Grant of summary judgment to financing company, reversed, in its suit seeking deficiency judgment.
Grant of summary judgment to financing company, reversed, in its suit seeking deficiency judgment after repossession and sale of vehicle purchased by defendants, holding that issue of fact remained as to whether plaintiff complied with notice provision of O.C.G.A. § 10-1-36 (a); plaintiff sent required notice via certified mail to address listed on defendants’ contract, but defendant had moved and notified plaintiff of her change of address in writing and by telephone; although plaintiff’s notice may have complied with statute as to one defendant, such did not negate its obligation to comply with statute as to other.
Kight v. Ford Motor Credit Co. LLC, A11A1954 (12/8/11)
Fulton County Daily Report, December 29, 2011
GA trial court erred in granting summary judgment to appellee, because appellee failed to show that motor credit company served appellant with its intention to recover deficiency within the 10-day time limit.
GA grant of summary judgment to appellee, REVERSED, in its debt collection action against appellant; motor credit company repossessed automobile after appellant allegedly defaulted on retail installment contract, motor credit company then sold vehicle at auction and assigned its rights to collect $6.5k deficiency to appellee; trial court erred in granting summary judgment to appellee, because appellee failed to show that motor credit company served appellant with its intention to recover deficiency within the 10-day time limit set forth in OCGA 10-1-36(a) – although record contained notice letter prepared by motor credit company, no evidence showed delivery of this letter to appellant and appellee’s employee’s statement that motor credit company did in fact mail notice to appellant constituted inadmissible hearsay, because employees relied solely on his review of motor credit company’s files and not his personal knowledge; notice was further deficient, because it listed address for appellant that was different from address noted in retail installment contract.
Beacham v. Valvary Portfolio Sers. LLC, A10A0740 (05/11/2010), 10 FCDR 1650
From: Fulton County Daily Report, May 28, 2010
