Car repossessed and account sold to Collection Agency

[punky]

Hello everyone,

What a wonderful resource this forum is! I need to know some info about the car repossession process. We bought a car in spring of last year (2007). Unfortunately we were unable to continue to make the payments. The car was repossessed in Jan of this year. We thought the OC would communicate with us about the sale of the car and how much it sold for, so that we would have a good idea about what the deficiency would be on the car, and how much we would owe.

What the OC did was to sell the account to a collection agency. This CA sent us a letter a few days ago, saying that they bought the account and that we owed 21,000 dollars (not the correct amount) but in that neighborhood.

We plan to do a debt validation because we are not going to accept at face value, that is what we truly owe, and perhaps we can do a debt negotiation with them. Right now they want CASH! Well so does everyone. If we had that amount to give the CA, we wouldn't have a repossessed car.

My question is, what things might we do before the debt validation? or is that the best thing to do first? Thank you for any ideas you guys might be able to help me with!

Regards,

punky

[swirlgirl]

My suggestion is to not play around with this.

1. Send a DV to the CA.

2. Send a letter to the OC asking for the details of the sale and a notice of deficiency balance. They should have sent this to you and it's required in most states.

Send both letters CMRR. After you get the info from the OC, send a copy of the notice of deficiency balance to the CA showing the proper deficiency balance. Stay on top of this. You should hear back from the OC within 30 days.

Most likely, you will have to make payment arrangements to settle the deficiency.

[punky]

Thank You swirlgirl, for your quick reply. I do appreciate it. Your suggestions are what I needed. Pardon my lack of knowledge, but what is CMRR? We do of course expect to make payment arrangements for the deficiency.

Much Regards,

Punky

[barblong]

Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested.

[swirlgirl]

Also, when it gets to the point of settlement or payment arrangements, see if you can get a delete from your CR. Try telling them your sob story and expalin how you took responsibility for this within a relatively short period of time. It's a long shot, but you never know.

[newbie7069]

I did this search for ya............

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/search.php?searchid=600393

Read through some of these threads. You may find some really helpful information.

[gordonfan]

Hang in there, Punky. We're going through the same thing right now. Our CA is trying to charge us 10% interest!!!

[punky]

Thank to everyone who has replied to my post. It has given me a jumpstart to handling this problem. The old saying "Knowledge is Power" is only partly correct. In my opinion only knowledge that is applied to a achieve a hopefully positive outcome is real POWER!

Regards,

punky

P.S. gordonfan good luck to you also.

[james442]

truthfully...you should fid out who repod your car because sometimes they take your car illegally!!believe i have heard of people getting out of repos because of grand theft.make sure they have a license to repo nd they have reported,this to your local authorities.

[BTO429]

I went through this same problem a couple months ago but I was lucky and got my truck back.

[punky]

Hello again swirlgirl,

I was reading your post again, and you said that I need to send the notice of deficiency to the CA. My question is, is the CA supposed to abide by the Notice of Deficiency concerning the amount that's owed. Thanks so much for your help?

Punky

My suggestion is to not play around with this.

1. Send a DV to the CA.

2. Send a letter to the OC asking for the details of the sale and a notice of deficiency balance. They should have sent this to you and it's required in most states.

Send both letters CMRR. After you get the info from the OC, send a copy of the notice of deficiency balance to the CA showing the proper deficiency balance. Stay on top of this. You should hear back from the OC within 30 days.

Most likely, you will have to make payment arrangements to settle the deficiency.

[punky]

Hello newbie 7069

I clicked on the link in your post, and for some reason it doesn't work. I would love to check the info you found for me!

Punky

I did this search for ya............

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/search.php?searchid=600393

Read through some of these threads. You may find some really helpful information.

[razr]

Post removed.

[newbie7069]

Hello newbie 7069

I clicked on the link in your post, and for some reason it doesn't work. I would love to check the info you found for me!

Punky

Oops! Sorry!

What I had done was an Advanced Search for the term "repo" by user "Nascar".

Nascar was extremly knowledgable regarding repossession issues. I knew that I had read many threads where he laid the requirements out.

Here's just one example:

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showthread.php?t=263298&highlight=repo

[punky]

Hello,

I have received so much great help from others, when I first posted about my car being repossessed, that I thought I would post a link to a very detailed and interesting article explaining chapter 9 of the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) which details the rights of secured parties, and the rights of debtors.

For anyone who is in the process of having a car repossessed or dealing with all the problems after the car has been repossessed, I think this article will be greatly helpful.

Here is the link:

http://www.farleighwitt.com/showarticle.aspx?Show=289

[punky]

Hello everyone,

I was just thinking about my auto repossession problem, and was wondering if the oc who held the title to the car, was supposed to send our notice of disposition by registered or certified mail, to our address?

