Bellingham Hearing Examiner

Bellingham Hearing Examiner Pro Tem Rajeev Majumdar conducted two vehicle impound appeal hearings on January 20, 2026, both involving circumstances where individuals faced significant financial hardship in recovering their towed vehicles. The hearings showcased the human impact of municipal impound policies when applied to residents experiencing economic distress and emergency situations. The first case involved Rachel Thompson, whose 2010 Ford Edge was towed on Christmas Day 2025 while she was assisting an elderly woman experiencing a COPD attack. Thompson had already paid $601 to recover her vehicle but sought relief due to financial hardship, living on SSI benefits with monthly expenses exceeding her income. Her vehicle became stuck on a sidewalk after she made a wrong turn while rushing to get her friend to safety and medication. The second case presented a more dire situation involving Sardam, whose vehicle was towed following flood damage during severe weather. His car had stalled in rising water on an exit ramp, and after moving it to safety, he was unable to retrieve it for several days due to road closures. When he returned to install dried engine components, the vehicle was gone. Having used the car for DoorDash income, Sardam now faces accumulated impound fees of $4,733.85 that exceed the vehicle's value, with no means to pay. Both cases highlighted procedural and systemic challenges in the city's impound system, particularly around timing of hearings and the compounding nature of daily storage fees for individuals without financial resources.

**Rachel Thompson Appeal:** - Case heard with full testimony from appellant, responding officer, and tow company representative - Thompson had already paid $601 impound fee under financial hardship - No formal vote recorded; Hearing Examiner to issue written decision - All exhibits admitted to record **Sardam Appeal:** - Case heard with limited testimony due to investigating officer absence (at training) - Vehicle remains impounded with accumulated fees of $4,733.85 over 39 days - Hearing Examiner excluded police reports from evidence (Exhibits 3 and 5) due to lack of foundation and absence of specific authorization in Bellingham Municipal Code 11.18 - Written decision to be issued **Legal/Procedural Issues Identified:** - Potential conflict between Bellingham Municipal Code and RCW regarding appeal destinations (Municipal Court vs. District Court) - Gaps in evidentiary rules for police reports in impound hearings compared to infraction proceedings

**Rachel Thompson, on her emergency situation:** "I deal with really bad anxiety and panic. And so when I was in this situation, I wasn't thinking clearly as far as I was. My main concern was just getting my friend to safety." **Thompson, on her financial hardship:** "I luckily, by the grace of God, got paid the day before, so I was able to make that payment of $600. But that was Christmas, and it really set me back." **Officer Walker, on the vehicle's position:** "The Ford had also been blocking public sidewalk, making it impossible for people safely to walk on the sidewalk without having to walk onto Northwest Ave." **Sardam, on his flood situation:** "I basically opened my driver's side door and there was water coming in my car. So I pushed the car to the side." **Aaron Samora, on accumulated fees:** "So we're at 39 days right now. So a grand total right now, if it were to be redeemed, would be $4,733.85, which exceeds what the car's worth." **Hearing Examiner Majumdar, on evidentiary standards:** "I have no foundation to admit these exhibits. I have no party willing to testify to their authenticity or to put them in the record."

# Real Briefings — Supplemental Content Master Prompt --- ## MODULE S1: STUDY GUIDE ### Meeting Overview The Bellingham Hearing Examiner Pro Tem Rajeev Majumdar conducted two vehicle impound appeals on January 25th, 2026. Both cases involved vehicles towed by ASAP Towing, with appellants seeking relief from impound fees due to financial hardship and challenging circumstances. ### Key Terms and Concepts **Hearing Examiner:** A neutral judicial officer who hears appeals and administrative cases for the City of Bellingham. In this case, Rajeev Majumdar served as the "Pro Tem" (temporary) hearing examiner. **Vehicle Impound Appeal:** A legal process where someone can challenge the towing of their vehicle, seeking either a reversal of the impound decision or reduction of fees. **High Centered:** When a vehicle gets stuck with its undercarriage resting on the ground, preventing the wheels from gaining traction. This occurred to Rachel Thompson's Ford Edge when she accidentally drove into a yard. **Pedestrian Right-of-Way/Sidewalk:** Public walkways that must remain clear for pedestrians. Vehicles blocking sidewalks can be legally towed by police. **Form of Pauperis:** A legal document allowing someone to proceed with court cases without paying fees due to financial hardship. Both appellants submitted these forms. **Prima Facie Evidence:** Evidence that, on its face, establishes a fact unless contradicted. The hearing examiner noted that vehicle registration records serve as prima facie evidence