Connecticut
In CT, tow companies can sell people’s cars after 15 days
REPORTING HIGHLIGHTS
An Outlier: Connecticut allows towing companies to sell some people’s cars in just 15 days, one of the shortest windows in the country.
Towed From Home: Many cars are towed not for violating the law but instead for breaking a rule like parking the wrong way or failing to display a parking pass at their apartment complex.
Far-Reaching Consequences: The sales have particularly affected low-income people, who have lost jobs after they were unable to get their cars back.
These highlights were written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story.
This article was produced in partnership with ProPublica through its Local Reporting Network. Sign up for our newsletter to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.
Melissa Anderson was trying to wrestle her squirmy 2-year-old daughter into a winter coat in December 2021 when she heard the neighbors yelling outside, “She’s coming right now!”
Anderson immediately knew what was happening. The tow truck company that regularly roamed her Hamden, Connecticut, apartment complex was back, and it had zeroed in on her recently purchased 1998 Dodge Neon.
She rushed downstairs only to see a MyHoopty.com tow truck driving away with her car.
Her temporary parking pass from the apartment complex had expired. She’d tried to get an extension because her Department of Motor Vehicles appointment to register the car was two days away. But she said the management wouldn’t give her one.
“I only came upstairs to put the baby’s jacket on,” Anderson said. “It was within like five minutes, my car was gone.”
She never saw her car again.
Exactly 15 days later, as Anderson realized she didn’t have the money to pay the mounting bill, MyHoopty took advantage of a little-known state law available to towing companies: It submitted a form to the Connecticut DMV to sell Anderson’s car.
On the form, MyHoopty typed that the Dodge was worth $600, half of what Anderson had paid for it less than three months earlier. And, DMV records show, the agency quickly approved MyHoopty’s application to sell the car.
What happened to Anderson exemplifies how Connecticut’s laws have come to favor tow companies at the expense of low-income residents. Connecticut’s window allowing towers to sell people’s cars is one of the shortest in the country — just 15 days if they deem the value to be $1,500 or less. Only two states — Iowa and North Carolina — have shorter time spans. Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island require at least 60 days, giving owners more time to reclaim their vehicles.
Melissa Anderson’s Dodge Neon was towed from her apartment complex in December 2021. She never saw her car again. Credit: Shahrzad RasekhThe Connecticut Mirror and ProPublica reviewed thousands of the forms that towers submit requesting the DMV’s permission to sell people’s cars. Many cases didn’t start with parking tickets, accidents or police involvement. Instead, people were towed for breaking parking rules at their apartment complexes.
Towing and storage charges can quickly add up to several hundred dollars. And once cars are hauled away, some tow companies make it harder for people to get their cars back. Some only take cash. Others refuse to release cars unless they’re registered in the person’s name — even if that person had recently bought the vehicle and wasn’t required to register it yet.
In some cases, the 15-day window can be shorter than the time it takes to get a registration appointment at the DMV. And it’s far shorter than it takes for a complaint to be heard challenging the legitimacy of a tow.
When cars are sold, the owners are again at a disadvantage. Under Connecticut law, tow companies are required to hold on to the proceeds for one year so owners can claim the money. After that, tow companies are supposed to subtract their storage fees and turn over any remaining funds to the state. But the DMV has never established a process for towers to submit the money, and the state treasurer’s office said it has no record of receiving any money from the sale of a towed car.
How to lose a car in 15 days
Connecticut has a statute that allows towing companies to sell people’s cars after 15 days if the tower deems the car’s value to be $1,500 or less. Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special to ProPublica
If a towed vehicle isn’t claimed in 48 hours, the tower must notify the owner via certified mail that they intend to sell it. Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special to ProPublica
Towers can charge up to $125, plus $5.65 per mile. With daily storage fees, charges can quickly add up to hundreds of dollars. If the owner doesn’t pay, the tower can notify the DMV of intent to sell.Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special to ProPublica
Many tow companies only take cash and aren’t open on weekends, which can make it hard to get vehicles back. Some towers won’t release cars without proof of registration, even if the owner shows the title and bill of sale. Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special to ProPublica
The registration requirement can create problems for people who recently bought a car and haven’t had to register it yet; it can take weeks to get a DMV appointment. So someone might be following DMV rules but still run into problems. Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special to ProPublica
If the car is worth $1,500 or less, the towing company can sell or junk it after 15 days. If it’s worth more, towers must wait 45 days and sell it at a public auction. Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special to ProPublica
Tow companies must keep the proceeds for one year so the car owner can claim the money. Towers say there are rarely proceeds after deducting towing and storage fees. But we have found some towers devaluing cars only to sell them for more. Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special to ProPublica
Any funds left from the sale are supposed to be turned over to the state. But the DMV has never set up a process for towers. And the state treasurer said no funds have ever been turned over to the unclaimed property account. Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special ProPublica
We’re interested in any barriers you faced to getting your car back and whether the tow company followed the required steps. Share your experiences with us here. Credit: Anuj Shrestha / Special to ProPublicaThat’s the system Anderson faced as she fought with MyHoopty and sought the DMV’s help.
