Question on Repo

[Shae]

Hello Board!!

I am currently working on BF's CR. He had a car that was repo'd at either the end of 06 or early 07 sometime. Ever since he has not heard anything else about it. We pulled his CR and the OC shows a $0 balance and "Reposession" and the balance has been sold to Calvary Portfolio. How should he go about handling this?

[Fizzle1979]

How should he go about handling this?

Very carefully. He might wake a sleeping lion. Most states have adopted the UCC or Uniform Commerical Code. However you need to check and make sure Cali is one of the states that have done that. The SOL would be four years from the date of sale of the auto after they repo'ed it.

Here's a start for information on the UCC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Commercial_Code

I think this is what you are looking for. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=com

Division 9, Secured Transactions http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=com&group=09001-10000&file=9601-9629

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

It would be very fuoolish to wake up this problem unless he is wanting to settle this right away; he is probably better off waiting for a CA to contact him.

I assume he has the paperwork so he knows at least a ball-park figure of the deficiency so while he is waiting, he shoudl start socking away some funds so that when they do contact him, he has some $$$ to ues to settle it.

If it so happens that they never contact him then the money saved wont' hurt anything

[Shae]

It would be very fuoolish to wake up this problem unless he is wanting to settle this right away; he is probably better off waiting for a CA to contact him.

I assume he has the paperwork so he knows at least a ball-park figure of the deficiency so while he is waiting, he shoudl start socking away some funds so that when they do contact him, he has some $$$ to ues to settle it.

If it so happens that they never contact him then the money saved wont' hurt anything

And if he's never received anything on the deficiency? May sound far-fetched but he really hasn't received anything. Would that be the amount the CA is claiming he owes?

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

Did he keep his creditor aprised of his correct address?

State laws vary but every state, as far as I know, have specific laws regarding how a repossession must be handled from what the repo man can do to hook the vehicle to the final disposition of the vehicle...as part of that, the debor shoudl be kept informed of the process as it moves along - that typically happens by mail sent to the address the lender has on file for the debtor.

[Shae]

Did he keep his creditor aprised of his correct address?

State laws vary but every state, as far as I know, have specific laws regarding how a repossession must be handled from what the repo man can do to hook the vehicle to the final disposition of the vehicle...as part of that, the debor shoudl be kept informed of the process as it moves along - that typically happens by mail sent to the address the lender has on file for the debtor.

Well we just moved in October, but all the mail is forwarded from the old address to here.

[Houdino]

Cal has adopted UCC.

I agree, unless you have the cash to pay off this debt, let it lie and start or add to your "Emergency Fund" of savings. If they want to persue this, they WILL find you. I know it sucks to be looking over your shoulder but unless you got the cash now and want to pay this off now, let it lie and hope they don't contact you until the SOL is up.

As soon as the debt is past the SOL you'll be in a much better negotiating position. It won't come off his CR until 7 years, but at least they won't be able to sue you for the money and you might be able to go for a PFD, altough I'm not sure how that would work with a repo...

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

Well we just moved in October, but all the mail is forwarded from the old address to here.

I'm not sure that really addresses the issue.

How many times, if any, did his address change during the life of the loan and did he keep his correct mailing address up-to-date with the lender?

Was he getting his "normal" mail from them during the life of the loan and up to the point the vehicle was repossessed?

It's important because shoudl it get that far, the standard of proof for the lender to show they sent the informaton is pretty "low" - the assumption is likely to be that the lender did send the info even if the debtor claimed to not have reveived it.

At any rate, I think the primary advice to "wait" still applies.

[cpl720]

My GF is going thru this now. She had a repo in 2003 in NY. We moved a couple of times since then. Now in AZ. She never received a deficiency amount after resale, no collection notice, no appearance letters, absolutely nada. CR had it listed as collection, not repo or charge off. Last week, someone shows up at her job and gives her boss garnishment papers with a copy of a judgement, one from NY in 2005, and now a fresh judgement here in AZ. She's gearing up to bug them for a long detailed paper trail. We'll see how that works out

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

My GF is going thru this now. She had a repo in 2003 in NY. We moved a couple of times since then. Now in AZ. She never received a deficiency amount after resale, no collection notice, no appearance letters, absolutely nada. CR had it listed as collection, not repo or charge off. Last week, someone shows up at her job and gives her boss garnishment papers with a copy of a judgement, one from NY in 2005, and now a fresh judgement here in AZ. She's gearing up to bug them for a long detailed paper trail. We'll see how that works out

Franky, since they already have a judgment, I would not expect it would work out well.

[Magdalen77]

Franky, since they already have a judgment, I would not expect it would work out well.

Well, it can't hurt to try. If they sued her for the balance, she wasn't notified and they ended up with a summary judgment, maybe she can the judgment set aside for improper service.

