Repo agent showing up at work

[JustFileSuit]

Sue the Repo Man and the Creditor

First, a basic: the repo man (nor the creditor) can use force to enforce a claim, so if the car is in a locked garage, then they cannot break in to tow it off, period. Unless they first get a Court Order that specifically allows them to "break a lock".

Second, the repo man does not know what garage it is in, and you are under no obligation to have conversations with him. Assuming the garage windows are covered over with black plastic on the inside, then he has no independent way to look in to confirm that it is in there, so he cannot just go break in on speculation.

Third, his showing up at work and being an uncouth pest (not surprising for a repo man) is way off the wall. You know who he is (or who his company is). So file suit in your local Court against the firm complaining of interference with financial advantage (your relationship with your employer) and ask for substantial damages, e.g. $60,000. Watch how fast they disappear off the radar.

I sued a creditor for this misconduct once (and they actually did take the auto and even sold it) and they were forced to re-purchase the auto, drop it off by flat-bed truck in my driveway, mark the note "paid", ($10K balance), pay court fees, and issue me a $3,500 check for my trouble just to settle with me. Sock it to them.

[GotNoMoney]

First off your state laws are going to dictate how repossession agencies and repo agents behave. The FDCPA does not apply to them. It only applies if they are willing to accept past payments or are acting as a CA in any form. Otherwise the repo agency is after the collateral and will tell you (and this is why) they any payment arrangements or payments must be given to the legal owner (the lender). So when a repo agent shows up at your work unless he is violation some other law, you simply ask him to leave and he must comply. He can however, talk about your account since he is not bound by the FDCPA but state law my apply.

[JustFileSuit]

First off your state laws are going to dictate how repossession agencies and repo agents behave. The FDCPA does not apply to them.

I would respectfully disagree with the above analysis. I think you can make a cogent argument that the Repo Outfit is acting in substance as a collections agent. You should be able to make the argument in Court with a perfectly straight face that the repo men are "collecting a debt" by the attempts to take the collateral; in substance, the collateral will be instantly converted into money and if there is a deficiency, the creditor will be claiming for the deficiency. Simply that the repo artists are taking physical goods instead of cash does not detract from the argument that they are "collecting" - with the intent of liquidating forthwith by means of auto auction or private sale the collected item into cash - for the credit and account of the underlying lender that hired them.

Admittedly, that is a novel, perhaps creative, argument, one that is not customarily advanced. Yet that does not imply that the argument has no traction in Court.

The debtor cannot sue the repo clowns for "trespass" at the worksite as the debtor does not own the workplace; that is the prerogative of the employer. And if he "talks" about your matters to others and any of it is inaccurate than the repo outfit is open to a complaint of defamation.

What the repo outfit IS doing, tortiously, is interfering willfully (indeed with malice aforethought) with your prospects of continued employment. You have a financial advantage in the relationship with your employer - same as if a vendor had your employer as a customer, and the repo outfit started bad-mouthing the vendor. So the claim of "interference with advantageous relations" has some traction - at least it gets you into the Court House Doors. And once you are in there, unless the repo attorneys can convince the judge to grant summary judgment, you and they are headed for trial. The repo outfit is not going to have any friends at trial.

Since the attorneys for the repo outfit know better than the uncouth louts that work there, once you file suit the clowns will disappear out of your hair. You won't see them again. Remember: these illiterates are bullies - only because nobody sues them. So "Just File Suit!"

[justbroke]

I would respectfully disagree with the above analysis. I think you can make a cogent argument that the Repo Outfit is acting in substance as a collections agent. You should be able to make the argument in Court with a perfectly straight face that the repo men are "collecting a debt" by the attempts to take the collateral; in substance, the collateral will be instantly converted into money and if there is a deficiency, the creditor will be claiming for the deficiency.

How many times has this worked for you in court? And an FDCPA violation? Not!

As many courts have, the 6th Circuit Court looked to the case of Jordan v Kent Recover and stated "an enforcer of a security interest, such as a repossession agency, falls outside the ambit of the FDCPA for all purposes." (Jordan v. Kent Recovery Serv., Inc., 731 F. Supp. 652, 656 (D. Del. 1990))

The only part of the FDCPA that applies to Repossession companies is 11 USC 1692f(6) related to Unfair tactics...