of vehicle ownership. **Business Records Exception:** A legal rule that allows certain documents to be admitted as evidence without requiring testimony from their creators, if they're kept in the regular course of business. **Municipal Code vs. RCW:** The hearing examiner noted a conflict between Bellingham's local laws (Municipal Code) and state law (Revised Code of Washington) regarding where appeals from his decisions should go. ### Key People at This Meeting | Name | Role / Affiliation | |---|---| | Rajeev Majumdar | Hearing Examiner Pro Tem for City of Bellingham | | Rachel Thompson | Appellant in first case (2010 Ford Edge impound) | | Officer Walker (Badge 334) | Bellingham Police Department officer who responded to Thompson incident | | Aaron Samora | President of ASAP Towing | | Mr. Sardam | Appellant in second case (vehicle flooded on exit ramp) | ### Background Context Vehicle impound hearings represent a critical intersection of public safety and economic justice. When police determine a vehicle poses a public hazard or violates parking laws, they can have it towed to private impound lots. However, the costs can be devastating for low-income residents—as seen in these cases where fees reached $601 for one day and over $4,700 for 39 days of storage. The appeals process allows people to challenge these impounds, either arguing the towing was improper or seeking fee relief due to hardship. Both appellants demonstrated financial distress: Thompson was on disability benefits, while Sardam lost his only income source (DoorDash driving) when his car was impounded. The hearing examiner's role is to balance public safety requirements with individual circumstances, applying both state and local laws to determine whether the impounds were justified and what remedies might be appropriate. ### What Happened — The Short Version Two people appealed vehicle impounds to the Hearing Examiner. Rachel Thompson's car got stuck helping an elderly friend during a medical emergency—she tried for hours to free it but couldn't, and it blocked a sidewalk. She paid $601 to get it back the next day but sought reimbursement due to financial hardship on disability benefits. Mr. Sardam's car stalled in flooding on an exit ramp. He pushed it aside and spent days drying out engine parts, but when he returned to reinstall them, the car was gone. After 39 days in impound, fees totaled $4,733—more than the car's worth. He couldn't pay and lost his DoorDash income source. The hearing examiner listened to testimony, noted legal complications about which documents could be admitted as evidence, and promised written decisions. He found conflicts between city and state law regarding where appeals of his decisions should go. ### What to Watch Next • Written decisions will be issued for both cases, determining whether fees should be reduced or refunded • Potential appeals to either Municipal Court or District Court (legal uncertainty about proper venue) • Ongoing accumulation of daily storage fees ($101/day) for Sardam's vehicle until resolved --- ## MODULE S2: FLASH CARDS **Q:** Who served as the hearing examiner for these vehicle impound appeals? **A:** Rajeev Majumdar, serving as Hearing Examiner Pro Tem for the City of Bellingham. **Q:** What was Rachel Thompson appealing? **A:** The impound of her 2010 Ford Edge that got stuck while she was helping an elderly friend during a medical emergency. **Q:** How much did Rachel Thompson pay to retrieve her vehicle? **A:** $601 total to ASAP Towing, which she paid the day after Christmas despite being on disability benefits. **Q:** Why was Thompson's car stuck and unable to move? **A:** It was "high centered" after she accidentally turned into the wrong driveway, with the undercarriage resting on the ground preventing wheel traction. **Q:** What was blocking the public right-of-way in Thompson's case? **A:** Her vehicle was blocking the public sidewalk, making it impossible for pedestrians to walk safely without going into the street. **Q:** Who responded to the scene of Thompson's vehicle? **A:** Officer Walker (Badge 334) from Bellingham Police Department, who called for the tow after being unable to contact the owner. **Q:** What caused Mr. Sardam's vehicle to be impounded? **A:** His car stalled in flooding on an exit ramp, and after he pushed it aside and removed engine parts to dry them, it was towed when left unattended. **Q:** How much were the total impound fees for Sardam's vehicle? **A:** $4,733.85 after 39 days of storage at $101 per day plus tax, exceeding the vehicle's value. **Q:** What was Sardam's source of income that was affected by the impound? **A:** DoorDash driving—he used the impounded vehicle to earn money through food delivery services. **Q:** What company towed both vehicles? **A:** ASAP Towing, represented at the hearing by company president Aaron Samora. **Q:** What legal document allows people to proceed without paying court fees due to poverty? **A:** A motion to proceed "in forma pauperis," which both appellants submitted due to financial hardship. **Q:** What evidence rule did the hearing examiner cite regarding vehicle registration? **A:** That certified vehicle registration is "prima facie evidence" of the identity of the registered owner. **Q:** What legal conflict did the hearing examiner identify? **A:** Bellingham Municipal Code and state RCW disagreed on whether appeals go to Municipal Court or District Court. **Q:** Why couldn't the hearing examiner admit the police reports as evidence? **A:** He found no legal foundation to admit police reports under Title 11.18 vehicle impoundment rules, unlike infraction court rules. **Q:** What happens next in both cases? **A:** The hearing examiner will review the law, apply it to the facts, and issue written decisions for both appeals. --- ## MODULE S3: QUIZ WITH ANSWER KEY **Question 1: What emergency situation led to Rachel Thompson's vehicle becoming impounded?