Government Seizes Vehicles Worth $1 Million; Brings No Charges, Keeps The Cars

from the where-'due-process'-is-commonly-abbreviated-as-'GFY' dept

Mon, Aug 3rd 2015 2:52pm — Tim Cushing

Asset forfeiture: drop the charges, keep the property. I guess the person behind Saeki Co., Ltd. should feel appreciative he actually was graced with charges, rather than just had his purchased vehicles seized and spirited away with a mumbled explanation and some dodgy paperwork.

Saeki Co. bought several luxury vehicles from a place called Texas Motors (which, oddly enough, is located in Florida) with the intent to sell them for a significant markup to wealthy Japanese citizens. This is possibly illegal, but not because of any explicit export ban. The only reason it verges on illegal is because resellers like Saeki ever-so-lightly tread on the toes of major manufacturers and their authorized dealers who do the same thing.

The true legality of the situation is undetermined. The feds behind the first seizures of soon-to-be-exported vehicles didn't seem to have a firm grasp on the matter. They certainly felt it was illegal, and this feeling resulted in plenty of seizures, but these agencies didn't have any crystal-clear guidance on the matter.

The crackdown was driven largely by agents with the Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security, who questioned whether these small export companies were violating federal law by using straw buyers — people paid small sums to buy cars — to conceal that the vehicles were being bought by people who had no intention of keeping them and were using cash from other people to make the acquisitions. Federal authorities have argued that using straw buyers is a deceptive practice that potentially deprives American consumers of a chance to buy the luxury cars and limits the ability of automakers to keep tight control over sales to domestic dealers and to foreign countries.

It's not so much the American public losing a few opportunities to buy a luxury vehicle as it is the other thing: tight control of sales. The American public can't get many laws written in its favor, but large industries certainly can. This initial thrust led to lots and lots of partnerships with local law enforcement agencies conveniently located near shipping docks. And this led to lots and lots of luxury vehicles ending up in the hands of law enforcement.

Then, the government stopped the crackdown. It claimed to be making an effort to more tightly focus its forfeiture efforts as a result of Eric Holder's reform initiative. The appearance of being an errand boy for corporate interests certainly didn't help. Cases were dropped and charges dismissed. But the vehicles remained in the government's hands.

One person in Saeki Co.'s position spent two years fighting for the return of a seized vehicle and $125,000 in cash. This followed about a dozen similar settlements, most occuring after a legal battle with the agency(ies) holding the vehicles. In other cases, the prevailing parties still have yet to be fully recompensed. And others are still being prosecuted for violating a law the federal government isn't entirely clear on and has lost an interest in enforcing.

Saeki Co.'s story is the worst of the potential situations. It had eight vehicles worth nearly $900,000 seized at the Long Beach Seaport by customs agents. This happened January 3, 2013. Two months later, customs agents seized another of its vehicles (worth over $100,000) in Seattle. Two-and-a-half years later, the feds have abandoned everything about the case but Saeki's vehicles. And it simply doesn't want to talk about the seized property.

Despite the Government’s change in policy, Plaintiff has not received administrative relief from CBP nor any communication from the Government justifying its seizure of Plaintiff’s vehicles.

Other than the fact that it won't be bringing criminal charges.

In or about early 2014, Assistant United States Attorney David Lazarus advised Plaintiff’s counsel that the federal grand jury investigation undertaken in the Middle District of Florida had concluded without any criminal charge lodged against Plaintiff or any of its agents.

So, no criminal activity but the government still wants to keep the cars -- which were seized under a vague "felony interference of a business model" law.

Plaintiff’s vehicles were seized by CBP not because of any wrongdoing by Plaintiff, but because of an ill-conceived program by the Government to support a vehicle export monopoly at the expense of the Constitutional rights of Plaintiff and other vehicle exporters.

As the complaint points out, the government's unwillingness to respond to the plaintiff is swiftly rendering the vehicles worthless. Overseas purchasers willing to pay above US domestic retail for luxury vehicles are most likely going to want this year's model, not something that's been sitting around a government warehouse for almost three years. (And that's not taking into consideration the possibility the vehicles may have racked up miles as government agents' "work vehicles" or the occasional "drive it like you seized it" joyride.)