11 USC 1692f - A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:
.
.
.
(6)Taking or threatening to take any nonjudicial action to effect dispossession or disablement of property if—

(A) there is no present right to possession of the property claimed as collateral through an enforceable security interest;
(B) there is no present intention to take possession of the property; or
(C) the property is exempt by law from such dispossession or disablement.

[JustFileSuit]

How many times has this worked for you in court? And an FDCPA violation? Not!

As many courts have, the 6th Circuit Court looked to the case of Jordan v Kent Recover and stated "an enforcer of a security interest, such as a repossession agency, falls outside the ambit of the FDCPA for all purposes." (Jordan v. Kent Recovery Serv., Inc., 731 F. Supp. 652, 656 (D. Del. 1990))

The only part of the FDCPA that applies to Repossession companies is 11 USC 1692f(6) related to Unfair tactics...

Your cite is impeccable. The gambit worked for me once; I recovered damages of $13,000. Adverse counsel did not know about Jordan, and neither did I! Just goes to show that imperfect knowledge can still prevail. It was a State Court venue even though FDCPA should grant original subject matter jurisdiction to the USDC.

Based on Jordan, I would withdraw reliance on 1692 other that the (f) you cite. And I suspect the (f) cases are vanishingly rare!

[justbroke]

Your cite is impeccable. The gambit worked for me once; I recovered damages of $13,000. Adverse counsel did not know about Jordan, and neither did I! Just goes to show that imperfect knowledge can still prevail. It was a State Court venue even though FDCPA should grant original subject matter jurisdiction to the USDC.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that you were triumphant. I just wanted to tap the brakes a little on stating that a Repo company is bound by all parts of the FDCPA. (I think your case may have factored in 1692f(6) moreso than most. Your case may not have been a 1692f(6) violation, but they did impede your rights in other manners.)

I strongly agree with you that we, as consumers, need to stand up for our rights! If we continue to allow the lenders to erode our rights to due process, fair practices, or whatever the entitlement is, we will all lose in the end.

My hat is certainly off to you for having prevailed!

[JustFileSuit]

Try the Fair Trade Practices Act

Another area where the repo outfits (and the lenders that hire them) can be attacked in Court proceedings is under the banner of the particular State's "Fair Trade Practices Act." [sometimes termed the Unfair Trade Practices Act]. Since so much of what these outfits do is unconscionable, filing suit under UTPA opens the Courthouse doors and gets you before the Judge. Again, if adverse party cannot prevail on summary judgment (and they probably cannot so prevail), then you file for a Jury and watch them tremble. Nobody likes repo men.

Federally-chartered banks typically are immune to State UTPA claims, but the repo men they hire are not. You could then incorporate the bank or lender under the theory of agent-servant relationships and responsibility. If they see that you are going to put up a determined fight, then settlement talks come quickly, simply for economic reasons; it costs money to contest, and if they do not settle, then they are facing a jury (whose wrath remains undetermined). From the point of view of the insurer of the repo man, it is better to settle. Expect a decent check.

[jlmaca]

What happens if you lose your job because they keep harassing you in the workplace?

You are months away from them being able to get a deficiency judgment and only a couple of months away from filing. It might be better to be done with the repo man and be on with your life. Just my 2 cents anyway.

I've had my car without making a payment for almost a year. I might have set a record. I simply kept it in a garage where they can't get it without a law suit. The repo company got frustrated and paid I'm sure for their effort. The bank got tired and then I filed Chap7.

I think I'm just lucky in a way because the repo guy could have stalked me everywhere and got the car when I was in the grocery store. The bank could have gone to court for the car. I believe the issue is basically what are you really trying to accomplish. After my Chap7 dishcarge I will contact them and try to arrange a payment plan and keep the car.

[JustFileSuit]

I suspect that after your discharge they are only going to be interested in a lump-sum settlement. But if they have gone this long I think you should be able to settle on the cheap. I admire your persistence!

