What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? OH
Hello. I am unsure if I am in the correct forum, but here we go.
My boyfriend was convicted of a second OVI offense in 2015. One of the stipulations was an interlock device be placed in the car over a period of time. A month after the device was install, he took a lien out of the vehicle to pay for legal expenses. Under the security contract, the lien holder declares they are not liable for any items within or connected to the vehicle, other than the Property (Property being the collateral, which is his car).
More recently, he fell behind on loan payments and the car was repossessed. It was taken on May 27th of this year, and he was given 20 days to pay the amount due or the car would go up for auction. The amount due was paid exactly 20 days later (June 16th), and release forms were sent to the repossession company. The repossession company is, I guess for all intents and purposes, a third party to the lien holder and borrower. Personal assets were claimed, aside from the interlock device because it is connected to the vehicle and belongs to another third party company that works with the courts. The lien holder had the auction date marked for July 9th, roughly three weeks from the last day to reclaim the vehicle.
Today, July 7th, we have come up with the money to have the vehicle released, but found out the interlock device was removed. The repossession company now wants an additional $100 for the removal of the device, and $65 to reinstall it. No paperwork from the lien holder was sent, to our knowledge, stating the device could be removed. The credit union has been notified and copies of papers have been asked for, but no one can come up with anything as to when the device was authorized to be removed.
If I am correct, which I may not be, the credit union is technically the owner of the vehicle and can only authorize the removal of the device per the court. Is this correct?
Upon my own research, I found this code under Ohio's government code page:
"4510.44 Immobilization or disabling device violation.
....(3) No unauthorized person shall tamper with or circumvent the operation of an immobilizing or disabling device.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of an immobilizing or disabling device violation, a misdemeanor of the first degree.
Effective Date: 01-01-2004"
I would like to verify that I am reading this properly: The repossession company tampered with the interlock unit (without any consent from any party), therefore breaking the law. Is it possible for the repossession company/auction house to be licensed to remove the device, despite it not being their property?
Any help would be wonderful.
Hello. I am unsure if I am in the correct forum, but here we go.
My boyfriend was convicted of a second OVI offense in 2015. One of the stipulations was an interlock device be placed in the car over a period of time. A month after the device was install, he took a lien out of the vehicle to pay for legal expenses. Under the security contract, the lien holder declares they are not liable for any items within or connected to the vehicle, other than the Property (Property being the collateral, which is his car).
More recently, he fell behind on loan payments and the car was repossessed. It was taken on May 27th of this year, and he was given 20 days to pay the amount due or the car would go up for auction. The amount due was paid exactly 20 days later (June 16th), and release forms were sent to the repossession company. The repossession company is, I guess for all intents and purposes, a third party to the lien holder and borrower. Personal assets were claimed, aside from the interlock device because it is connected to the vehicle and belongs to another third party company that works with the courts. The lien holder had the auction date marked for July 9th, roughly three weeks from the last day to reclaim the vehicle.
Today, July 7th, we have come up with the money to have the vehicle released, but found out the interlock device was removed. The repossession company now wants an additional $100 for the removal of the device, and $65 to reinstall it. No paperwork from the lien holder was sent, to our knowledge, stating the device could be removed. The credit union has been notified and copies of papers have been asked for, but no one can come up with anything as to when the device was authorized to be removed.
If I am correct, which I may not be, the credit union is technically the owner of the vehicle and can only authorize the removal of the device per the court. Is this correct?
Upon my own research, I found this code under Ohio's government code page:
"4510.44 Immobilization or disabling device violation.
....(3) No unauthorized person shall tamper with or circumvent the operation of an immobilizing or disabling device.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of an immobilizing or disabling device violation, a misdemeanor of the first degree.
Effective Date: 01-01-2004"
I would like to verify that I am reading this properly: The repossession company tampered with the interlock unit (without any consent from any party), therefore breaking the law. Is it possible for the repossession company/auction house to be licensed to remove the device, despite it not being their property?
Any help would be wonderful.