Like I said before we never received anything having to to with our repossessed vehicle, so if they sent anything without sending it certified mail, It could have ended up anywhere, with just our word that we didn't receive it.

Regards,

punky

Edit: Would a JDB be considered a secured party? It is the secured party who is obligated to make sure they deliver the legally required documents, however the JDB doesn't have the collateral that secured the loan, so I was wondering if they can be considered the secured party

[punky]

Since my last post, my hubby and I DV'd the CA , and also informed them that we needed them to send us The Notice of Calculation of Surplus or Deficiency, which we didn't receive from the original creditor. We are legally entitled to receive this notice under Utah's UCC Title 70a Chapter 9, within 14 days after we request it. We didn't receive it

We received a letter from CA, that states they received our correspondence requesting verification of our debt. I thought we were requesting a Debt Validation. Is Debt Verification and Validation the same thing? They said all collection activity will stop and the account would be put in dispute status, while they investigate our claim, however they have not reported to Credit Reporting Agency, that the account is in dispute.

The rest of the letter states that meanwhile, the account info we have on file is as follows, and the rest of it is basic account info.

So now, the next step is to send another CMRR letter to the CA/Creditor asking for proof that we were sent the Notification of Disposition before the sale of the vehicle, since the OC was legally required to send it within 15 days before the sale of the vehicle. I am wondering if we should wait until we hear back from them in regards to validating the debt, or should we go ahead and send the letter?

The reason I am putting so much emphasis on them providing proof they sent it to us, is that according to the Utah UCC, a debtor has certain options, that are explained in the Notice of Deficiency. If we didn't receive this document in a timely matter, before the sale of the car, then the actions available to us, contained in the document were denied us, to my way of thinking.

Here is the Notice that we were to receive.

70A-9a-614. Contents and form of notification before disposition of collateral -- Consumer-goods transaction.

In a consumer-goods transaction, the following rules apply:

(1) A notification of disposition must provide the following information:

(a) the information specified in Subsection 70A-9a-613(1);

( a description of any liability for a deficiency of the person to which the notification is sent;

© a telephone number from which the amount that must be paid to the secured party to redeem the collateral under Section 70A-9a-623 is available; and

(d) a telephone number or mailing address from which additional information concerning the disposition and the obligation secured is available.

(2) A particular phrasing of the notification is not required.

(3) The following form of notification, when completed, provides sufficient information:

[Name and address of secured party]

[Date]

NOTICE OF OUR PLAN TO SELL PROPERTY

[Name and address of any obligor who is also a debtor]

Subject: [identification of Transaction]

We have your [describe collateral], because you broke promises in our agreement.

[For a public disposition:]

We will sell [describe collateral] at public sale. A sale could include a lease or license. The sale will be held as follows:

Date:

Time:

Place:

You may attend the sale and bring bidders if you want.

[For a private disposition:]

We will sell [describe collateral] at private sale sometime after [date]. A sale could include a lease or license.

The money that we get from the sale (after paying our costs) will reduce the amount you owe. If we get less money than you owe, you [will or will not, as applicable] still owe us the difference. If we get more money than you owe, you will get the extra money, unless we must pay it to someone else.

You can get the property back at any time before we sell it by paying us the full amount you owe (not just the past due payments), including our expenses. To learn the exact amount you must pay, call us at [telephone number].

If you want us to explain to you in writing how we have figured the amount that you owe us, you may call us at [telephone number] [or write us at [secured party's address] ] and request a written explanation. [We will charge you $[insert amount] for the explanation if we sent you another written explanation of the amount you owe us within the last six months.]

If you need more information about the sale call us at [telephone number] [or write us at [secured party's address]].

We are sending this notice to the following other people who have an interest in [describe collateral] or who owe money under your agreement:

[Names of all other debtors and obligors, if any].

Regards,

punky

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

Yes, there is a difference.

The standard for “verifying” a debt per the FDCPA is very low and is rarely enough information for a consumer to reach a reasonable decision about the alleged debt…the information you should (and sounds like you are) asking for is much more comprehensive and you letters should point out that you are asking validation…you need to be asking for specific pieces of information the you need to reach a decision about paying the debt.

Understand, that the “law”, at least Federal law, doesn’t require they provide the info but common sense does – it will be up to you to stand your ground until they provide the information you feel you need.

I’d recommend you check out the threads on the DV proves – keep in mind, it is a process; especially this one: http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showthread.php?t=228576

Keep in mind that if there is a substantial amount of money involved then this may well move to the court room for disposition at which time you can then demand, with the force of law, the information you feel you need (“Dscovery” information)…if they cannot show that they followed your state’s laws regarding the repossession then you may be able to avoid the debt but they probably won’t go down without a fight.

[punky]

Yes, there is a difference.