[lovebirds]

I've had my car without making a payment for almost a year. I might have set a record. I simply kept it in a garage where they can't get it without a law suit. The repo company got frustrated and paid I'm sure for their effort. The bank got tired and then I filed Chap7.

I think I'm just lucky in a way because the repo guy could have stalked me everywhere and got the car when I was in the grocery store. The bank could have gone to court for the car. I believe the issue is basically what are you really trying to accomplish. After my Chap7 dishcarge I will contact them and try to arrange a payment plan and keep the car.

My car is locked up and wrecked so there is no reason for him to stalk me.

[JustFileSuit]

If it is wrecked, then take a picture of the wreckage, and take it with you in your settlement discussions. Looks like cents on the dollar to me!

[lovebirds]

Just an update:

The repo people still call but no more visits. Our office has an extreme "no process servers" policy and our home is unaccessable except through our private garage so even if they are trying to visit, they are not getting through. We'll have plenty of time and are actually pushing out filing to March to have time to spend down our tax refund on home repairs.

This car was wrecked in February 2009 and hasn't had insurance since April 2009. Should I re-establish insurance after I file bankruptcy? The car's trunk and brake lights and smashed in and front bumper is also smashed when my husband was sandwhiched. I can't see how the condition can get any worst until Nissan picks it up.

[GotNoMoney]

Go look up the word Replevin... I don't know why everyone thinks that you can not pay for the collateral or maintain insurance on it and then keep it without filing for BK protection for more than a couple months. Your playing a shell game that honestly the repo company doesn't care if they get it or not right now since they have so much business. But in the end you will lose. It will be the sheriff that knocks on your door next.

But I read all these posts from people that have a "problem" with repo people when in fact the problem is you the borrower. You didn't make your payments or keep insurance and the legal owner has a legal right to take back the collateral....period (and how they do it is state dependent). Then people go on and on about how they are going to sue the repo people for everything under the sun and how they (the repo agency) will be scared and shaking in their boots at the idea of a jury trial.....LMAO....

You want to be the debtor that stands in front of a jury that has kept the car for months on end without a payment and expect those people on a jury that pay for their cars to be sympathetic, your a moron. People secretly side on the side of the repo people since you are the "bad person", you are no worse than a criminal that is trying to steal something to most people. Ask anyone what will happen if you don't pay for your car and keep it and the answer is, you will go to jail... those of us that are educated about the process know this is not true (for the most part unless you disobey a court order to relinquish the collateral) but the average Joe, in their mind it is wrong and illegal to keep something you didn't pay for. Now lets have a jury trial about that bad repo man.

So the op has a car that is wrecked and refuses to turn it back into the lender why? What is it your trying to prove? That your smarter than a repo person? Wow there is an accomplishment to be proud of.

If you had turned the car back in when it was wrecked the lender would have had your insurance pay for the damage to the car. So if you collected the money from the car being wrecked and the lender knows it was insured expect them to file a claim against your insurance company. At that time the insurance company will show they paid the claim and then expect a call from your local insurance fraud investigator. Insurance fraud is taken very seriously. You no longer are able to collect the money for an accident and then not have the vehicle repaired and this is especially true if there is a legal owner.

Also you can't BK out against fraud. So good luck.

Ya, I owned a repo agency for 15 years, I might have an idea of what I am talking about. I have seen several people have large judgments that they can't BK against them to avoid jail time for insurance fraud. It is rather funny because they did exactly what you are doing.

I would really like to know what your attempting to gain by playing a game you can't win? Especially with a car you can't even drive...LOLOLOLOL

[GotNoMoney]

Also on a personal note on the deficiency balance.... over 18 months ago I voluntarily turned in a vehicle. Had the repo people come pick it up. I have been fighting with BoA over the amount. They claimed they put $2K in repairs into it to sell it and I wanted proof since they only sold it for $6K ... Anyways, BoA has since sold the debt and I kept doing the same old dance of DV's and then C&D's. Point is, almost two years and still no lawsuit. And back in November I turned my last vehicle that is not owned by me into the credit union. It was an RV, just no way I could even keep up the payments. I had not paid on it for almost five months while I was living in it. It was a small CU and they actually had no one working collections for four months...LOL, no wonder no one ever even called me. But once they called I made arrangements to turn it in. I guess being an ex repo person I knew it was only a matter of time and I could have even forced them to have to evict me to get it. But why do all that when you know what the end result is going to be. No one is going to let you keep living in a $85K motorhome.