Then there's the simple fact that a newly-purchased vehicle starts leaking resale value the instant a purchaser drives it off the lot.

Using the generally accepted average vehicle depreciation rate of 20% in the first model year and 15% in subsequent years, the value of Plaintiff’s property has decreased in value by approximately $375,891.00 since their seizure. This measure increases every day that the Government fails to return the seized vehicles to Plaintiff.

Much of the filing details "conversations" with the government about the return of the vehicles, most of which went something like this.

SAEKI CO.: So, there's no criminal charges? This means we can have our cars back, right?
GOV'T:

The lawsuit repeatedly makes claims about Saeki Co. being deprived of due process. Which it has been. But civil asset forfeiture isn't about due process. These statutes provide -- from the very start -- a way for the government to bypass the protections due process affords to citizens. The cases themselves indicate that clearly. It's not the government versus any named individual or company. It's the government against the seized property itself, which cannot advocate in its own defense and can only be spoken for if the government grants the request.

So, while the company is absolutely right about being deprived of this right, in terms of asset forfeiture, this right simply does not exist. This lawsuit may force a response from the government, but it's a step it doesn't consider to be "appropriate" in terms of disputing seizures.

What Saeki does have going for it is the government's ambivalence towards the "law" it claimed Saeki broke. If nothing else, a judge will be asking the government a few tough questions about how its ongoing non-prosecution has managed to tie up not-guilty vehicles for the better part of three years. Given the racket that asset forfeiture is, that's about the best that can be hoped for.

Car Asset Forfeiture (PDF)Car Asset Forfeiture (Text)

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: asset forfeiture, civil asset forfeiture, dhs, homeland security, luxury cars, seizure
Companies: saeki co., texas motors

42 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

TheResidentSkeptic (profile), 3 Aug 2015 @ 3:08pm

Not correct.
There is nothing "CIVIL" about asset forfeiture.

It is just plain theft. Call it what you want -

Theft by Thugs; Robbery at Badge Point; or any other fancy terms - but it is still the taking without real justification or compensation and needs to be shut down.

Shame us poor citizens don't have anyone representing us or our needs in our government.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 3:11pm

Soon, only governments and corporations will be able to own things, and citizens will have become slaves. Some slaves, like law enforcement, will be more equal that other slaves, but only so long as they do their masters bidding.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 3:31pm

Done.
Alright, you need a longer response. ALREADY done. Hence the shootings of unarmed people by police without charges being filed (in the majority of cases.) See also the felony charges you face if you lie to congress, but no charges being filed if congress lies to you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 3 Aug 2015 @ 3:41pm

Naturally
Well of course they didn't file any charges, "In possession of nice car in the presence of an officer who wanted it" probably wouldn't look too good on a warrant, and I'm almost positive that's not actually a crime on the books(yet).

Mind, I'm sure the judge would still rubber-stamp the warrant, they're pretty spineless when it comes to anything the police want, but if it went public it wouldn't look too good, and neither police nor judges want that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pyrosf, 3 Aug 2015 @ 3:47pm

How?
How does this pass the right to due process, barring that the right to just compensation.

I've seen tons of court cases say that based on the law this passes due process. Can we start attacking the law on 5th amendment grounds that the government took property with out paying for it?

"...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Any use by the government (other then perhaps storage awaiting due process) should qualify. Heck, its super easy and even better as you don't have to prove anything but "The government took something of mine, the government has never compensated me for this"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 3:49pm

Re: Done.
Rarely are charges filed against people who lie to Congress either, unless they are against a personage of the opposite party.

How to fix:
Get rid of political parties.
Remove money from politics and elections. The two ARE different if one has been paying attention.
Replace all bureacrats with unencumbered drones (might take a while).