“We live paycheck to paycheck and Christmas was coming, and we just couldn’t afford to try and get the car back,” Anderson said.
Michael Festa, the owner of MyHoopty, said he is simply following the law, which allows property owners to remove cars that break rules. In an emailed response to written questions, Festa said he’s never turned over money to the state because the proceeds have never satisfied the towing and storage bill.
The majority of the cars are “in severe mechanical and structural disrepair,” he said. “Any vehicle of any value is either redeemed by its registered owner or lending institution.”
Exactly how many Connecticut residents this system affects has been hard to pin down because the DMV has been slow to provide information. The CT Mirror requested the DMV forms 2 1/2 years ago under the state Freedom of Information Act. Agency officials initially said the request would cost $47,000 but lowered the cost after the CT Mirror’s attorney intervened. Yet the DMV still hasn’t produced all the forms.
The DMV is supposed to review each form and record the car’s book value in the top right corner, which ensures tow companies don’t undervalue cars and sell them faster. If a car is worth more than $1,500, towers have to wait 45 days. The book values regularly exceed the towers’ estimates.
Still, more than half of the roughly 4,200 forms the CT Mirror and ProPublica have received so far show the tow company requested to sell the vehicle citing the 15-day rule. In nearly 700 of those cases, the company asked to sell a car within three weeks.
DMV Commissioner Tony Guerrera said in a written statement that he believes the 15-day window “strikes the right balance for consumers and towers,” protecting drivers’ rights while ensuring vehicles don’t “remain on a tow company’s property for months, amassing large storage charges.”
The DMV said it rigorously reviews the towers’ forms and requests additional documentation from them when their estimate differs greatly from the book value. Officials also said that the initial $47,000 records fee was “an error” and that the request has taken time because they have to manually redact thousands of documents.
State Rep. Roland Lemar, D-New Haven, who co-chairs the legislature’s Transportation Committee, said lawmakers need to look at the 15-day threshold and other towing practices in the upcoming legislative session.
“There are obvious abuses happening to residents across Connecticut, and those impacted are folks with lower economic means who can’t possibly be expected to access that amount of cash in such a quick time frame,” said Lemar, who will chair the General Law Committee, which oversees consumer protection, next session. “There needs to be reform within the DMV, but I think there’s also clear and obvious consumer protection issues.”
“Somebody Is Going to Get Hurt”
Connecticut’s towing law initially passed in 1921 with good intentions: As more people owned cars, more were abandoned, and municipalities needed a way to get them off the streets.
As car ownership grew with the development of highways and suburbs, state lawmakers in the 1960s increased penalties for abandoning vehicles and made it easier for towing companies to sell them.
Before those adjustments, towers had to store a vehicle for 90 days. If no one claimed it, they were required to notify the owner of the intended sale via registered mail and advertise it three times in the newspaper. In 1963, the legislature decided to allow sales within 30 days if the vehicle was worth $35 or less, about $360 today.
Lawmakers cut that time in half to 15 days in 1987 for vehicles worth less than $500 at the time. Local police officials said in public hearings that there were so many junk cars that even local scrapyards didn’t want them and that the shorter time frame would help towns dispose of abandoned vehicles more quickly.
How Connecticut’s Towing Laws Compare to Nearby States
The state has the shortest time before sale among northeastern states.
