In an unpublished decision, BANK OF STOCKTON, Plaintiff & Respondent, v. GAYLE A. GRESHAM, Defendant & Appellant., No. H050099, 2023 WL 8252076, at *1–2 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2023), the Court of Appeal found the Bank's post-repossession letter to be compliant with Rees-Levering. The facts were as follows: Gresham entered into a contract with Capital Volkswagen to buy a… Read More
In Chavez v. Golden Auto Grp., Inc., No. E078712, 2023 WL 4875175, at *1–2 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 1, 2023), the Court of Appeal found in an unpublished decision that a deferral agreement to pay a downpayment in installments that was not reflected on the RISC violated Rees-Levering. The ASFA requires car dealers to disclose all the terms of a… Read More
AB 2311 on GAP Protection has been approved by the California Governor, and sent to the Secretary of State for enrollment. The bill is described as This bill would establish provisions to govern the offer, sale, provision, or administration, in connection with a conditional sale contract, of a guaranteed asset protection waiver (GAP waiver), defined to mean an optional contractual… Read More
D'Happart v. First Commonwealth Bank, 2022 PA Super 132, 2022 Pa. Super. LEXIS 328 (No. 580 WDA 2021 August 5, 2022) , Judge Bender affirmed the Court of Common Pleas finding against a consumer who challenged the application of the UCC's safe harbor to the notice required after his vehicle was repossessed. Appellants' second issue, they claim that FCB's "pre-sale… Read More
In Safe Credit Union v. Diaz, No. C092158, 2021 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5435, at *7 (Aug. 23, 2021), the Court of Appeal held in an unpublished decision that an anti-SLAPP motion by a credit union was not proper to challenge an NOI class action filed in response to a debt collection action. For complaints and cross-complaints alleging mixed causes… Read More
In Lobel Fin. Corp. v. Guiam, No. H044095, 2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7717, at *8 (Nov. 20, 2019), the Court of Appeal found that an automobile finance company's NOI withstood an ASFA challenge. In this case, respondent sent appellant an NOI pursuant to the ASFA. The terms of the NOI are not in dispute. What is in dispute is… Read More
In Gonzalez v. Ford Motor Co., No. LA CV 19-00652 PA (ASx), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185279 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2019), Judge Anderson held that a vehicle manufacturer need not reimburse the consumer for negative equity financed into the RISC. Finally, Plaintiff argues Ford's repurchase offer was "less than 50% the amounts he had paid for the vehicle." (P.… Read More
In Duran v. Quantum Auto Sales, Inc., 2017 WL 6334220, at *5 (Cal.App. 4 Dist., 2017), the Court of Appeal held in an unpublished decision held that the FTC Holder Rule does not limit attorneys' fees but the Plaintiff's recovery against the Holder is limited to those fees/costs that resulted from litigation of claims against it. We therefore turn to Veros's alternative… Read More
Scott Hyman and Alisa Givental published an article in the Conference on Consumer Finance Law Quarterly entitled Hyman & Givental, California's Single Document Rule for Retail Automobile Transactions, 70 Conf. Cons. F. Law Q. 134 (Summer 2017). A copy of the Article can be found here. Read More
In Baseline Financial Services, Inc. v. Hobbs, 2016 WL 7243531, at *4–6 (Cal.App. 4 Dist., 2016), the Court of Appeal in an unpublished decision found that an automobile lender complied with the mailing requirements of the ASFA. It is undisputed that Bank of the West sold the vehicle on March 18, 2010. Baseline presented in evidence an NOI with respect… Read More
In Raceway Ford Cases, the California Supreme Court found that a car dealer did not violate the AFSA in backdating a RISC to the date of sale when financing could not be found after a spot-delivery. The Automobile Sales Finance Act (ASFA), also known as the Rees-Levering Motor Vehicle Sales and Finance Act (Civ. Code, § 2981 et seq.) is… Read More
In Tun v. Wells Fargo Bank, the California Court of Appeal found that the Trial Court did not err in finding, pre-trial in limine, that an Automobile RISC Holder's tender to the Court of money under Civil Code 2983.4 did not constitute an "admission of liability". When the Trial Court, despite a defense verdict in favor of the Dealer and the… Read More
In Ally Financial, Inc. v Trujillo, 2016 WL 4766225, at *6 (Cal.App. 6 Dist., 2016), the Court of Appeal held in an unpublished decision that class notice in an NOI class action adequately informed the class members of potential adverse tax consequences. On appeal, Trujillo and Riley contend that the class notice regarding tax consequences violates due process, and is therefore… Read More
In Nichols v. Century West, LLC, 2016 WL 4368157, at *7–8 (Cal.App. 2 Dist., 2016), the Court of Appeal held that post-dated checks were not "deferred down-payments" under ASFA and did not violate the single document rule. None of these cases offers guidance on whether post-dated checks provided to a dealership at the time of a sale should be categorized as… Read More
In Aguayo v. U.S. Bank, 2016 WL 2609296, at *2-4 (S.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Whelan granted partial summary judgment to an NOI class action plaintiff who argued that US Bank's NOI violated state law. First, Judge Whelan rejected US Bank's conflict preemption argument. On September 24, 2009, this Court granted U.S. Bank's motion to dismiss the case based on the finding… Read More
In Lopez v. Asbury Fresno Imports, LLC, --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2015 WL 513150 (Cal.App. 5 Dist. 2015), the Court of Appeal affirmed a bench trial award in favor of a car dealer against a consumer. The Court of Appeal rejected Plaintiffs’ claim under the Rees-Levering Automobile Sales Finance Act, finding that even if a “Four-Square” was a “purchase order” under… Read More
In Raceway Ford Cases, --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2014 WL 4589808 (Cal.App. 4 Dist. 2014), the Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's finding in favor of defendant car dealer as to backdating claims, but remanded to the trial court to determine whether the action could still be maintained as a class action. The Court of Appeal's decision is important because of its… Read More
In Bor Pha v. Yia Yang, 2014 WL 654559 (E.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Nunley certified as AFSA class against a car dealership, with a sub-class of Hmong putative classmembers. This is a putative class action brought by Plaintiffs Bor Pha and Nou Lee (“Plaintiffs”). Plaintiffs allege that Defendants Yi a Yang and Yia Auto Sales, Inc.FN2 sold automobiles and arranged financing… Read More
In Munoz v. Express Auto Sales,--- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2014 WL 131195 (Cal.Super.A.D. 2014), , the Los Angeles County Appellate Division set forth how an automobile dealer can cure Rees-Levering violations under Civil Code 2984. Pursuant to a second amended complaint filed November 1, 2012, plaintiffs alleged that defendant violated the ASFA by failing to properly itemize the sources of the… Read More
In Wright v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., --- Fed.Appx. ----, 2013 WL 6137482 (9th Cir. 2013), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in an unpublished opinion that an automobile customer who paid a small sum of money to set up his right to bring an NOI class action lacked UCL standing to bring the claim. On April… Read More