** - A) She had a medical emergency and couldn't move her car - B) She was helping an elderly friend with COPD who needed her inhaler - C) Her car broke down during a snowstorm - D) She was rushing to the hospital for surgery **Question 2: How long did Thompson's vehicle remain impounded before she retrieved it?** - A) Three days - B) One week - C) One day (retrieved the morning after Christmas) - D) Two weeks **Question 3: Who is Aaron Samora in relation to these cases?** - A) A police officer who responded to both scenes - B) The hearing examiner's clerk - C) President of ASAP Towing company - D) An attorney representing the appellants **Question 4: What was the daily storage fee for vehicles at ASAP Towing?** - A) $50 per day - B) $75 per day - C) $101 per day plus tax - D) $125 per day plus tax **Question 5: Why was Mr. Sardam's vehicle initially disabled?** - A) It was vandalized while parked - B) The engine failed due to mechanical problems - C) It stalled in flooding on an exit ramp - D) It was damaged in a traffic accident **Question 6: What did Sardam remove from his flooded vehicle to dry out?** - A) The entire engine - B) The ECU, filter box, and other wet electronic components - C) Just the battery - D) The seats and carpet **Question 7: What legal issue did Hearing Examiner Majumdar identify regarding police reports?** - A) They contained false information - B) They were submitted too late - C) He had no legal foundation to admit them as evidence under current rules - D) They were not properly notarized **Question 8: According to the hearing examiner, where do appeals of his decisions go?** - A) Definitely to Bellingham Municipal Court - B) Definitely to District Court - C) There's a conflict between city and state law on this question - D) Directly to Superior Court **Question 9: What financial assistance was Thompson receiving?** - A) Unemployment benefits - B) Workers' compensation - C) SSI (disability) benefits and food assistance - D) Social Security retirement benefits **Question 10: Why did Sardam's appeal take so long to be scheduled?** - A) He waited too long to file the paperwork - B) His initial request got lost and had to be refiled - C) The hearing examiner was on extended vacation - D) ASAP Towing requested multiple delays **Answer Key:** **1. B — Thompson was assisting an elderly friend with COPD who needed to get home to her inhaler during a medical emergency.** **2. C — The vehicle was impounded on December 25th and Thompson retrieved it "first thing in the morning" on December 26th.** **3. C — Aaron Samora identified himself as the president of ASAP Towing company and served as their records custodian.** **4. C — Samora testified that storage fees were $101 per day plus tax, leading to the $4,733.85 total after 39 days.** **5. C — Sardam explained his car "stalled out" when water got in the engine during flooding on an exit ramp.** **6. B — Sardam testified he pulled the ECU, filter box, and "everything that I thought could got wet" to dry them at his sister's apartment.** **7. C — The hearing examiner stated he found no legal foundation under Title 11.18 vehicle impoundment rules to admit police reports as evidence.** **8. C — Majumdar noted that Bellingham Municipal Code says appeals go to Municipal Court, but state RCW contradicts this and directs them to district court.** **9. C — Thompson submitted documentation showing she received SSI disability benefits and food assistance, with monthly expenses exceeding income.** **10. B — Sardam explained he filed for a hearing before the holidays but "my paperwork somewhere got mixed up and couldn't be found."** --- ## MODULE S4: Q&A — COMMON QUESTIONS **Q: Why can vehicles be impounded even when there's an emergency situation?** A: Police officers must balance individual emergencies against public safety. Even in emergency situations, vehicles blocking sidewalks or roadways can pose safety hazards to other community members. The law allows for impounds when vehicles create public hazards, though the appeals process provides a way to seek relief afterward based on circumstances and financial hardship. **Q: How do impound fees accumulate to such high amounts?** A: Impound lots charge both an initial tow fee (around $400) plus daily storage fees. At ASAP Towing's rate of $101 per day plus tax, costs quickly compound. After 39 days, Mr. Sardam's fees reached $4,733—more than his vehicle's value. This creates a devastating cycle where people can't afford to retrieve their cars, leading to even higher fees. **Q: What can someone do if they can't afford impound fees?