Note: In Connecticut, New Hampshire and New York, the time varies based on the age or value of the vehicle. Maryland has a different time period for Baltimore. (Lucas Waldron/ProPublica)
The measure did face some pushback, though. State Sen. Thomas Upson, R-Waterbury, questioned whether the new law would violate due process because it did not offer a sufficient way for drivers to challenge a tow. Still, the measure passed easily.
Lawmakers continued to crack down on abandoned cars through the 1990s. They expanded the ability of tow companies to remove vehicles from private lots, where residents and owners complained people were parking without permission, and lowered to 45 days the time after which more expensive vehicles could be sold.
But by the late 1990s, lawmakers started to recognize the effects that towing policies had on people with low incomes.
“I’ve seen a car towed overnight and people not able to pay one and two days of charges, and every day they try to hustle the money to put it together, they can’t do it because the choice now is whether I pay rent, pay the food, pay the doctor or redeem my car,” Rep. Richard Tulisano, D-Rocky Hill, said during a 1998 debate in the House. “Somebody is going to get hurt.”
Yet instead of heeding Tulisano’s warning, the next year, following concerns about parking from property owners, lawmakers expanded the number of cars that could be sold within 15 days by raising the threshold from $500 to $1,500.
Timothy Vibert, president of the Towing & Recovery Professionals of Connecticut, defended the industry, noting that in many cases, vehicles are towed because owners have been skirting the law by driving without registration and insurance. So they don’t try to get their towed cars back because they can’t afford the towing fees or the cost of owning a car.
“I’m not stealing cars,” he said. “I am removing cars that are either illegally parked, whether they be law or condominium rules.”
Most of the complaints, he said, relate to what’s known in the industry as “trespass towing,” when companies tow from private lots rather than in response to police stops and accidents. Some companies have contracts with apartment and public housing complexes to search their lots for cars that don’t belong to residents or violate other rules like not being backed into their parking spaces.
One large trespass tow company in Connecticut that has faced scrutiny is MyHoopty, which is based in Watertown, a small town northwest of New Haven. Since 2022, Watertown police have responded to 87 complaints from people who had gone to MyHoopty. Most said they either couldn’t get their cars back or were being overcharged.
In an incident last January, the police threatened to charge Festa with larceny when he wouldn’t release a car to its owner. Body-camera footage shows that the woman presented Festa with the title and bill of sale and asked him to let her have it towed out of his lot. Festa told the police he couldn’t release her car until she showed proof it was registered in her name.
The department did not follow through with its threat. Festa said MyHoopty “goes above and beyond” to help customers get their cars back. “We understand that having a vehicle towed without consent can leave a person feeling violated, and some may even perceive it as theft,” he wrote in an email. The company provides several resources, he said, “ensuring a smooth and efficient process for vehicle recovery.”
Since 2022, police have responded to 87 complaints from people who had gone to towing company MyHoopty.com in Watertown, Connecticut. Most said they either couldn’t get their cars back or were being overcharged. Credit: Shahrzad RasekhFesta, who wears his own body camera as an “extra measure of security,” has sued the police twice in state court in the past few years after the complaints prompted the department to take the rare action of removing MyHoopty from a list of tow companies they call after accidents and police stops. One lawsuit was dismissed. The other accuses Watertown officers of launching a “campaign of persecution” against Festa.
Watertown police Chief Joshua Bernegger declined to comment on MyHoopty, citing the pending litigation, and the town has asked the judge to dismiss the suit. But Bernegger said, generally, while “many standup towing companies” perform “crucial public services” in a dangerous environment, “there are, however, some tow companies that are operating on the fringe of a very ambiguous law.”
Festa has also faced criticism at the state level. In late 2022, Festa led an effort with other towers and the towing association to get the DMV to increase towing rates, arguing at a DMV hearing that expenses on everything from truck insurance to workers’ compensation had gone up. The DMV approved a modest increase, but the hearing also offered an opportunity for several people, including Anderson, to complain about MyHoopty refusing to give their cars back.
In response to those concerns, Lemar proposed a bill to require tow companies to give drivers 24 hours’ notice before a tow and to take multiple payment methods, including credit cards. The bill passed the committee, but facing fierce opposition from towers and property managers, it wasn’t called on the House floor. The 15-day rule was not part of that legislation.