The above will take at least six years, Six years we can hardly afford.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 3:52pm

Re: How?
It will take some time (years) before the owner of the property is 'awarded' 'standing' to make such a claim.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 4:01pm

nah, you just misunderstand them.
They are the good guys and these brave heroes stopped a serious anti-American activity that threatened Democracy itself!
You dont want to seem like a crazy tinfoilhatt'r right? Or do you hate Freedom?!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 5:14pm

Re: How?
The more this sort of thing happens the more people will start literally attacking law officers on sight
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 3 Aug 2015 @ 5:25pm

Can someone point out for me the part in the US Constitution that covers asset forfeiture?
Something tells me the same logic (spurious or otherwise) that is being used to deny American citizens property and and will be used to deny them life and liberty as well.

Not that this hasn't happened with the Extrajudicial Detention and Interrogation program, but at least we recognize that was outside any implementation of justice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 6:06pm

Of the people, by the people, for the people, my ass...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pixelation, 3 Aug 2015 @ 7:17pm

Prove's the point
Here's the thing about so many people in law enforcement/government. They are closet criminals.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 7:48pm

Re: Prove's the point
You gotta realize that corporations write the laws. Anything that threatens their precious profits is a crime.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 8:12pm

Re: Re: Prove's the point
You make it sound like the USA isn't ruled by the people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
denialisbliss, 3 Aug 2015 @ 8:15pm

This sort of asset procurement is not the worst kind. The real scale and scope of these seizures will chill your spine. As the nation and the govt become more broke every day, incidents like this will happen more frequently.

In a way, poor people with no "seizable" assets are the luck ones. When's the last time you heard of some homeless' shopping carts emptied of their contents by "govt" people?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 8:28pm

Re: Re: Re: Prove's the point
Corporations are people
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 8:43pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Prove's the point
And when was that established? Also in first year it was how many real people made use of it compared to corps? The figure I have in mind is 1 person on 50 corps.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John, 3 Aug 2015 @ 8:47pm

Doesn't the US Constitution prohibit the seizure of property by the government, unless a conviction has occurred?

I (not a US person) was under the impression that this was made part of US law because the British Crown was in the habit of confiscating the assets of the colonists. This, alongside the other amendments such as the right to bear arms, and to have free speech, were a reaction to elements of British repression.

So, how come this hasn't been challenged constitutionally in the courts?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Aug 2015 @ 8:47pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Prove's the point
"And when was that established?"

When corporations paid for politicians. They contribute to their campaigns and offer them revolving door favors. When you have enough money to afford a politician then you can talk. Until then you have no rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David, 3 Aug 2015 @ 10:02pm

Re: Prove's the point
A pile on the ground is not a closet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Spartacus, 3 Aug 2015 @ 10:20pm

Re: How?
Irony: we have a so-called Constitutional Law professor as a so-called POTUS, ordering non- judicial murder as a matter of policy. Gummint theft is tame by comparison.

Spartacus & The Chain Gang

Hint: Rent your luxury cars, as needed. The corporate citizens have more influence.p
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Citizen Lame, 3 Aug 2015 @ 10:24pm

Re: How come?
Because the criminals in charge make it up as they go along.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Citizen Lame, 3 Aug 2015 @ 10:24pm

Re: How come?
Because the criminals in charge make it up as they go along.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 4 Aug 2015 @ 12:46am

Police robbing the homeless.
No, they just shoot those as crazies and process them as dead John Does.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David, 4 Aug 2015 @ 4:02am

Re:
Nostalgia. The Americans have been preserving Square and Line Dance better than the Britains, too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Aug 2015 @ 5:03am

Re:
rounded up and put into homeless camps with armed guards that prevent them from leaving sounds infinitely worse
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Aug 2015 @ 5:06am

Re:
The "It can't happen here" belief has blinded most people to the reality of the situation. It is happening but most refuse to look up and see the world as it is and instead keep staring at the ground safe in their naïve belief their country is safe and will protect them without them having to do anything.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
got_runs? (profile), 4 Aug 2015 @ 6:26am

Re:
The U.S. Constitution was voided after 9/11.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Aug 2015 @ 6:56am

So, while the company is absolutely right about being deprived of this right, in terms of asset forfeiture, this right simply does not exist. This lawsuit may force a response from the government, but it's a step it doesn't consider to be "appropriate" in terms of disputing seizures.

