Read the memo to Portland Bureau of Transportation and Portland Police Bureau as a PDF:
Executive Summary
The Ombudsman received a complaint in early 2025 from a community member who felt financially exploited by the company that towed their vehicle after a collision. The company charged them nearly $1,700, three times the amount that would have been allowed under the City’s contract with tow companies to remove vehicles from the public right-of-way.
An Ombudsman investigation determined that the charges were legal. However, we also learned that a gap between police practices and the City’s tow contract can expose vehicle owners to widely disparate charges depending on which tow company happens to be dispatched to the scene.
The police regularly order private request tows rather than hazard tows as a courtesy to vehicle owners involved in an accident or breakdown. Private request tows do not require the officer to issue the driver a citation for blocking the right-of-way. They also involve less paperwork for owners when retrieving their vehicles.
Police officers order thousands of private request tows every year. Private request tows are not covered by the City tow contract limits on charges. Most tow companies voluntarily limit their charges to those allowed under the City tow contract, but one does not. Elite Towing & Recovery charged a median amount that was nearly five times higher than the median amount charged by their competitors.
The Transportation Bureau, which manages the City’s tow contract, says they never intended private request tows to be used to remove vehicles that are blocking the right-of-way. That’s why they didn’t include them in the contract. They say the issue could be resolved if Portland Police ordered hazard tows instead.
The Ombudsman concluded that the Police Bureau’s use of private request tows benefits motorists. Therefore, to protect community members from arbitrarily disparate towing charges, the Ombudsman recommends that the City rewrite the towing contract to include police-ordered private request tows or standardize rates through another means.
Introduction
The Ombudsman received a complaint in February 2025 from A.C.,1 whose vehicle was involved in a collision on Northeast Columbia Boulevard and was towed by Elite after the police requested a tow. Six days later, A.C. went to Elite’s tow yard to recover the vehicle and was given a price of $1,657. A.C. complained and was able to negotiate a release charge of $920, an amount they still found excessive because it represented 40% of their monthly income.
Under the City’s contract with tow companies to remove vehicles from the public right-of-way, A.C. would have paid an estimated $535 for towing, storage, lien, City, mileage and dispatch fees. But the police officer at the scene of the collision ordered A.C. a private request tow. This category is one of the options outlined in a Police Bureau directive, but it is not covered in the City tow contract, which is managed by the Bureau of Transportation. As a result, Elite was entitled to charge higher fees.
Figure 1. When Elite towed A.C.’s car after a collision, they paid nearly twice as much as the City’s contract would have allowed
We investigated to determine why the Police Bureau called for a private request tow instead of a tow category that is covered under the City contract. We also wanted to determine whether Elite was an outlier in charging much higher rates when police call for a private request tow to remove a disabled vehicle from the public right-of-way.
The key source of information for our investigation was the City’s towing database. From that, we found the names of other vehicle owners who paid higher fees to Elite. We also interviewed officials from the Police and Transportation bureaus, the owners of Elite and two other tow companies, and representatives of a company that auctions off vehicles that are badly damaged in collisions.
This memo summarizes the investigation and presents our findings and recommendations.
Background
The City of Portland contracts with about half a dozen private tow companies to remove vehicles from the public right-of-way. These include vehicles that are illegally parked in a loading zone or disability parking spot, recovered stolen vehicles, abandoned vehicles, and vehicles that create a hazard by blocking the flow of traffic. The contract, which is managed by the Transportation Bureau, allows City officials to order the removal of a vehicle from the public right-of-way when needed. It also provides steady business to tow companies in exchange for City Council-approved rates for vehicle owners.
When a vehicle is disabled in the public right-of-way, either because of a collision or engine trouble, a police officer calls the Bureau of Emergency Communications and orders a tow. Dispatchers send the tow request to one of the companies on the City tow contract on a rotating basis and depending on where the vehicle is located.
Police can order a hazard tow when the vehicle is blocking traffic, a bike lane or a sidewalk. The City’s tow contract limits what tow companies can charge for hazard tows, including the towing, mileage, dispatch and lien fees, and the daily storage rate.
In practice, Portland Police officers typically choose another option for disabled vehicles rather than a hazard tow. Police Directive 630.60 allows officers to order a private request tow on behalf of the vehicle owner. According to the Police Directive, unless the vehicle owner selects a specific tow company, a private request tow is directed to one of the City-contracted tow companies. These tow requests are also made through the Bureau of Emergency Communications. Between 2021 and 2024, tow companies responded to almost 14,000 requests from police for private request tows. This represented one-third of all police-ordered tows during that time period.
With any police tow, the vehicle owner is responsible for paying the fees before they can get their vehicle back.