Complaints to the DMV Go Nowhere
In some cases, Connecticut’s laws and the DMV’s processes make it harder for people to get their cars back once they’re towed. And for low-income people, the consequences of having their car sold can extend far beyond the cost of the car.
After her Dodge Neon was towed, Anderson pleaded with MyHoopty to release her car. She told them she had the bill of sale, title and proof of insurance and was going to the DMV in two days. But Anderson said Festa told her it wasn’t his problem; he wouldn’t release the car until it was registered.
This is where low-income people can get trapped. The law says that tow companies shall release vehicles to their owners once the fees have been paid and they present proof of registration. But there’s another law that seems to conflict with that: The DMV allows up to three months for drivers to register vehicles purchased out of state. And for private sales in Connecticut, the DMV says there is no deadline. So people can still run into problems even if they follow DMV rules.
Because Anderson bought her car in a private sale, she didn’t receive the temporary license plates usually provided by car dealers. She instead had to make an appointment at the DMV, which at the time took weeks to get, or go to an authorized dealer, which costs extra.
Plus, it was difficult for Anderson to get to MyHoopty’s lot, which was a 40-minute drive from her apartment. She said, one day, a person who answered the phone told her, “You’re wasting your time coming down here anyway, with all the fees and everything, you ain’t getting your car back, sweetheart.”
Anderson said her husband lost his job shortly after the car was towed because he couldn’t always get rides and it took more than an hour on multiple buses to get from Hamden to the restaurant he worked at in Milford.
To make matters worse, Anderson said, in the car were all of her husband’s chef tools, including knives he had been given in culinary school, which he estimates were worth more than $1,000.
After learning her rights from a tenants union, Anderson filed a complaint with the DMV in early 2023. In a three-page letter, she wrote, “It may be just a car to some, but for my family it was sanity, peace of mind stolen from us by MyHoopty.”
DMV records show MyHoopty sold her car to a Waterbury auto salvage facility for $800 within two months of towing it from her apartment complex. Anderson said her husband’s chef tools were never returned.
Festa declined to comment about specific cases, including Anderson’s. But he said MyHoopty employees “take the handling and return of personal property very seriously” by documenting every step of the towing process and “allowing customers to retrieve all personal belongings from their vehicles.”
The CT Mirror and ProPublica interviewed dozens of people across the state who had their cars sold after being towed. Like Anderson, they said their complaints to the DMV went nowhere.
This does not seem to be unusual. From 2021-23, the DMV conducted 17 investigations into complaints from drivers accusing MyHoopty of exorbitant bills and questionable reasons for towing their cars, according to records obtained by CT Mirror and ProPublica.
But most of the cases ended with no action being taken, records show. The law allows tow companies to sell people’s cars and doesn’t give owners a quick process to challenge a tow. The DMV has the power to issue fines of up to $1,000 or suspend or revoke companies’ licenses, and in a few cases, the department issued an infraction for overcharging on a towing bill — the legal equivalent of a speeding ticket.
Guerrera said the agency wants to make sure that everybody is held to the same standard. “If we receive complaints, we investigate and we adhere to the statutes that allow us to do things in regards to penalties or whatever it may be,” he said. “If it’s a formal complaint, we look into it, and if we find there’s something wrong, then we hold them to the letter of the law.”
Guerrera and other DMV officials said that tow companies could be charged with filing a false statement for lying on the forms, although they acknowledged they don’t remember a case when that happened.
Rachel Massaro filed a complaint against MyHoopty after the company towed her 2004 Honda Civic from her townhouse at Seramonte Estates in Hamden in 2021. But the DMV didn’t find any violations.
Massaro had just bought the car for $3,000 two days earlier. She brought it home that weekend and said she was told by the property manager that she couldn’t get a temporary pass until Monday.
“She told me, if I park, I had to park where the visitors” parked, Massaro said. “I did that and I was still towed.”
Massaro said MyHoopty told her it would cost more than $700 to get her car back. State regulations permit companies to charge $125, plus $5.65 per mile, for a tow, and daily storage fees range from $23 to $37.
“I told them I just bought the car, and I can’t spend another — he wanted $740,” Massaro said, “and he was like, ‘I don’t know what to tell you, honey.’”