** A: They can file an appeal with the hearing examiner and request to proceed "in forma pauperis" due to financial hardship. Both appellants in this hearing submitted evidence of their inability to pay. The hearing examiner can potentially reduce or waive fees, though this depends on the specific circumstances and applicable law. **Q: Why couldn't the hearing examiner use the police reports as evidence?** A: Unlike traffic infraction courts that have specific rules allowing police reports, the hearing examiner found no legal basis under Bellingham's vehicle impoundment code (Title 11.18) to admit police reports without an officer present to authenticate them. This technical legal issue meant some evidence couldn't be considered, even though it might have been relevant. **Q: What happens to vehicles when owners can't pay the impound fees?** A: When fees exceed a vehicle's value and owners cannot pay, the towing company can eventually sell the vehicle as abandoned property. This means people lose both their transportation and any equity in the vehicle, creating additional hardship especially for those who depend on their cars for income. **Q: How does this affect people's ability to work and earn money?** A: As Mr. Sardam's case illustrates, impounding someone's vehicle can eliminate their source of income if they depend on it for work like rideshare or delivery driving. This creates a catch-22 where people need money to get their car back but can't earn money without their car, potentially trapping them in poverty. **Q: Are there time limits for appealing vehicle impounds?** A: Yes, though the specific timeline isn't detailed in this hearing. Sardam mentioned trying to file before the holidays but his paperwork getting lost, suggesting there are deadlines that must be met. The accumulating daily fees create urgency since delays make the situation more expensive. **Q: What's the conflict between city and state law that the hearing examiner mentioned?** A: Bellingham's Municipal Code directs appeals from hearing examiner decisions to go to Municipal Court, but state law (RCW) appears to direct them to District Court instead. This creates legal uncertainty about where someone would properly file if they wanted to appeal the hearing examiner's decision. **Q: Can police officers issue tickets in addition to impounding vehicles?** A: Yes, though neither appellant in this hearing received additional citations. The hearing examiner asked Officer Walker about this, noting that officers can typically post parking tickets on vehicles even when the driver isn't present. **Q: What kind of written decisions will the hearing examiner issue?** A: The hearing examiner will review all admitted evidence, apply relevant law to the facts of each case, and issue written decisions explaining whether the impounds were proper and what remedies (if any) are available to the appellants. These decisions will determine if fees should be reduced, waived, or remain as charged.

## MODULE S1: STUDY GUIDE **Meeting ID:** BEL-HEX-2026-01-20 ### Meeting Overview The Bellingham Hearing Examiner Pro Tem Rajeev Majumdar conducted two vehicle impound appeals on January 25th, 2026. Both cases involved vehicles towed by ASAP Towing, with appellants seeking relief from impound fees due to financial hardship and challenging circumstances. ### Key Terms and Concepts **Hearing Examiner:** A neutral judicial officer who hears appeals and administrative cases for the City of Bellingham. In this case, Rajeev Majumdar served as the "Pro Tem" (temporary) hearing examiner. **Vehicle Impound Appeal:** A legal process where someone can challenge the towing of their vehicle, seeking either a reversal of the impound decision or reduction of fees. **High Centered:** When a vehicle gets stuck with its undercarriage resting on the ground, preventing the wheels from gaining traction. This occurred to Rachel Thompson's Ford Edge when she accidentally drove into a yard. **Pedestrian Right-of-Way/Sidewalk:** Public walkways that must remain clear for pedestrians. Vehicles blocking sidewalks can be legally towed by police. **Form of Pauperis:** A legal document allowing someone to proceed with court cases without paying fees due to financial hardship. Both appellants submitted these forms. **Prima Facie Evidence:** Evidence that, on its face, establishes a fact unless contradicted. The hearing examiner noted that vehicle registration records serve as prima facie evidence of vehicle ownership. **Business Records Exception:** A legal rule that allows certain documents to be admitted as evidence without requiring testimony from their creators, if they're kept in the regular course of business. **Municipal Code vs. RCW:** The hearing examiner noted a conflict between Bellingham's local laws (Municipal Code) and state law (Revised Code of Washington) regarding where appeals from his decisions should go. ### Key People at This Meeting | Name | Role / Affiliation | |---|---| | Rajeev Majumdar | Hearing Examiner Pro Tem for City of Bellingham | | Rachel Thompson | Appellant in first case (2010 Ford Edge