The standard for “verifying” a debt per the FDCPA is very low and is rarely enough information for a consumer to reach a reasonable decision about the alleged debt…the information you should (and sounds like you are) asking for is much more comprehensive and you letters should point out that you are asking validation…you need to be asking for specific pieces of information the you need to reach a decision about paying the debt.

Understand, that the “law”, at least Federal law, doesn’t require they provide the info but common sense does – it will be up to you to stand your ground until they provide the information you feel you need.

I’d recommend you check out the threads on the DV proves – keep in mind, it is a process; especially this one: http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showthread.php?t=228576

Keep in mind that if there is a substantial amount of money involved then this may well move to the court room for disposition at which time you can then demand, with the force of law, the information you feel you need (“Dscovery” information)…if they cannot show that they followed your state’s laws regarding the repossession then you may be able to avoid the debt but they probably won’t go down without a fight.

Hello Robert_Nashville,

Thank you for the very helpful information. We have clicked the link in your post, and found a very helpful DV flo chart, that Kristy the website owner created, that will help us through the DV process.

We got out the sales contract and was reading through it again, and it says they have at least ten days before the date of the intended sale or transfer of property, to mail us notice of the event. Here is the exact wording.

"You agree that if any notice is required by law, to be given to you of an intended sale or transfer of the property, notice is reasonable if mailed to your last known address, as reflected in our records, at least ten days before the intended sale or transfer (or such other period of time as is required by law) emphasis mine.

Well since we have lived at our current address for several years before purchase of vehicle, they can't say it got sent to the wrong address. It seems they have broken at least, this part of the contract, if I am understanding it right. The only other explanation of why we didn't receive any of the required communications, that i can think of, is that they got lost in the mail.

It seems they just skipped over the requirement for notification as stated in their contract and the legal requirements for notification of disposition and the explanation of calculation of deficiency or surplus as stated in the Utah UCC, chapter 9, and just sold the debt straight to the JDB, who is now trying to collect.

Regards,

punky

[punky]

Hello Everyone,

I just thought I would post with an update to our auto repossession and then the JDB collections problem, because they bought the debt from the original creditor

Of course first they sent dunning letter, and we responded within 30 days asking for debt validation, and also asked them to send us the Written Explanation of Calculation of Surplus or Deficiency, of which we told them we did not receive from the original creditor, and we were legally entitled to receive it, under the Utah UCC. The creditor is legally required to send us this document within 14 days of request for it.

Well, all we got back from them is a debt verification letter, and them saying that they would require some time to look into it further.

UPDATE: We watch our credit reports closely, and since they received our letter, they have removed themselves and the debt from our credit report. Only one credit report was showing this debt, and it's gone.

Now, my hubby and I are scratching our heads and wondering what this means. It seems that if the account was in dispute status, which it is right now, wouldn't the JDB just put a notation on the credit report that the debt was in dispute? Why is it completely gone?

Regards,

punky

[punky]

Hello everyone,

We have some new info on our repossessed car. This post is kind of long but I am hoping, by my posting on the continuing story of our repo'd car, that we may be of some help to others who, might find themselves in a similar situation.

Since our car was repossessed in Jan of this year, 08, we have had some very interesting things go on in the process. Like my original post said. the OC sold the account to a collection agency, however in the letter from the CA, they listed two previous creditors. The OC and then another company. We thought this is strange. We wondered who repossessed the car. The Original Lender who financed the car, or this new creditor we never heard of before.

We looked the new creditor up on the web, and found to our surprise that the new creditor, was the parent company of the original lender.

Well I have been researching and studying all info I can find on auto repossessions and the laws governing them. In my research I found a very informative article on the sale of repossessed autos. In this article it talks about the process of selling a repossessed auto and how it has to be sold in a commercially reasonable manner.

It said that "in general, courts have failed to recognize sales that were not really public, as in sales in which the creditor sold the collateral to itself or to an alter ego of itself at a suspiciously low price"

http://www.independentdealer.com/sales/sales7.asp

Well I put 2 and 2 together, after getting the Collection Letter, and reading the above referenced article, I got the idea that perhaps the car wasn't sold to anyone but back to the OC's Parent Company.

Which may explain why we never were taken through the repossession process, in terms of receiving any written legal documents we were entitled to according to Chapter 9 of Utah's UCC.

Well when the Collection Agency told us we owed them $XX,XXX because they had bought the account, we wrote them back and told them we needed them to do a debt validation, and to send us the Written Explanation of Calculation of Surplus or Deficiency, which we told them we never received from the OC.

After requesting it, they had 14 days to send it to us, and we never received it. After they got our letter, and about a month later, they removed themselves and the debt from our credit report.

So we are thinking what is going on here. We decided to order a Carfax Report, to learn exactly what has been going on with the car. Wow, did we get educated, at least we think we did.

