The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s ruling that the defendants in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act case did not violate the statute when repossessing the plaintiff’s vehicle, ruling there was no breach of the peace.
The background: The plaintiff sued after her vehicle was repossessed in Arizona, alleging that the defendants violated the FDCPA by engaging in a repossession that breached the peace. The lawsuit also relied on Arizona’s version of the Uniform Commercial Code, which allows secured creditors to repossess collateral without a court order so long as it is done without a breach of the peace.
- The plaintiff argued that her verbal objections during the repossession should have required the repossession agent to stop and that continuing the repossession after those objections was unlawful.
The ruling: The Ninth Circuit sided with the defendants, holding that there was no breach of the peace under the facts presented.
- The court explained that the FDCPA itself does not define when a repossession becomes unlawful and that courts must look to state law standards. Because Arizona law does not provide a bright line definition of breach of the peace, the court analyzed the totality of the circumstances, including whether there was violence, threats, law enforcement involvement, physical obstruction, or a disturbance to third parties.
- In affirming the lower court’s summary judgment ruling, the court noted that there was “no use of law enforcement, no violence or threat of violence, no physical obstruction, and no significant disturbance to third parties.” The repossession occurred in a public parking lot, the plaintiff was allowed to contact the lender by phone, and the repossession company even agreed to tow the vehicle to her home so she could remove personal belongings.
- While the plaintiff verbally objected, the court emphasized that plaintiff’s verbal request not to repossess the vehicle alone, without escalating factors, did not create the kind of risk of violence courts are primarily concerned about.
