. All organisations with large fleets of vehicles do it.
@@zchris87v80you'd be locked up zero days given that you acted in good faith which they may have. Fraud legally is the INTENTIONAL use of deceit or trickery. A mistake is not a fraud, that's why this is civil. I assure you the city didn't intentionally list the wrong vehicle. They probably even intended to list the 2004 AFTER they stripped it. If they have multiple other 04' models and no other 02' ones they'd sell the 02 intact.
The first time I made a comment on this, I was surprised about how many Jacksonville residents had complained about their City Hall and how crooked they are.
also really poor management of the dude she hired to drive it down to her. wich is also why i doubt the city will be atfault, they will argue that the dude who picked it up is at fault
I used to work at an auto auction ( at times at the gate ) one of the things that is supposed to be checked is the VIN BEFORE the vehicle is allowed to leave the yard ( and the transporter is supposed to check that as well to make sure it is the right vehicle , too )
That problem exists if your country/state allows cities to leverage taxes. If they would get a fixed (but limited) share of tax revenue of the state/or federal government, they would have limited ressources and couldn't acquire more with taxes. Obviously there is no efficient use of money if wasting it has no negative effect (especially in a two party system).
Yh because she’ll take them to court because she got a better firetruck instead it’s so terrible that she could buy a firetruck that was broken and then they gave her a working one worth the same price oh no what on earth can she do 😭😭😭😭
@@Alphoric They damaged it *after* she bought it. Imagine this. You own a car made in 2015. Let's pretend its a Cara Yadrems. You like this car, you drive it daily. Cool? Now, the city comes and tows off your car worth $15,000. They then strip it for parts, and give you a 2013 Cara Yadrems, probably with an extra 40,000 miles on it, worth maybe $12,500 at a stretch. Then they offer you $1,500 and *want the title for YOUR car*. You gonna be mad?
She HAS the title, it's literally her truck. This would be an easy court case I imagine. She could have someone tow it out of whatever yard their keeping it in and I imagine Jax can't do a thing about it
Except that she is in possession of a truck she does not have the title on. If she did that, I would imagine they could come after her. Maybe if she returned the truck she got, but even then government is not some random eBayer. She would probably get arrested.
Just grabbing the correct truck is only part of the issue. It's not in the condition it was sold as. It's worth a fraction of that after being stripped.
The problem is that she doesn't have a title for the truck she has and the one she paid for isnt in her possession. The city also basically blamed HER for taking the wrong truck, making it theft by misappropriation on her part. I'd just take the 1500+ an option to have first no bid deals on any new fire vehicles for sale in the next year or two as compensation .
Once she transfers the title, she can show up with police and take her property back. At this point the city just needs to give all her auction money back then do a deal to swap titles to where she keeps the older truck for free. That is the only way to make this right if they wont restore and giver her truck back.
@Christobanistan That's not how that works. If I steal your car and put it in my driveway, I can't say "You're not allowed onto my property." Bring cops and you will get your stuff back.
@Christobanistan it's not how it works, it's not impounded if it's drivable she can take it as it's her property she just needs police still allow her to be on the property to take it, it's just unfunctional because components were taken out so they damaged her vehicle..
Sounds like City has stolen a firetruck, so same as with any vehicle, charges should be filed against City, and when they drag their heels, Mayor can be shown his new cot in Gray Bar Hotel!
Only the government can say “oops” and get away with it. If it was a person the selling party would be forced to fix the truck back to its original condition and then payed for wasting the buyers time.
Yeah exactly. Everyone feels bad for the poor lady that drove away with the wrong truck and now wants the tax payers to make right by her. If you can't even do that basic level of diligence, you really have no business flipping. Both parties made mistakes and hurt the tax payers. I guess the station is now short a ladder truck - hopefully her mansion doesn't catch fire.
The standard political response, "we investigated and discovered the error, but we're not going to fix it, lessons were learned". It's always the "lessons were learned" part that never gets believed, cause it keeps happening.
When you have a revolving door of low level employees who you can claim "learned their lesson", then you don't have to take any responsibility. The real lesson learned is by the victim of the offense who has now decided never to deal with governments again.
Agreed. If he had done that, none of this would have happened. Still, though, the city of Jacksonville is on the hook for this one ultimately. If she sues them, she'll win.
EASY SOLUTION: She has ownership papers; report the firetruck as stolen! Then force the Jacksonville PD to "recover" the vehicle! She would get the truck she's entitled to AND the City would be forced to pay restitution for damages! This isn't rocket-science!
@milchuck Then why do they want the title back? Easy, they cannot do anything with that vehicle; they cannot sell it as they do not have the title. The state also would not issue a replacement since they are no longer the legal owner of it. As soon as they get that title, they can freely sell it. All she would need to do, file papers with the court and then take the court order to the sheriffs office and they are bound to enforce the court order that the vehicle is to be released. If the city wants to keep it, then they can try to convince the judge that they are the rightful owner even though they sold the vehicle and provided the title to the other party. All the city can do is delay and have legal fees accumulate; but when they lose, they will be out a lot more money and still not have that fire truck.
