Zeroth, there really is no substitute for losing your home. Not being taken in for the night, not a shelter.
First, morality and legality are not identical.
Second, not doing something is a choice. Not acting and acting both have moral implications.
Third, systems are at times very good at pitting individuals against other. An employee can say "they are just doing their job"; meanwhile it is the organization structure that might strictly limit what authority the employee has. This can put the customer in the unfortunate position of having to raise issues with multiple layers of people, which takes away from their normal duties, before getting an issue resolved. A considerate customer might feel bad for "taking up" the first tier employee's time. This is by design. Think of car dealerships. I feel terrible for the dynamic of almost everyone involved there.
I haven't really laid out the specific connection, but I think you can see what I'm getting at. The car companies that hire repo companies probably don't empower the repo companies to exercise discretion. The people that build these corporate structures tend to understand human psychology and use it to their advantage.
I think the moral thing is to let the guy do his job that he is lawfully doing. Buying him off night buy the person a night but doesn’t solve any problems and only lets someone feel good for doing the minimum - bribing.
If you really want to help then take the person in or get them a hotel or take them to a shelter. Help them get their vehicle back by paying fines and the payment. It’s a lot more work but solves the problem better than hassling a guy, involving police, and then bribing the guy to go away for a night.
The only person to benefit from this is the guy who gets to feel morally superior while bragging about it on the internet.
Not particularly out to brag. Annoyed at the lack of a systemic solution. Random lady in a RV should not have to depend on random angry italian immigrant having cash in wallet, being more angry than tired that day, and having been made aware of a situation by loud shouting.
Zeroth, there really is no substitute for losing your home. Not being taken in for the night, not a shelter.
First, morality and legality are not identical.
Second, not doing something is a choice. Not acting and acting both have moral implications.
Third, systems are at times very good at pitting individuals against other. An employee can say "they are just doing their job"; meanwhile it is the organization structure that might strictly limit what authority the employee has. This can put the customer in the unfortunate position of having to raise issues with multiple layers of people, which takes away from their normal duties, before getting an issue resolved. A considerate customer might feel bad for "taking up" the first tier employee's time. This is by design. Think of car dealerships. I feel terrible for the dynamic of almost everyone involved there.
I haven't really laid out the specific connection, but I think you can see what I'm getting at. The car companies that hire repo companies probably don't empower the repo companies to exercise discretion. The people that build these corporate structures tend to understand human psychology and use it to their advantage.