Rachel Massaro filed a complaint with the Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles after the car she bought two days earlier was towed. Massaro paid $3,000, but the towing company told the DMV it was worth only $600. Credit: Shahrzad RasekhMyHoopty submitted the form, seeking permission to sell the car, to the DMV 17 days after towing Massaro’s vehicle. On the form the company listed the car’s value as only $600.
The reason: There was no key to see how well the vehicle ran. It was the same explanation MyHoopty gave the DMV for the price of Anderson’s car.
Massaro said the car was worth a lot more and that MyHoopty knew she had the key. “I told them to let me go in and at least get my stuff out of there,” she said. “He told me that until I paid that fee, I couldn’t.”
Massaro never got back the shoes and clothes she had just bought at TJ Maxx. And the Honda was also sold to a salvage dealer in Waterbury for $800, according to DMV records.
Massaro cried when she saw a copy of the DMV form showing her car had been junked.
“It’s just an abuse of power that they hold over people they know can’t afford to pay the fees,” Massaro said.
Under the statute, when a towing company removes a vehicle from private property, it must inform the local police within two hours. The law is designed to ensure that police don’t mistake stolen cars for ones that were towed.
Hamden is a town of 60,000 people. But call logs from the police department show that from January 2022 to June 2024, more than half of the agency’s 1,082 tows were from Seramonte Estates, where MyHoopty had a contract to tow vehicles.
The law requires tow companies to send a certified letter to the car’s registered owner informing them it’s going to be sold. Several people, however, said they were never notified.
Abdul-Basit Ajia was studying business and playing basketball at Post University in Waterbury in April 2023 when someone broke into his Toyota Avalon in his apartment complex parking garage, shattering the window and damaging the steering wheel and gear shift. He reported the break-in to police and left it parked until he could afford to make the repairs necessary to take it home to Rhode Island.
Ajia said he didn’t know it had been sold until a reporter called him to ask what had happened. He said he never got any notification from the state or the towing company, Durable Radiator & Autobody, about the request to sell the car.
DMV records list Ajia’s mother’s address in Rhode Island, but he said no notice arrived there either.
Durable Radiator declined to comment and referred questions to the Waterbury towing association, which didn’t return calls and emails.
Ajia said the lack of transportation as he finished college made it more financially difficult to get started. He still hasn’t been able to purchase another car and rents one from his uncle.
“You need a car for almost anything,” he said. “So I was really out there just struggling, even to find a job.”
Shahrzad Rasekh, José Luis Martinez and Andrew Brown of The Connecticut Mirror and Asia Fields and Ryanne Mena of ProPublica contributed reporting.
You can help
We’re investigating towing practices in Connecticut, where companies can sell people’s cars after just 15 days. If you’ve been affected, we want to hear from you.
Connecticut
Pension fund assets for retired CT state employees and teachers up 14%
State Treasurer Erick Russell achieved a 14% increase last year investing Connecticut’s pension fund assets, gaining roughly $8.3 billion for retirement programs for state employees, teachers and other municipal workers.
The state, which oversees nearly $69 billion in pension assets, aims for an average annual return on pension investments of 6.9%.
Expectations for bigger gains grew throughout the past year as key stock market indices surged. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, an index of 30 prominent companies listed on stock exchanges, grew by more than 13% in 2025. And the S&P 500, which follows 500 traded companies, topped 16%.
Among peer states and other entities that manage public pension funds holding more than $10 billion in assets, Connecticut’s 2025 performance ranks in the top 17%, Russell said.
But the treasurer, who also announced this week he will seek a second term, said the latest big earnings stem from more than the big gains Wall Street enjoyed in 2025.
“Markets certainly have been strong, but a lot of this is about our overall asset allocation,” said Russell, who updated the Investment Advisory Council Tuesday on the state’s portfolio. “The progress we’ve been making … is a good sign that we’re set up for future success.”
Russell also reported investment gains of 10.3% for the 2024 calendar year and 12.8% for 2023.
State officials particularly have focused on improving investment returns since a May 2023 report from Yale University researchers found Connecticut’s results badly lagged the nation’s over the prior decade.
That only compounded an even larger pension problem that state officials began to address in the early 2010s. According to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, Connecticut governors and legislatures failed to save adequate for pension benefits for more than seven decades prior to 2011. This deprived the state treasurer of huge assets that otherwise could have been invested to generate billions of dollars in revenue over those seven decades.