impound) | | Officer Walker (Badge 334) | Bellingham Police Department officer who responded to Thompson incident | | Aaron Samora | President of ASAP Towing | | Mr. Sardam | Appellant in second case (vehicle flooded on exit ramp) | ### Background Context Vehicle impound hearings represent a critical intersection of public safety and economic justice. When police determine a vehicle poses a public hazard or violates parking laws, they can have it towed to private impound lots. However, the costs can be devastating for low-income residents—as seen in these cases where fees reached $601 for one day and over $4,700 for 39 days of storage. The appeals process allows people to challenge these impounds, either arguing the towing was improper or seeking fee relief due to hardship. Both appellants demonstrated financial distress: Thompson was on disability benefits, while Sardam lost his only income source (DoorDash driving) when his car was impounded. The hearing examiner's role is to balance public safety requirements with individual circumstances, applying both state and local laws to determine whether the impounds were justified and what remedies might be appropriate. ### What Happened — The Short Version Two people appealed vehicle impounds to the Hearing Examiner. Rachel Thompson's car got stuck helping an elderly friend during a medical emergency—she tried for hours to free it but couldn't, and it blocked a sidewalk. She paid $601 to get it back the next day but sought reimbursement due to financial hardship on disability benefits. Mr. Sardam's car stalled in flooding on an exit ramp. He pushed it aside and spent days drying out engine parts, but when he returned to reinstall them, the car was gone. After 39 days in impound, fees totaled $4,733—more than the car's worth. He couldn't pay and lost his DoorDash income source. The hearing examiner listened to testimony, noted legal complications about which documents could be admitted as evidence, and promised written decisions. He found conflicts between city and state law regarding where appeals of his decisions should go. ### What to Watch Next • Written decisions will be issued for both cases, determining whether fees should be reduced or refunded • Potential appeals to either Municipal Court or District Court (legal uncertainty about proper venue) • Ongoing accumulation of daily storage fees ($101/day) for Sardam's vehicle until resolved ---

## MODULE S2: FLASH CARDS **Meeting ID:** BEL-HEX-2026-01-20 **Q:** Who served as the hearing examiner for these vehicle impound appeals? **A:** Rajeev Majumdar, serving as Hearing Examiner Pro Tem for the City of Bellingham. **Q:** What was Rachel Thompson appealing? **A:** The impound of her 2010 Ford Edge that got stuck while she was helping an elderly friend during a medical emergency. **Q:** How much did Rachel Thompson pay to retrieve her vehicle? **A:** $601 total to ASAP Towing, which she paid the day after Christmas despite being on disability benefits. **Q:** Why was Thompson's car stuck and unable to move? **A:** It was "high centered" after she accidentally turned into the wrong driveway, with the undercarriage resting on the ground preventing wheel traction. **Q:** What was blocking the public right-of-way in Thompson's case? **A:** Her vehicle was blocking the public sidewalk, making it impossible for pedestrians to walk safely without going into the street. **Q:** Who responded to the scene of Thompson's vehicle? **A:** Officer Walker (Badge 334) from Bellingham Police Department, who called for the tow after being unable to contact the owner. **Q:** What caused Mr. Sardam's vehicle to be impounded? **A:** His car stalled in flooding on an exit ramp, and after he pushed it aside and removed engine parts to dry them, it was towed when left unattended. **Q:** How much were the total impound fees for Sardam's vehicle? **A:** $4,733.85 after 39 days of storage at $101 per day plus tax, exceeding the vehicle's value. **Q:** What was Sardam's source of income that was affected by the impound? **A:** DoorDash driving—he used the impounded vehicle to earn money through food delivery services. **Q:** What company towed both vehicles? **A:** ASAP Towing, represented at the hearing by company president Aaron Samora. **Q:** What legal document allows people to proceed without paying court fees due to poverty? **A:** A motion to proceed "in forma pauperis," which both appellants submitted due to financial hardship. **Q:** What evidence rule did the hearing examiner cite regarding vehicle registration? **A:** That certified vehicle registration is "prima facie evidence" of the identity of the registered owner. **Q:** What legal conflict did the hearing examiner identify? **A:** Bellingham Municipal Code and state RCW disagreed on whether appeals go to Municipal Court or District Court. **Q:** Why couldn't the hearing examiner admit the police reports as evidence? **A:** He found no legal foundation to admit police reports under Title 11.18 vehicle impoundment rules, unlike infraction court rules. **Q:** What happens next in both cases? **A:** The hearing examiner will review the law, apply it to the facts, and issue written decisions for both appeals. ---