Investigation Findings
The Police and Transportation bureaus differ on the use of private request tows
We learned that although police officers who order private request tows are acting in line with the directive, Transportation Bureau officials take a different position on the appropriate way to remove disabled vehicles from the public right-of-way. Transportation Bureau officials maintained that officers should order hazard tows if vehicles are blocking the flow of traffic. They said police are using a work-around that was never intended. Title 16 of City Code, which regulates vehicles and traffic, does not mention private request tows.
The police said they want to avoid a punitive citation when the motorist did nothing wrong. The paperwork requirements to retrieve a car after a hazard tow can also be a barrier for economically vulnerable vehicle owners who cannot readily provide a copy of the title with their name on it and proof of insurance. Many people living on the street cannot meet the paperwork requirements and lose their vehicles.
Although some Police Bureau officials were aware of Elite’s charging practices, top Police officials did not become aware of the full scope of the issue until we informed them of our findings. They argued in favor of changing the tow contract to cover private request tows rather than shift practices and have officers order hazard tows instead.
Elite charged significantly more than their competitors for police-ordered private request tows
Our investigation found that during the first three months of 2025, Elite charged significantly higher fees for private request tows than the five other companies that voluntarily complied with the City contract’s limits.
The five companies released 314 vehicles for a median charge of $419. By contrast, Elite’s median charge for 91 released vehicles was $1,893.
Figure 2. Elite charged nearly five times the median amount its competitors charged for private request tows in the first quarter of 2025
The owner of Elite agreed to meet with the Ombudsman. They said they were charging the rates that would apply if the vehicle owner called the company directly and requested a tow. Elite’s owner defended this practice on several grounds. They said the City rates do not cover the company’s true costs. Other jurisdictions, such as the Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office and the Oregon State Police, allow companies to charge two to three times as much as Portland. The owner also said they were skeptical that their competitors were putting their true charges in the City’s database.
Elite’s reasoning that the City tow contract rates do not cover its costs raises the question of why Elite chose to sign on to the City contract. Even though the contract rates do not apply to private request tows, being on the contract is the only reason that Elite is dispatched to these tows.
We did not find evidence to support Elite’s claim that other companies are charging higher rates than they are reporting, either. We reached out to a randomly selected group of owners of vehicles that were removed as private tows by other tow companies in the first three months of 2025. All but one of the owners who responded confirmed that they were charged the amount that is listed in the City’s database. The other could not find their records.
After discussing our findings with Elite, we asked them to provide partial refunds to the initial complainant and two other vehicle owners we spoke to. We also asked Elite to voluntarily comply with the City contract rates for owners who pick up their vehicles. Elite did not respond.
Vehicle owners expressed outrage about towing fees
In addition to A.C., the initial complainant, we reached out to more than a dozen other people whose vehicles were towed by Elite. Two responded to say they also felt exploited. A.C. and the two other vehicle owners shared their experiences with us.
- A.C.: “I was stunned and outraged.” After getting their vehicle back, A.C. contacted the Ombudsman to express their anger about the amount they had to pay. “I had savings, so it didn’t hurt me that month, but it was a heavy hit,” they said.
- K.V.: “That’s just kind of crazy.” K.V. was on their way to a family weekend at the beach when another vehicle collided with their family’s Honda Odyssey on Southeast 82nd Avenue. K.V. picked up the vehicle two days later and was shocked that the cost was $1,667. That included a $50 mileage fee and a $80.08 fuel surcharge even though Elite is located less than two miles from the scene of the collision.
- L.F.: “It just is really wrong.” L.F. was driving on Southeast Powell when a vehicle struck their Acura MDX. L.F.’s car hit the curb and a tree, landing on its side. L.F. was lucky to avoid serious injury. When they went to get the car back three days later, they were stunned by the price tag: $1,967. That included a $123.23 fuel charge and $95 mileage fee even though the collision occurred 2.6 miles from the Elite tow yard. It also included $375 in storage fees, nearly three times more than would be allowed under the City tow contract.
Figure 3. L.F. paid Elite Towing & Recovery more than three times as much in towing, storage and other fees than they would have if a different company had responded to the police request for a tow
Conclusion
In exercising their discretion to order a private request tow, police can help to make a vehicle breakdown or accident less stressful and financially and administratively burdensome for vehicle owners. We found the Police Bureau’s reasons for ordering private request tows for disabled vehicles to be compelling. However, this practice, combined with the City’s contract language and Elite’s charging practices, leaves motorists unfairly exposed to widely disparate rates.
Since Elite declined our request to align its charging practices with its competitors, the appropriate solution is to change the City’s tow contract or standardize rates for police-ordered private request tows through other means.
Recommendation
To protect vehicle owners from excessive charges, we recommend that the Bureau of Transportation ensure that community members pay fair standardized rates, for example by amending the City towing contract to cover all tows initiated by any City Bureau.
Footnote
1 This memo uses pseudonyms to protect the privacy of the vehicle owners.