The short and sweet of the Carfax report, is that it is showing us as owning the car for 10 months, from our date of purchase, which isn't true, because we only had the car a little over 6 months, when we voluntarily surrendered it.

in Dec, 07, and it was picked up the first of Jan, 08.

It does not show that the car went to auction after they took possession, and then sold. It shows that we owned it until April 08, at which time it was sold, under our title no., which makes it look like a private sale by us, to a new buyer. Incidentally April Is when we got the collection letter from the Collection Agency

Now it seems to us that once the car was repossessed from us, and the repossession was perfected, would the car still have our title no., and be sold under our title no?

Perhaps someone who knows more than we do, could answer this for us.

Right now we are using a repossession deficiency letter we found over at whychat, to send to all companies concerned in this matter.

http://whychat.5u.com/repoltr.html It is a letter that you are not supposed to use, if the repossession is less than 2 year old. You can use the letter for repossessions less than 2 years old, if you are sure that you didn't receive any notices of the sale, which we didn't.

Perhaps, someone could give us some pointers on the letter mentioned above, and offer an opinion of whether we should use it, or perhaps we should really consult with a consumer rights attorney.

We think something very strange has went on with the disposition and sale of this car.

Regards,

punky

.

[punky]

Hello everyone,

My hubby and I are starting the New Year by having a major JDB reappear on one of our Credit Reports, after dropping off some 6 or 7 months ago. We thought we were done with them, but it seems we are going to have to fight some more.

This major JDB bought the account from the finance company that finances cars all over the US, and has a very bad reputation. Of course we weren't taken through the repo process required by the UCC, and which our State recognizes, before the account was sold to the JDB, who stated that they were now our new creditor. We requested a validation of debt and the Explanation of Surplus or Deficiency from the JDB.

Of course they couldn't supply us with this document and didn't validate the debt. They then dropped off the credit reports. At about the first of July, we get the requested letter from the OC. This notice was bogus. The info in this letter is not factual and I don't mean minor errors either. A part of the notice is supposed to reflect refunds and credits, that will determine the final surplus or deficiency balance.

The letter states:

Under the terms of the Retail Installment Contract and Security Agreement for the account and pursuant to applicable law, XXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX disposed of the collateral XXXX/XXXXXXX/XXXXXX pledged to secure the indebtedness for the sum of $XX,XXX.XX. After applying the net proceeds from the sale, along with any applicable refunds, as required by the terms and conditions of the loan contract, a deficiency balance remains in the amount of $XX,XXX.XX, for which you remain liable under your agreement. Emphasis mine.

We had GAP and Warranty insurance on the car, which came to $1,754.05 The Auto Dealership sent the OC a check for that amount, which was not reflected in the letter they sent to us. We asked the dealership to send us a copy of the canceled check, and they did. The check cleared a little over 3 months before we were sent this letter.

Could the applicable refunds the above statement is referring include the $1,754.05? If so, It looks like to me that the R I C S A was not honored, however I am not a lawyer of course, so I might be in error here.

Now coming up to the present time, the JDB is reporting again on one of the credit reports. My question is will this start the DV process all over again? As of today they haven't sent a new collection letter, but it will probably show up in the present future.

I don't see how the JDB can even think of collecting after everything was so messed up by the OC, Could someone advise me on this?

This forum has been a tremendous help and thanks to everyone who has given me their ideas and suggestions.

Regards,

punky

[wahoo238]

If the JDB is now re-reporting and never provided validation this is continued collection activity. You may also have issue w/ CRA for failing to notify you w/ in 5 days of re-insert.

[punky]

Hello wahoo,

Thank you for your response.

TC (True Credit) has noted the reinsert, that is how we know about the JDB probably starting re-collection activity again. So I guess since it is not a new collection activity, but only the continuance of the previous one, we will wait for a collection letter to show up and then do the DV again.

It's just that I don't see how they have much of a leg to stand on, when the OC messed everything up in the first place, but I guess we will see.

Regards,

punky

[wahoo238]

Hello wahoo,

Thank you for your response.

TC (True Credit) has noted the reinsert, that is how we know about the JDB probably starting re-collection activity again. So I guess since it is not a new collection activity, but only the continuance of the previous one, we will wait for a collection letter to show up and then do the DV again.

It's just that I don't see how they have much of a leg to stand on, when the OC messed everything up in the first place, but I guess we will see.

Regards,

punky

Ok CRA off the hook but since your DV was timely without a response makes re insertion continued collection activity, a violation of FDCPA. If you were to dispute with CRA and they verify TL then tey have violated FCRA (actualy think they already have). There may be state violations as well, you could possibly make up your deficite quickly if you choose to sue. Curious, did the re insert referece a "dispute"?