if they bring let A-P-K back ,lets bring back bernie madoff too,see ya,they had there chance

Well done council, well done !

Wow!! Finally some justice!!

Bravo council! Shall we ring the bell of integrity!

I bet you the company learned that you always get everything in writing first..

^^^^^^^^^^^^^ding ding ding

LOL......Thank you Council....Botton, you'll only represnt the slobs in life who skirt the law. Matter-of-fact, hows the fraud charges against YOU in Florida going? Your client is a slob and we the taxpayers called and called and called again expressing that we didn't want this slob and his hook near our cars. It looks like WE WON!!!!!!!!!

Does anyone leaving comments on this site have any bit of education. Toms river not agreeing with the state attourney general or the county prosecutor is the worst excuse they ever could have came up with. Not only is it slander against apk, now apk will win In court for toms rivers inaccurate excuse.

Instead of keep blaming this company. Blame the OFFICIAL. OEM guy JAMES SAMERELLI who gave orders!!! Why did he resign so abruptly???? Because he told these guys to do something heat was on because of his orders so he is letting APK take the hit for him! He should be ashamed of himself ruining the lives if these guys!!!! You people should also be ashamed for pointing fingers and not KNOWING the TRUTH!!!!! I'm sure dominoes will follow!!!!

FINALLY THE BOARD CAME TOGETHER,THAT A START.GET RID OF THOSE TOWING THAT ROB THE PUBLIC.

Hey I Have Spoken.... Why must you assume that whoever writes/voices on the side of APK you think they are related? You have spoken too much of something you know nothing about!

No one robbed the public! They provided a service and should be paid for their services! Do you get paid for your work? Do you expect to get paid for your services? What makes them do different? They were told by their SUPERIOR Mr Samerelli who was in charge at the time to do what they did! They did it! If people took their vehicles out with them when they were told to leave this would not the case!!!

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." Google it.

As to the above comment, how dare you treat what these idiots do like a traditional service needer-service provider relationship. Nothing could be further from the truth. Those people were lucky to find a place for themselves to go, no less their cars and jet skis. Not to mention how much notice they had to evacuate. The vast majority were parked legally on property owned by taxpayers. These morons knew what they were doing didn't smell right but we're too busy seeing dollar signs to question the township. Typical behavior for this industry in my experience. Obviously the poster above is connected to this company in some way because no one with connected brain cells would defend the actions of those vultures.

They allege that they were told to remove cars but the entire thing smells of highly unethical if not illegal activity. They shouldn't be awarded the Toms River contract or any contract that involves public trust. I am frankly surprised and dissappointed at the actions of NJ Department of Consumer Affairs. That little slap on the wrist was pathethic - this was an aggregious violation of public trust.

A five year old child would be smart enough to know that behavior was WRONG. They are not innocent in this matter even their story about the official is true.

APK would have probably had better luck( dollar-signs) walking across the street to Krauzers and buying mega-million lottery tickets in the amount of money that they spent on lawyers, defending them, making claims against Seaside and trying to win a towing contract with Toms River.

@finally
I was a victim of them a few years back as was my son. Obviously my input was heard by the mayors office and the purchasing. My sons story was pretty screwed up the officials almost fell over. Then with the SS horror stories. APK didn't have a chance. So don't tell me "you know nothing about". Because I do.........LOL..... Now go away, face it, you bud is a crook

If the state attorney general and the ocean county prosecutor found no fraudulent or illegal activity then toms river doesn't have a leg to stand on. Once again they will lose apk will end up winning in court. The ritaco scam will be over soon, friends working for other friends who are politicians to get a tow contract.

I bet we can pack the meeting room with citizen/victims of APK. The people will always have the final say. These crooks also do the towing in all the store parking lots in town. Maybe they all should be brought up to speed about this company. Word travels to quick in our little burg.

So does the other toms river towers. Please educate yourself before making ignorant comments. They will have their day in court and win.

Concerned Citizen...They did nothing wrong? That's why they reached a settlement with the Attorney General and Consumer Affairs. I think they were very lucky to get that settlement and in my opinion the AG's office wanted the people to get their property back. If they did not reach this settlement, people would've waited longer to get their property back.

Incorrect again. Like I said educated comments I m looking for. The settlement was reached with ssh first before apk. They committed to paying the bill and taking responsibility for having the cars towed. Check with consumer affairs. Why do you think these two are in negotiations. The investigative cost was suspended because there was no wrongdoing.

What makes you think that toms river is obligated to hire one company over another? Just like you and I can shop around and hire any company we choose based on any reason we choose. Last time I checked, we operated in a free market. Sure there is a bidding process but at the end of the day, the township is a consumer of services just like any other consumer and can enter into or not enter into a contract with whomever they choose. So please tell me "concerned citizen", you truly believe that APK will find a judge to rule that the township HAS to enter into a contract with them or else? Or that said judge will award them damages? Damages for what? Their reputation? Toms river had nothing to do with any of that. I'm surprised to hear anyone even suggest they will sue.