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

Well, it can't hurt to try. If they sued her for the balance, she wasn't notified and they ended up with a summary judgment, maybe she can the judgment set aside for improper service.

I disagree.

First, I don't see any reason here to think that there was improper service.

Beyond that, it can hurt to try - it “can” be less expensive overall to just pay a debt, even if you don’t actually owe it, than to go to court – even if you “win”.

Not every default judgment can be overturned (or should be).

Not everyone who “didn’t get served” can rightfully claim “improper service”.

Not everyone who is the victim of improper service can substantiate their claim and get a judgment overturned even if there was improper service.

Not everyone who gets a judgment overturned is “off the hook”…unless the court/the law precludes the plaintiff from re-filing, they can just file again and the consumer is now faced with fighting the new lawsuit – but keep in mind that if the defendant does owe the debt the plaintiff will probably prevail.

As with any possible legal action, one needs to no only have the “facts” on their side and a way to substantiate their position but they also have to have the resources (time, energy, knowledge/ability, financial, etc.) to fight the fight…they have to look at the total “cost”, and weigh it against their chances of winning and loosing and the full consequences of each outcome.

What I’m saying here is, it can be perfectly possible to “win” your case and still come out with a net loss which is my opinion, is something that “hurts”. That doesn't mean consumers shouldn't try; but they need to make a decision with a realistic view of their problem.

[Magdalen77]

I disagree.

First, I don't see any reason here to think that there was improper service.

Beyond that, it can hurt to try - it “can” be less expensive overall to just pay a debt, even if you don’t actually owe it, than to go to court – even if you “win”.

Not every default judgment can be overturned (or should be).

Not everyone who “didn’t get served” can rightfully claim “improper service”.

Not everyone who is the victim of improper service can substantiate their claim and get a judgment overturned even if there was improper service.

Not everyone who gets a judgment overturned is “off the hook”…unless the court/the law precludes the plaintiff from re-filing, they can just file again and the consumer is now faced with fighting the new lawsuit – but keep in mind that if the defendant does owe the debt the plaintiff will probably prevail.

As with any possible legal action, one needs to no only have the “facts” on their side and a way to substantiate their position but they also have to have the resources (time, energy, knowledge/ability, financial, etc.) to fight the fight…they have to look at the total “cost”, and weigh it against their chances of winning and loosing and the full consequences of each outcome.

What I’m saying here is, it can be perfectly possible to “win” your case and still come out with a net loss which is my opinion, is something that “hurts”. That doesn't mean consumers shouldn't try; but they need to make a decision with a realistic view of their problem.

Well, my only thought is that she should get whatever information she can from the OC and the CA (I don't remember, is there one of those in this) and then she can decide whether it's worth it to fight or pay up. Generally I agree with you, Robert, but for every one person who goes too far when it would be better to just pay, there's another 20 people who haven't gotten all the facts and overpay or pay unnecessarily. And yep, I agree it could end up being very difficult and very costly, might even screw up any chances you have of settling with a creditor if you push it too far. People need to decide if this is the hill they want to die on.

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

Well, my only thought is that she should get whatever information she can from the OC and the CA (I don't remember, is there one of those in this) and then she can decide whether it's worth it to fight or pay up. Generally I agree with you, Robert, but for every one person who goes too far when it would be better to just pay, there's another 20 people who haven't gotten all the facts and overpay or pay unnecessarily. And yep, I agree it could end up being very difficult and very costly, might even screw up any chances you have of settling with a creditor if you push it too far. People need to decide if this is the hill they want to die on.

Keep in mind that there are two posters in this thread who have had repossessions...they are similar situations and in both cases, the debtors apparently "moved" and/or did not keep the lender apprised of their correct mailing address. That said, I was primarily responding the “cpl720”.

In any case, the issue of having not received proper "service" of pending litigation presupposes that the lender has the debtor's correct address. If the debtor did not supply address corrections (which is typically the contractual obligation of the debtor) to the lender, he/she will have a difficult if not impossible time substantiating a claim that the lender didn’t perform proper service.

I agree that both debtors in this thread need to know the facts here but the facts need to be tempered a bit with the reality that if there is already a judgment against you for a debt, you’ll probably not get it overturned and will have to pay/settle it.

[LoveToGod]

Hello Board!!

I am currently working on BF's CR. He had a car that was repo'd at either the end of 06 or early 07 sometime. Ever since he has not heard anything else about it. We pulled his CR and the OC shows a $0 balance and "Reposession" and the balance has been sold to Calvary Portfolio. How should he go about handling this?

Did you move from one state to another? It could be that the collection agency is not licensed to collect in the stated you moved to if that is the case.

[Shae]

Did you move from one state to another? It could be that the collection agency is not licensed to collect in the stated you moved to if that is the case.

No, same state.

Also, in California, CA's don't have to be licensed to collect.

I think we are going to hold off on this one as suggested. We're still within SOL. Don't wanna wake the giant.