In practice maybe, but in reality, the right plainly exists right in the fifth amendment, and no law constitutionally can abridge the right.
Just because a right is continually violated, does not mean it doesn't exist...just further reinforces the indignity of the rights violation that occurs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mason Wheeler (profile), 4 Aug 2015 @ 7:34am

Federal authorities have argued that using straw buyers is a deceptive practice that ... limits the ability of automakers to keep tight control over sales to domestic dealers and to foreign countries.

Waitwaitwait... didn't the Supreme Court rule in the Kirtsaeng case, a couple years ago, that no such anti-arbitrage right exists? Or does that only apply to publishers?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Aug 2015 @ 7:36am

The point here is your governement is corrupt and its time you replace them all, from your local mayor, judge and sheriff to everyone in DC.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Aug 2015 @ 8:10am

"drive it like you seized it"

sounds like our govt catch phrase.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Arizona, 4 Aug 2015 @ 8:34am

Re: government theift
Wath david Vose videos,he show you, they don't want their shopping carts,THEY want their children to rape and murder,and they are klilling the parents in their fema camps,ALL the while america,WILL SOON BE JOINING THEM........
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ken Riel (profile), 4 Aug 2015 @ 8:42am

'The' Government is OUR Government
I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, referring to OUR government as 'the government' should be considered both grammatically and politically incorrect.

This is an obvious truth that shouldn't be hard for anyone to grasp at all. The way it is phrased here is like referring to your own mother as 'the mother', not only is this impolite, it's also kind of stupid.

If we can't get a grip on this we'll likely never be able to correct the injustices you guys work so hard to expose.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Aug 2015 @ 9:27am

Copying media is theft. Stealing cars is not theft.

Fuck logic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ray jones, 4 Aug 2015 @ 11:20am

Re: distant perception
what ever happened with distant perception web site it just seemed to stop working for me...
ray jones
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stephen May, 4 Aug 2015 @ 12:15pm

Agree 100%
A very sad state of affairs in the United States when a government can simply steal your property in violation of that nostalgic but now defunct Constitution.

Remember when Americans made fun of Russia and Nazi Germany and other countries whose government officials just stole whatever they wanted from citizens? What about the old-fashioned "tax" collectors who took the tax and whatever else they wanted?

The U.S. -- and all states -- are just as bad.

We don't live in the country falsely taught about in schools.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
baja, 4 Aug 2015 @ 5:57pm

gubmint seizure
Going on a long time, Ck out on google....Reese family fast and furious scapegoat? 48 months a DOJ settlement and stil no $, vehicles beat etc. HSI='s USSA kgb
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Aug 2015 @ 7:41pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Prove's the point
"When corporations paid for politicians."
Well... you might want to check how black people(at the time slaves) got their rights and became people. Then check how many corps applied for the same thing in this year.

To make it short. More corps than black ex slaves applied for the right to be a person in that year.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lindy, 4 Aug 2015 @ 10:56pm

So they dropped the charges because it wasn't Illegal
Government just trying to help big corporations and little guys shouldn't profit from anything, sounds like it to me. The GOV ARE CRIMINALS, that's why this was dropped!!! BALONEY!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Melissa (profile), 6 Aug 2015 @ 3:56pm

Government is allowing the same thing in animal rescues
Now that retail rescue from south to north has learned to control the internet and it is the Government that is allowing it to take over all animal shelters in the south!Also especially where I live in Tn, where the animal rescue corps has set up its Base location? They can go and raid someone of thousands of expensive pure breeds to sell the retail rescues! The governer of Tn has been letting this happen for yrs in his home town of Knoxville, Tn, where most of his staff came from, a news story was released recently on this issue, and after 817 share it was erased from internet!!! Channel 4 in Nashville infact!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Richards, 16 Sep 2015 @ 1:10pm

Great
I dont understand their point of doing this..maybe all they want is money from car owner which is sickening.. they should wake up!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]