... And if there truly was no wrongdoing, the investigative fee would have been dropped, not suspended. The fact that they need to behave for a certain amount of time before it is dropped is an obvious indicator of wrongdoing. My apologies if my assessment of the situation isn't astute enough for you concerned citizen.

Now we are getting somewhere. The federal motor carriers act requires any company that qualifies for a government bid must be hired or given to the highest bidder. Toms river is not like a consumer because they are held to a higher standard. It is a fact that toms river admitted that apk was fully in compliance with the current ordinance. Therefore toms river is in violation of federal law. There will be no more toms river doing what they want when this reaches a court of law. As to the suspended sentence it was suspended due to no wrong doing. You cannot bribe the state. They would have been charged if any wrongdoing or fraudulent activity was found. Check with consumer affairs for accurate information.

In compliance with the exception of the ethics rules you mean

The law doesn't state any code of ethics. Nice attempt but please do your research before you make ignorant comments. Bottom line they qualify and toms river violated federal law.

Karma's a bitch APK ..... Keep filing false claims.... maybe after you give all your money to your scumbag attorney Bottom and go broke you'll have to shut that dump you call a buisness down finally!!!!

"The federal motor carriers act requires any company that qualifies for a government bid must be hired or given to the highest bidder. "

Really, what is the statue number?.

It's people like this no knowledge just ignorance. I m looking for facts not uneducated ignorant rambling. Bottom line apk was cleared and will win in court.

Impeach obama!!!!!

Glad APK was denied a license. They are scum bags who took advantage of victims for their own pesonal gain and they got caught. Bravo to the town Council. As for Michael Botton, how can you defend such scum with BS legal crap and technicalities? Typical lawyer. APK is getting what they deserve, just like all crooks and scum bags should. You lose!!!

Way to go TR Council!!!!!!!!! "They were not held at fault" seriously,.............they should be put out of business for trying to rob the victims of Sandy.....

Read about the APK Attorney Michael Botton

http://myfloridalegal.com/webfiles.nsf/WF/MRAY-7YXQF7/$file/Complaint.121709.pdf

F-R-A-U-D.....Nice

Once again ignorance. Good for toms river breaking laws so in the end apk will win and eventually be put on the rotation wasting tax payer dollars. As for their attorney., whether he is competent or not a student of law could win this case with the derogatory comments made by the counsel president.

Why did the Toms River Police and the other law enforcement officers at the bridge allow these trucks to cross the bridge. I thought there was a controled access to the island. I guess those reports were untrue. Next time I know I should not believe what I read. I have asked this question before still no answer.

Also why were no charges filed by Toms River for being in possesion of stolen property.

Toms river allowed apk threw the road block at the request of ssh. They also witnessed the transport of over 200 cars being removed. There were no theft charges filed because the town authorized every tow. Finally someone sees the truth coming out. Don't believe anything you read in the press do your own research make your own determination.

Just read the above link to the pending case in Florida. How in the world is this person allowed to practice law? Mr. botton is just in it for the money just like in the Florida case. As for Apk u just don't deserve to work in this industry deal with it. Or sue our town and cost the tax payers more money? Haven't you and your people already made a bad situation worse? Do our community a favor and bury your head in the sand............DISHONEST SLOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bad situation better in seaside. The roads were not able to be cleared without the work they did at the request of the town. Apk didn't do anything dishonest according to the state attorney general as well as the prosecutors office. As well as the town of ssh who currently reinstated apk as their town tower.

Get a life concerned citizen. Or should I say Apk . Who ever ur just go away. This is the first and last time I will even communicate with you. I spent alot of time removing stupid people from my life and you will not be the first one back in. So ur stupid or just get off on annoying people. Either way ur a waste of space.

Another ignorant comment. What's the matter can't handle the truth. It will all come out eventually. Ps I have no affiliation with apk. I do not work for apk or am I related to anyone who works there. Tired of the crooked ocean county politics supported by people like yourself. What's next a statement by ritacco.

"Concernec Citizen", the fact is that a lot of corruption has gone on, and is going on, in NJ, and must be stopped. It appears as though there were corrupt Ocean County politics at play with the APK towing fiasco, but I don't have enough info to comment on that. Don't lose sight that not all of the cars that APK towed were illegally parked or blocking roadways. APK towed many cars out of their own driveways, including my cousin's car. Now THAT'S scum bag criminal work no matter how you look at it and no matter that they "got off" because of Ocean County politics. BOTH ARE DEAD WRONG.

