Its a system. I think Frontline did a episode about it. There are even consulting companies that will teach police what to look for to maximum asset forfeiture gains like types of cars, best with out of state plates (so its harder for them to come back to the local courts to appeal), etc etc. None of it was about preventing crimes, all of it was about maximizing profits - much of which they can keep and spend as they like without any oversight.
I used to spend a lot of time hanging out in forfeiture court in Chicago. On the first day for a new judge she brought the State's Attorney's to the bench and said (loudly) "You guys win almost every case here because nobody can even figure out the paperwork to dispute your claims. That ends today. I won't allow that in this courtroom."
That same day they had a case where a son had taken the keys to his dad's brand new SUV and got caught driving drunk and the State were trying to sell the car. The judge said "Did this man know his son had the keys? No. Does he have valid insurance and license? Yes. Give this man his car back. Refund him all his costs and fees."
(for info, most of the time if you even file the most basic paperwork to challenge a forfeiture the State will drop it since they have a thousand easier cases to work on)
I've read reporting on civil asset forfeiture abuse for many years -- the inclusion of "abuse" composing a tautology, it increasingly appears.
Nonetheless, it remains active policy appearing in ever more circumstances.
People argue that it's only a few bad cops who make the rest look bad. I'm having increasing difficulty these days believing that argument.