This was the second time the department had wrongfully impounded his car and they made no attempt to fix the mistake from the first time, this didn't impact the ruling.
Its gonna get much worse before it get any better.
This was the second time the department had wrongfully impounded his car and they made no attempt to fix the mistake from the first time, this didn't impact the ruling.
Its gonna get much worse before it get any better.
I think we are building up the ultimate faceless bureaucracies.
Is legislation or regulation the answer? That would be unfortunate. The government rarely makes things better, but to be honest, those accident investigation boards probably DO prevent management from sweeping things under the rug.
Some kind of consumer ratings for Quality of Service will have to spring up. You can now find ratings of airlines for their on-time record and likelihood of losing your baggage. We need something similar for web companies.
What's your solution to the "bad service" problem?
We can consider separately : (1) the failures that might kill someone, and (2) just lousy customer service.
The analogy to airlines would be: (1) a crash that kills people (2) being late & losing your luggage
Everyone else is expected to use their brains and be responsible for the consequences of their actions. Government officials are not. This is not an issue of computer failures being treated differently than other high-consequence failures. This an issue of government failure getting a pass.
Qualified immunity is a corrupt and depraved element of the US legal system.
Sovereign immunity (the principle that the state rules over all so no one can force the state to do anything) protects the state from liability from its own mistakes. You can only sue the state if the state decides to allow it.
It seems like the vendor of the faulty system should be liable.
Why?
The police department does, so they should be liable for those decisions.
Like, the moment there was a case of somebody being incorrectly listed as having a suspended license, the entire department should have been informed to not trust the results until the underlying issue was found and fixed.
Does it? Perhaps if they are using a bespoke solution, but they could just as easily be using a standard system procured at the county or state level.
> the entire department should have been informed to not trust the results until the underlying issue was found and fixed.
This doesn’t seem like a real world solution. Without knowing the frequency and nature of the problem this could be a massive overreaction.
its not a massive overreaction.