Somebody actually made a mistake, and now they think they can ignore their obligation and bully their way through the problem. They have the opportunity to make a good faith settlement or lose an embarrassing and expensive case in the Courts. Damages should include the additional money that She resold the truck for but was unable to collect and time spent dealing with the City.
@@osco4311, no court would ever consider the potential profit she might have made. The responsibility of the seller in this case would be to make the buyer 'whole'. In other words, if they can't give the buyer what was agreed upon, they must take whatever steps are necessary to restore the buyer to the same position they were in before the agreement was made. Any costs incurred by the buyer (detailing, transportation, legal fees, etc) would be reimbursed by the seller. The wrong truck and the title would be returned to the seller.
VIN numbers and unit numbers are extremely easy to check. Either the bureaucrat in charge was too lazy and stupid to do something that simple or this was done purposefully because they decided they wanted the parts from the firetruck that they sold her so they switched them and hoped she was too stupid to notice.
It is her responsibility to check the VIN of the truck at the moment of picking it up. Actually she stole a truck now, city should send the cops over :)
So basically she has a firetruck with no title. And a title to a another firetruck she dosnt have? And now the title she owns for the other firetruck, she can repo it legally?
My car was once parked in front of my friends house. It was snowing, and there wasn’t any parking ban issued. We went to a ski resort that was local. Returning back from our trip, I seen my car completely smashed in on the fender and wheel area completely destroying the car. I called the police, and they said they would send someone out. 5 hours later no one showed up. I called a couple more times and they kept saying someone would come. The neighbors came out and said they seen what happened. A city snow plow truck had smashed into it. I called the police back and they told me I would have to fix my car myself, and then send the city the bill and they would determine if the repairs were necessary. I told them I needed their insurance information and they refused. Also, since I was now deprived of a vehicle I relied on for transportation, I told them by law I must be given a rental vehicle until my car was repaired. I was threatened on the phone by a police officer saying that if I kept causing trouble they would charge me with illegally parking a car and obstructing police. So I called 19 action news. A few hours later I was on TV and I told my story. And guess what? The next day I was contacted by someone. They gave me the information I needed, got me a tow truck to tow my vehicle to the repair shop of my choosing, which is the law, and they said all damages would be paid for in full. And guess what else? I got my rental car. Unfortunately I still missed 3 classes at the college I was attending but at least it was handled. Funny thing though, after all that was taken care of, the news network pulled my video off of their site and it was no where to be found anymore. I wish I still had it. I liked being on TV. Made me feel cool fighting for justice and holding the city accountable and forcing them to OBEY THE LAW.
Does the city have an attorney? If they do I would think their job could be in jeopardy because they didn't warn them they would get sued. She could sue for her lawyer fees too.
odeis5 It had tires on it when she bought it & the city has already admitted that they have taking parts off the truck after it was already sold. She took detailed pictures of truck before she bought it. If she takes it in front of a judge she’s going to win & get her attorney fees paid for. Why do you think she should just accept what the city initially wanted to give her?
odeis5 I’ve read several articles on this and she took detailed pictures of the truck and sent them to the buyer she had lined up for it. SHE LEGALLY OWNS THE TRUCK AND SHE HAS THE LEGAL TITLE IN HER NAME!. My daughter is an attorney and she said it’s much easier & faster to get the city to do the right thing willingly than to go to the courts first.
@@jamielancaster01 who is she taking "detailed" pictures of the truck if she never went there and send someone else to pick it up WHO BY THE WAY PICKED UP THE WRONG ONE.
I used to buy and sell fire and police vehicles for a local city government. It sounds like the vehicle she bought was already stripped for extra parts to use for other fire trucks. Instead of admitting that, they tried to pull a fast one and send her another... oops! They will bury the person responsible under mountains of red tape and he or she will never take responsibility. I hope the purchaser ends up with a substantial financial settlement.
If this was recorded today, i guarantee this would be said "I haven't been able to sleep. This is given me anxiety and is really affecting my mental health"
I have lived in Jacksonville all my life Robert and you can trust me when I tell you you absolutely DO NOT WANT TO LIVE HERE. It is HORRIBLE. All the bad stories you have heard are TRUE and then some. All the good stories you have hear are LIES made up by the greedy Chamber of Commerce.
If the city mistakenly parted out a truck this woman legally owns they are legally required to repair her truck for her before returning it to her. If she has all the paperwork to prove she owns it the city is committing vandalism if they continue to take parts off her truck knowing they don't own legally it. It sounds like she needs to hire an attorney and possibly press charges as well.