See yourself and people like yourself are quick to point the finger with little or no facts. There was no corrupt politics at play with apk there's a contract. Go to seaside and request it, it's public knowledge. Apk agreed to the contract as well as the town who set the rates. How many news releases do I have to quote that say apk was told by ssh to tow every car driveway or not. I would disagree that's " scumbag work' if they were following orders. If apk wasn't following orders they would have been charged. Those are the facts. instead i keep reading ignorant people rambling on these sights like yourself. I m waiting for someone on this sight to make any sense at all.

The state attorney general as well as the ocean county prosecutor has confirmed that the cars were ordered to be towed. Every car ordered to be towed because containing flammable substances over leaking gas mains was hazardous. The town is in negotiations to pay apk which reinforces my point that the cars were ordered to be towed, private property and public streets. The rates that you read about 105 and 25 a day are off an old ordinance which is misquoted by the town. The state attorney general has the ordinance, reviewed the bills and were all exactly off the current ordinance. Originally the town agreed with the state to pay for the tows, which is why apk gave the cars back. Not because they bribed the state or admitted any wrongdoing. Still waiting for a legitimate complaint on the situation.

Even if APK was cleared during that whole thing the owners n workers at that company are rude n careless towards locals. I stopped in and made a complaint about where they were parking the cars on the corner of Adams ave. And Coolidge ave. You couldn't see down the road when pulling out of the intersection I expressed my concern for safety and I was met with rude responses such as what are u the parking police or the head of the neighborhood watch mind ur business its not ur concern. So I'm glad the town turned them down cause they don't care about or respect the local toms river residents. Let's also not forget the owners previous problems he had in north jersey which is why he now operates in ocean county under a different name

Ohh yeah another thing a good way to prove u didn't price gouge is to sue the town that just lost everything and can hardly afford to rebuild for 2.6 million dollars thats a good way to show ur support for the locals

To all locals please educate yourself. First of apk isn't suing seaside at all. They put a claim in to have the bill for towing the cars paid. Which there is a document that the state witnessed created by Cameron, borough administrator, which magically disappeared. There is no law suit pending at this time. Toms river attourney fitsimmons also believed the lawsuit to be true with his comment made at counsel. Does fitsimmons really base his decisions for the town on what the paper says? Very unprofessional in my opinion. A complaint on the cars isn't justification of a denial in a court of law for rudeness. I ve been by there recently and all cars are removed.

I knoW this thread is too long and most won't see this but the plain truth of the matter is this. While it is true this company was not charged with a crime,so to Speke. There was and investigation and a settlement reached. That means there were thing done incorrectly. Now as long as the firm in question complys with the settlement and is than cleared in the future they can than apply for a township license. The way this firm conducted its busisness during this disaster and it's treatment of the public is grounds enough for the down to say no. It should not be a matter of the courts. To those on this thread who are advocating for this firm are no doubt employed by or are family members of those employed by this company. To that I say they may be very decent people that work for a not so good person,and leave it at that. Clean up your act, APK, and try again in 3 years.

I do not work or know anyone at APK, I do not advocate forthem . I am just looking for answers. So far none of my questions have been answered .Has there been any release of reports by any agency? Till those reports are released how do we know what happened and who is responsible. The reporters have not been able to find out who allowed APK access to the area. Who told those guarding the bridge to let them across?

Good questions and comments. To Stan I do not work for apk or am related to anyone at apk. I just read the facts. Your not correct with your statement that the investigation is the reasoning that anything was done incorrectly. The settlement was reached with ssh first before the tow company. The only settlement reached was to release the cars at no cost and the town to pay for them. Settlement does not mean anything was incorrectly done period. Apk will win in court since the state attourney general will release their reports showing nothing but good interactions with the residents in seaside. Watch and see apk will win this dispute in court. Toms river will owe apk for discrimination and the loss of the contract. Toms river arrogance will be their downfall. This will cost tax payers in toms river. Apk will not have to wait three years after the courts rule.

To Ed I am glad that your making more sense then the person before you. It is true toms river aloud apk to enter the bridge to tow 200 cars. Attorney general wouldn't have reached a settlement if there was any wrongdoing period. No exceptions. Which proves apk did absolutely nothing period. And yes how can toms river make any educated decision without these reports. Truth is they cannot and made a unjust decision. Apk will win in court, not wait three years, and cost the taxpayers money when they win. Toms river needs facts not news articles before they had any right to deny apk.

ok whatever..but to overcharge citizens like that is a crime and maybe all that cashed raked in will be accounted for too? irs here comes another one for you

Concerned Citizen, I love how if you do not like someone's post you call them ignorant. You say attorney general will release reports showing nothing but good interactions with residents is laughable....btw its not aloud, its allowed.