The treasurer’s office under Russell has put more funds into private and domestic markets and curbed reliance on investment managers who receive large fees for their work.
Gov. Ned Lamont and the General Assembly also have greatly assisted efforts to bolster the fiscal health of pension programs in recent years. Since 2020, they have used $10 billion from budget surpluses to make supplemental payments into pensions for state employees and municipal teachers. That’s in addition to annual required payments that currently approach $3.3 billion in the General Fund.
“These returns highlight the impressive work of Treasurer Russell and his team in increasing investment returns,” Lamont’s budget spokesman, Chris Collibee, said Tuesday. “Gov. Lamont’s focus has been on building a sustainable Connecticut for the future. Every dollar in additional investment revenue is funds the state can use to cut taxes and provide more resources for essential programs like education, child care, housing, and social services safety nets.”
Russell, a New Haven Democrat, said he has tried to make the office both “disciplined and forward-looking.”
“Over the last several years, we haven’t just changed how the office works, we’ve changed who it works for. We’re ushering in a new era of fiscal responsibility, making significant payments on long-term debt that has allowed us to invest in the residents of Connecticut and begin to lift up communities across our state.”
Russell also brokered a key compromise in 2023 between Lamont and the legislature that salvaged the Baby Bonds program, an initiative that invests long-term funds in Connecticut’s poorest children when they’re born to help finance educational and business opportunities later in life.
Keith M. Phaneuf is a reporter for The Connecticut Mirror (https://ctmirror.org). Copyright 2026 © The Connecticut Mirror.
Connecticut
Body recovered after Bloomfield house fire and explosion
A body was recovered after a house explosion resulting in a house fire in the area of Banbury Lane on Monday night.
Fire Marshal Roger Nelson says they recovered a body around 1:15 on Tuesday morning. The identity of the body found will not be released at this time.
When officers arrived around 6:11 p.m. they encountered the house fully in flames, police said.
According to police, the fire department was able to extinguish the fire, but the house sustained devastating damage.
There are no criminal aspects related to this incident at this time.
The incident was contained to the one house.
Connecticut
Exclusive | Ex-CBS anchor Josh Elliott back on Connecticut dating scene after ugly Liz Cho split
Ex-CBS host Josh Elliott is looking for love eight months after he filed for divorce from “Eyewitness News” anchor Liz Cho.
“Josh is out and about on the dating scene in Fairfield County,” a spy exclusively tells Page Six. “He’s been seen at the bars in the area where middle-aged singles congregate.”
A second source tells Page Six, “Josh isn’t dating anyone, but he is open to meeting people. His daughter is his priority.”
Page Six can also reveal that Elliott moved out of his and Cho’s estimated $4.2 million Connecticut marital home in January.
In court papers dated Jan. 29 and obtained by Page Six, Cho revealed Elliott moved out of their home and into a new residence without her knowledge.
Cho claimed she was notified by Optimum on Jan. 21, regarding her ex installing internet at his new home.
“The Defendant learned for the first time from said communication that on or about January 15, 2026, the Plaintiff secured an unfurnished rental residence located in Southport, Connecticut,” the filing read.
“It is now clear that the Plaintiff surreptitiously entered a new lease…” the court papers continued.
A rep for Elliott did not respond to Page Six’s request for comment.
Page Six broke the ousted CBS anchor filed for divorce from Cho after a decade of marriage on June 20, 2025.
“The marriage of the parties has broken down irretrievably,” the court papers read. Elliott asked for a “dissolution of the marriage” and for “an equitable distribution of all property, both real and personal.”
Cho responded to her estranged husband’s complaint on Nov. 6 and filed a cross-complaint against him. She also stated their marriage “has broken down irretrievably.”
The divorce became messy when Cho requested “copies of written correspondence, emails, cards, WeChat messages, Facebook messages, social media messaging, instant messaging, telephonic text messages, transcribed voicemail messages or any written forms of communication” between Elliott and “any person, other than the defendant, with whom [Elliott] have or have had a romantic and/or sexual relationship, from July 11, 2015, to the present.”
Elliott objected the request on the “grounds that the time frame of the request for production is unreasonable, unnecessary, harassing and not likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.”
