The debtor failed to make payments on a car loan secured by the creditor. After the debtor defaulted, the creditor hired a repossession company to retake possession of the car. When the repossession company took possession of the car in a public parking lot, the debtor made verbal requests asking them to stop. Notably, there was no profanity, screaming, or any threats of physical violence. Further, the debtor also had an opportunity to remove personal belongings from the car after the repossession. Later, the debtor sued the creditor and the repossession company alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692f(6) and an Arizona self-help statute. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the creditor and repossession company, and the debtor appealed.
In Chavez v. Ford Motor Credit Co. LLC, No. 25-8, 2026 WL 280787, 2026 U.S. App. Lexis 3714 (9th Cir. Feb 3, 2026) (unpublished opinion), the court upheld the summary judgment in favor of the creditor and repossession company. To determine if the creditor held a present right to possession under the FDCPA, the court analyzed A.R.S. § 47-9609, an Arizona statute which allows a secured party to exercise self-help repossession if it does not lead to a breach of the peace. While there is a split in authority as to whether mere oral protests may constitute a breach of the peace, the court declined to adhere to a bright line approach. Instead, the court adopted a totality of the circumstances approach, looking at a variety of factors such as “the use of law enforcement; violence or threats of violence; trespass; verbal confrontation; and disturbance to third parties.” Rivera v. Dealer Funding, LLC, 178 F. Supp. 3d 272, 279 (E.D. Pa. 2016). When applying these factors, the court determined there was no breach of the peace because the only factor present was the debtor's verbal objection, while all other indicators of violence or disturbance were absent. Therefore, the court concluded the creditor maintained a right to possession and did not violate the FDCPA or state law.
By Charlie Cole [email protected]
Edited By Deanna Dulske [email protected]
Edited By Landon Womack [email protected]
Edited By Taylor O’Brien [email protected]