Anyways, I dropped it off to them on November 15th or so and they are still trying to sell it. It will still be months before this is resolved. I now am free to file BK since that was the last thing I was waiting for to file. I didn't want to file while I was living in it since I knew I had no way to keep it since I have no income. But I took the money I saved up from not making any payments or insurance and bought an old motorhome to live in.

So, while some places might be "quick" to sue for the most part it take months and months. I stopped paying my bills almost three years ago on my credit cards and not one creditor had sued me yet. Lucky? I don't know. I owe almost $250K in CC and loans so you would have thought someone would be trying to sue me. It might be because I have zero income but generally that doesn't stop them from suing.

[jlmaca]

Go look up the word Replevin... I don't know why everyone thinks that you can not pay for the collateral or maintain insurance on it and then keep it without filing for BK protection for more than a couple months. Your playing a shell game that honestly the repo company doesn't care if they get it or not right now since they have so much business. But in the end you will lose. It will be the sheriff that knocks on your door next.

But I read all these posts from people that have a "problem" with repo people when in fact the problem is you the borrower. You didn't make your payments or keep insurance and the legal owner has a legal right to take back the collateral....period (and how they do it is state dependent). Then people go on and on about how they are going to sue the repo people for everything under the sun and how they (the repo agency) will be scared and shaking in their boots at the idea of a jury trial.....LMAO....

You want to be the debtor that stands in front of a jury that has kept the car for months on end without a payment and expect those people on a jury that pay for their cars to be sympathetic, your a moron. People secretly side on the side of the repo people since you are the "bad person", you are no worse than a criminal that is trying to steal something to most people. Ask anyone what will happen if you don't pay for your car and keep it and the answer is, you will go to jail... those of us that are educated about the process know this is not true (for the most part unless you disobey a court order to relinquish the collateral) but the average Joe, in their mind it is wrong and illegal to keep something you didn't pay for. Now lets have a jury trial about that bad repo man.

So the op has a car that is wrecked and refuses to turn it back into the lender why? What is it your trying to prove? That your smarter than a repo person? Wow there is an accomplishment to be proud of.

If you had turned the car back in when it was wrecked the lender would have had your insurance pay for the damage to the car. So if you collected the money from the car being wrecked and the lender knows it was insured expect them to file a claim against your insurance company. At that time the insurance company will show they paid the claim and then expect a call from your local insurance fraud investigator. Insurance fraud is taken very seriously. You no longer are able to collect the money for an accident and then not have the vehicle repaired and this is especially true if there is a legal owner.

Also you can't BK out against fraud. So good luck.

Ya, I owned a repo agency for 15 years, I might have an idea of what I am talking about. I have seen several people have large judgments that they can't BK against them to avoid jail time for insurance fraud. It is rather funny because they did exactly what you are doing.

I would really like to know what your attempting to gain by playing a game you can't win? Especially with a car you can't even drive...LOLOLOLOL

I'm a case in point playing the shell game. I've done it with a Chevy 1 Ton, a skid steer and now my car. I basically agree with most of what you have said here, as you are right, if you can't pay for for it, give it back, period. What's lacking in your diatribe is the personal circumstances of those people who would be harmed by giving these items back too soon. You know the law and push it to the extreme. My repo guys show up and demand the vehicle. You can't demand shit. So I call the cops and get your ass off my property. You want to intimidate and make your money fast. Well ok, everyone is entitled to make an honest living which I believe the repo guys do. But don't tell me I don't have the right to drag out the prosess to my benefit. I managed to sell the skid steer, keep 3 grand and pay it off. If repoed I'd by out of luck. I still have my car to take my wife to the hospital for treatment and am trying to get a loan to pay it off post chapter 7. The bank can sue me and I follow the law. Don't be so smug.