repossession

What is the name of your state? Arizona
I was still owed $300 for a car that was sold for $1,000 on payments, with being listed as a lien holder. The buyer was missing payments, so I informed the buyer I would have to take the car back if the payments wen't made. The buyer moved and left no information on how to contact them and missed 6 stait payments. I had to track them down. So I transferred the title back to my name got a temp plate and had the vehicle repossessed by a friend. It was done with out breaching the paece, and the buyer was informed and was allowed to remove all of his belongings from the vehicle. But now the buyer has a lawyer and is suing me, and I'm being told the car wasn't leagaly repossessed. I just want paid for my car or the car. What do I do, where did I break the law?

[Ladynred]

Did you have a contract or some agreement in writing with the buyer ?

Did you notify the buyer in writing that you were going repo if payments weren't made or did you contact the person orally ?

Was your name on the Title as the lienholder ?

From the AZ Code, UCC:

"47-9609. Secured party's right to take possession after default

A. After default, a secured party:

1. May take possession of the collateral; and

2. Without removal, may render equipment unusable and dispose of collateral on a debtor's premises under section 47-9610.

B. A secured party may proceed under subsection A of this section:

1. Pursuant to judicial process; or

2. Without judicial process, if it proceeds without breach of the peace.

C. If so agreed, and in any event after default, a secured party may require the debtor to assemble the collateral and make it available to the secured party at a place to be designated by the secured party that is reasonably convenient to both parties"

"47-9619. Transfer of record or legal title; definition

A. In this section, "transfer statement" means a record authenticated by a secured party and stating:

1. That the debtor has defaulted in connection with an obligation secured by specified collateral;

2. That the secured party has exercised its postdefault remedies with respect to the collateral;

3. That, by reason of the exercise, a transferee has acquired the rights of the debtor in the collateral; and

4. The name and mailing address of the secured party, debtor and transferee.

B. A transfer statement entitles the transferee to the transfer of record of all rights of the debtor in the collateral specified in the statement in any official filing, recording, registration or certificate of title system covering the collateral. If a transfer statement is presented with the applicable fee and request form to the official or office responsible for maintaining the system, the official or office shall:

1. Accept the transfer statement;

2. Promptly amend its records to reflect the transfer; and

3. If applicable, issue a new appropriate certificate of title in the name of the transferee.

C. A transfer of the record or legal title to collateral to a secured party under subsection B or otherwise is not of itself a disposition of collateral under this chapter and does not of itself relieve the secured party of its duties under this chapter."

From reading this, where you MAY have screwed up was in transferring the Title back to yourself BEFORE you took the vehicle. From what I'm reading, you had every right to take the vehicle based on your security interest in it, but you probably didn't have the right to change the Title until AFTER you repo'd it.

IAAL, HG, or JetX .. legal opinions ??

You can read the UCC here - what you want is Article/chapter 9:

[url]http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/47/title47.htm[/url]

yes we had a written contract, that they defaulted on and i had informed them orally warning them if payments are not made that i would take the car back, more than 6 weeks prior. if i hadn't transfered the title back over to my name, then it could be classified as theft of means of transportation. (so i thought) the way it looks a person doesn't have to pay the full amount in order to keep the car.

[Ladynred]

No, that's hardly true. As a lien-holder, if recorded as such on the Title, you had every right to take it w/o being charged with theft. If that were the case, all repo men and the ones who hired them would end up in jail !!

I would suggest you get yourself an attorney. There are legal procedures to follow with a repo, and if they're not followed to the letter of the law, the repo is not legal... even for a bank !