Toms River has EVERY right to deny APK

I didn't call everyone ignorant. Actually if you read my previous post I thanked two individuals for their comments. What's this overcharging you speak if? Do you have any facts to back up your claim? I d bet that consumer affairs has facts that contradict your false claim that apk overcharged anyone. If apk did then they would have been prosecuted. Has far as apk s dealing with their taxes I m sure they will follow the laws like they did this entire story. If you don't want to be called ignorant and uneducated then please show me your facts to back up your bias opinions. What right to deny apk if there is no justification. "Actions in seaside" not a valid reason to deny a contract if the ocean county prosecutor and consumer affairs found no wrongdoing. Please educate me on how this is just cause for a denial.

Please, charging somebody $700-$1000 to get their car is outrageous....you sir, are the ignorant one

I would disagree. It is a fact that the town set the rates and that apk towing has followed those rates. Is that not a true statement? Am I the ignorant one because I can read between the lines. It is also my understanding that companies in the town besides apk also were charging the same if not more to remove flood vehicles. Why is 700 to 1000 outrageous if the town of seaside sets the rates? I am still awaiting legitimate reasons for this denial not ignorant uneducated comments like the post before this.

Hey did everyone read the paper today? Turns out they were told to tow all the cars. What no comments? Why should they be denied a tow contract if they were following orders?

Oh I read it, looks like Samerelli and APK were in bed together now it hits the fan and they are covering their butts...maybe if you read closer you would've seen where APK had other violations that precluded them from being granted the contract.

Like I previously stated consumer affairs as well as ocean county prosecutor cleared apk of any price gouging. You do know that was their sole purpose of their investigation and they found no wrong doing. That's a state and county agency both agreeing that apk did nothing wrong. Are you saying that they are guilty no matter what? If so it's the people like yourself that need to go back to school and get an education. It's never too late. I think you yourself bke should read a little closer and find out the meaning of "accused of" and "found no wrongdoing".

Please can you state these violations with any factual basis? Or just more opinions that apk is guilty no matter what.

Again with the insults from one who either has the wool pulled over their eyes or is the pot calling the kettle black. Consumer Affairs wanted to make these people whole again, if litigation was going to take place it would have been months and months before these people would not have gotten their vehicles back..that's a fact. APK and Samerelli obviously had more than a business relationship with APK planning to hire him and they served on the the Fire Co together. I would think the councilman also would not make the statement that APK had other violations that precluded them from getting the contract if he did not have that info. You sir, need to read between the lines. Just because you may not agree with someone doesn't give you the right to sling mud like a scorned 3 yr old

It all comes down to this, if I told you to jump off of the George Washington Bridge, would you do it?

well seems to me noone was told to remove garaged boats cars in driveways etc..ok and the order to get the cars off the island if true saved how many peoples vehicles? i say thank you for that but why charge so much money? o apk get over it

Cars were removed after the storm, not prior to

$$$$$ orders are orders$$$$$$ from the EMC of SS , who has resigned before his Butt was hanging from a light post...But that leaves the towns Butt hanging & the people who hired APK and were ready to share there new $$$$$$ windfall...All served on the FD together...shame on those involved in this sham of public trust as the almighty buck wins again !!! Birds of a feather, do flock together...Mayor right on down to them..puts a bad light on the volunteer's in town...who do it to help there fellow man, not get perks after the fact , like price gouging...

All good comments at least some people are seeing the light. Orders are orders and if you served in the military you would know to follow them. Bottom line the order was given and followed directly by apk. Following orders isn't a justification for a denial. As far as price gouging if apk was guilty there's no making the public whole. They would have been prosecuted. There's no negotiation to appease the public . Are you inferring that apk bribed the state to satisfy the public? There are no legitimate reasons for a denial I m sure a judge will agree when this goes to trial. And bke cars were taken only after the storm not prior not sure your reasoning. Are we all in agreement that the order was given to take cars after the storm?

I clearly state previously cars were taken after the storm...A verbal order from a soon to be employee is very far from orders given in the military, if you can't tell the difference there then their is no reason to continue. How do you know their are no legitimate reasons for denial, are you saying the councilman lied? Consumer affairs wanted to make these people whole, they have stated that.

Let me educate you of the facts. At the time the order was given by the oem coordinator. He was the one calling the shots. Are you familiar with his role? Do you know he has jurisdiction over the police department. Do you know he ordered the cars to be towed? Do you also know that the police also ordered the cars to be towed? Soon to be an employee or not he gave the order, along with the police department, to remove every car private property and the streets. Apk followed orders that's all there is to it. I am saying the counsel man had no facts just what he read in the paper. Clearly stated if you watch the online counsel meeting. Did you know he also stated that apk is suing seaside when in fact they aren't? Very unprofessional of the entire counsel. Did you know toms river counsel was playing there ritacco scheme for a year before the storm keeping their friends on and everyone else out? Facts are more appropriate then newspapers. Maybe you could inform the counsel of that.