Cho also requested “monies spent for the benefit of any person with whom you have had a romantic and/or sexual relationship, other than the defendant,” “property given or transferred by you to any person with whom you have had a romantic and/or sexual relationship, other than the defendant,” “monies spent for your benefit by any person with whom you have had a romantic and/or sexual relationship with, other than the defendant.”
The TV personality in addition requested financial records, documentation proving Elliott’s search for employment — as he was ousted from CBS in 2017 — travel invoices, and more. Elliott objected to the requests.
A source close to the couple previously told Page Six, “This is standard in a divorce. Her lawyer is doing a thorough document request. The documents she is requesting are standard.” The insider also insisted there is no evidence Elliott had a relationship with anyone outside the marriage.
Also in the Jan. 29 court filing, Cho filed a motion for contempt against Elliott regarding their jointly owned marital Connecticut mansion.
Cho claimed Elliott arranged for a moving truck to come to the marital residence while she was on vacation with her daughter on Jan. 19.
Cho claimed Elliott moved a “significant amount of furniture and furnishings from the marital residence,” and their “two Portuguese water dogs,” which she alleged at the time of the filing were not returned.
The court docs continued to allege, “On Tuesday, January 6, 2026, [Cho] realized that she was missing a valuable watch and earrings from her jewelry bag. As [Elliott] is the only other person who had access to the missing watch and jewelry, [Cho] believes [Elliott] is in possession of such personal property.”
She claimed his alleged actions are a “willful violation” of the court’s orders.
The insider alleged Elliott was the one to take care of the dogs and that he took “a small amount of furniture.”
In Elliott’s response to her filing, he objected to her request and claimed her allegations are “false and inflammatory.”
He claimed in court papers, “[Cho] alleges [Elliott] ‘ransacked’ and ‘abandoned’ the marital residence — claims that are patently false and intended to annoy, harass and intimidate [Elliott].
“[Elliott] did not ransack the marital home. He did not damage the property. He did not render the residence uninhabitable. He removed limited personal property and furnishings so he would have a safe haven from [Cho’s] escalating and erratic behavior direct at not only [Elliott], but his minor child as well.”
In a separate filing, he continued to defend his actions by alleging, “[Elliott] removed only limited furniture items and furnishings, many from the basement, solely to furnish a new residence after removing himself and his child from a hostile environment created by [Cho]. All property remains intact and subject to equitable distribution.”
In regard to the jewelry claim, Elliott said, “Perhaps most egregious is [Cho’s] baseless accusation that [Elliott] stole her jewelry. This allegation is made without evidence, without corroboration and without even a good-faith attempt to verify the truth.”
He then accused her of “monitoring and listening to [Elliott’s] private phone calls; rifling through [Elliott’s] personal belongings and closet; leaving the marital residence for extended periods without communication despite the presence of two dogs requiring daily care” and more claims.
He is requesting that the court deny her motion for contempt and they are due in court on March 20.
Lawyers for Cho and Elliott did not respond to Page Six’s request for comment regarding the divorce.
Elliott, 54, and Cho, 55, met while working for ABC and got married in July 2015.
This was the second marriage for both, as they each share a daughter from their previous relationships.
Cho has been with ABC on “Eyewitness News” since 2003, while Elliott was with ABC’s “Good Morning America” from 2011 to 2014.
After a brief stint with NBC, he joined CBSN as lead daytime anchor in March 2016. Nearly a year later, he was let go from the company.
Elliott has been out of the spotlight in recent years, but is now in talks to join Gayle King and Nate Burleson on “CBS Mornings,” Awful Announcing reported.
-
Wisconsin1 week agoSetting sail on iceboats across a frozen lake in Wisconsin
-
Massachusetts1 week agoMassachusetts man awaits word from family in Iran after attacks
-
Maryland1 week agoAM showers Sunday in Maryland
-
Pennsylvania5 days agoPa. man found guilty of raping teen girl who he took to Mexico
-
Florida1 week agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Detroit, MI5 days agoU.S. Postal Service could run out of money within a year
-
Miami, FL6 days agoCity of Miami celebrates reopening of Flagler Street as part of beautification project
-
Sports6 days agoKeith Olbermann under fire for calling Lou Holtz a ‘scumbag’ after legendary coach’s death