Not likely to be a good enough answer. Miscellaneous unknown old parts slapped together are not going to be equal to the value of the well maintained truck they sold her. Government will screw you out of a dollar even if it costs thousands of dollars to do it.
She needs a lawyer, not the cops. But then it's a question of cost vs benefits of getting the right truck back... might be a good small claims complaint
I'd say he kinda did her a favor,lol. At least she has something for the 10 grand. If the truck she bought was "on the road" already she would have been out 10 grand and no truck. And it would have been 6 months or a year before she got her money back. They would have dragged that out for sure. Not to mention she still would have been charged by the transporter for at least half of the bill. Or the driver knew what was up and didn't want to lose a load,lol.
@@highpockets5340 but at the same time, if you are transporting a vehicle or any type, you should check the the vin to make sure you are being given the correct thing, even if the seller is saying it’s correct it may not be and checking the vin verifys that information. That being said the person that verified the release of the truck also should have checked the vin of the truck that was released against the one she bought. Honestly everyone is at fault for this is some way or another
@@KayColeLynn Sorry but only the person that released the wrong truck is responsible. Transport/driver did their job from pt A to B without damage/delay. I Think of it like a delivery from Amazon, if the contents are wrong is it the drivers fault?
They should give her a complimentary "Sorry we screwed up" free fire truck. It was their error and I would sooner see the money go to her rather than some cold government owned auction that clearly has more money than brains anyway.
I wasn't aware of the "Michigan's Columbus: The Life of Douglass Houghton" book you wrote. Originally being from Michigan and being familiar with Houghton Lake I decided to order a copy of the book.
How is this “the most American problem ever” it’s a serious problem all over the world. Not only did she buy something & was given something else & not only did she buy a truck have the paperwork for a specific truck (that if she were to get involved with the police in any matter when pertaining to the truck she will get arrested for not having the correct paperwork & will legally be seen as GTA) but more importantly she bought it from a governmental body & said governmental body not only gave her the wrong truck but are refusing to help her. A governmental body telling a citizen that they will get something only to give that citizen something else happens all over the world.
@@pepethepatriot7524 Private fire departments don't exist here in Spain at all. They are all run by the government and with new fire trucks only, so those old fire trucks are completely useless here. So yeah, it's a very American thing indeed.
@@Alcosmos_ private fire departments don’t exist in America either. What the women wanted to do was buy an old truck, refurbish (or make it new if you don’t know what that means) & then give it away to a fire station that needs it.
I like how they tried to blame it on the transport for not first verifying the VIN. Um...The City released the wrong truck to the transport is relevant, but not mentioned in the City Press release! The transport checking their job isn't!
@@codeoptimizationware2803 Hope fully she got paid off or got her truck and signed a NDO and thats why we haven't heard. The reddit patrol will probably find out.
I don't know the outcome as of this comment but she unquestionably has the legal right to sue, or at least in most states in these bait and switch situations involving vehicles. I would love to hear about an update. NOTE: This is from 2018 and it's only now being noticed on RU-vid? What a weird algorithm.
@@fyrman9092 The government will blame someone else. Who could that be? They will blame the transporter employee and ignore their employee. So sorry but we did improve so (maybe) it won't happen again.
The two comments above me are clearly not talented in the art of doing business. Bringing politics into this will not benefit our profit margin whatsoever. The money in my pocket wont feel different, weather the person it came from has a skin that is white brown black or burnt to a crisp like the survivors of the fires mentioned earlier. Smdh.
@@stefanx8344 if you're talented in doing business you would look for the organization/individual that is good at doing the burning. Yeah idc wether they are black, white, yellow or green.
The fact they’ve stripped HER truck for parts, makes the transaction to fix regis, a lot more complicated. Depending on the terms of the sale, it could range from a refund, replacement, or up to providing an alternate product to the same value and functionality as the ‘misplaced’ item. If I was her, I’d start by lodging a claim for a new truck with all matching equipment, then let them negotiate down from that with my lawyer - and they’re paying for them too !
Yep. The $1500 difference is somewhat reasonable as a good faith first offer to make her whole. But their bargaining position is gone after stripping the vehicle while she owned it, so she has no reason to take that offer.
@Snowsc Used firetrucks are not considered fungible. They stripped her truck by accident, so they owe her full restoration of her truck. They owe her the truck plus restoration of the truck, which would probably cost them about 20'000. They want to give her a different cheaper truck, of their choosing, and the difference in price, which costs them nothing (she already paid for it). She didn't buy that different truck, and they can't force her to accept it. Used firetrucks are not fungible. The moment they refused to give her her truck when notified about the mistake, they made it much harder to claim it's all an accident, which opens the possibility of damages as well.
If I was her, I'd contact local PD, call it "stolen" (because it was) and tell them that a PI found it stripped for parts at x location. Press charges on the people who stole it.