Soldier fights back against car repossession

[Skippy]

http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/story?se...cal&id=6563329

Soldier fights back against car repossession

FRANKENMUTH (WJRT) -- (12/18/08) -- Sergeant Bernhardt Rupprecht is on his way back to Iraq after a pre-holiday visit to his family. But during that visit, he was busy trying to settle a dispute over his car.

Just two weeks ago, Rupprecht was featured in an ABC12 news report. He was back home in Little Bavaria, helping the family of another Frankenmuth soldier who was badly injured in a training accident.

"When I heard that I was in Iraq at the time," Rupprecht said. "My parents told me about it and it broke my heart."

But while he was home, he was also trying to clear up a dispute with Bank of America -- a dispute which is detailed in a federal lawsuit.
Story continues below
Advertisement

"Bank of America violated, we believe, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA)," said Rupprecht's attorney, Julie Gafkay.

The SCRA protects military personnel from civil action, such as car repossession, while they are in a military action. Gafkay believes Bank of America repossessed Rupprecht's 2004 Dodge Neon while the serviceman was in Iraq.

Rupprecht got a late payment notice after his military pay was not put into his account, and once the money was there, the lawsuit states Rupprecht called from Baghdad.

Gafkay says Rupprecht called on a satellite phone in a combat zone, asking Bank of America to reinstate payments and to take the money he owed from his account. Bank of America refused.

She says a collection agency, also named in the lawsuit, is trying to collect $11,000. It's a legal dispute between a soldier and large financial institution that is also getting $25 billion in bailout money from the federal government.

"They are receiving a handout from the very government that he is over there fighting for!" said Gafkay.

A spokeswoman with Bank of America says due to the lawsuit, they cannot make a comment at this time.

[CWM Asset Recovery]

The "Solders and Sailors Relife Act" barrs lenders from enforcement of security agreements against any service member on active duty as long as the date he went active was after the date he signed the security agreement. I have always declined to accept assignments or to effect repossession of collateral when the act is applicable. Clients and even their atty's will often attempt to get you to go ahead anyway. Sometimes the debtor dosen't know about the act. I explain it to them whenever I become aware that the circumstances warrant it ! After all, I am an American first and a "Repo Agent" second.

[anonymous]

Could the repossession company get sued or just the bank?

[ALSCO Phoenix]

The repo company will be sued as well. They will be co-defendants most likely, as the bank has deeper pockets. They will be the target of choice. You can bet the repo company will have some liability. The bank will most likely try to shift all the blame to them. In the end the bank will be held the most responsible(unless they closed the order, or the repo co. was at fauly in some other way), but I would exspect to see the repo company on the hook for something. At the very least, they will have to defend themselves. Not cheap anyway you look at it.

[bigdaddy]

So how do you decide when to back off? Say you have the car on the back of your loader and someone runs out and informs you that the debtor is in the military. Shouldn't the bank know this already?

[ALSCO Phoenix]

I hope someone can tell me exactly how to handle this, as I have ran in to it a few times. I have had to use my own judgment. Absolutely the bank should know. But as we all know banks and debtors make mistakes. Perhaps the bank hasn't been made aware they cannot repossess. I end up slowing down, talking with debtors, calling the bank,and figuring out how to proceed with everyone in agreement. If I can't get answers, I leave it. I would rather miss one repo than defend a law suit. If you take it without the debtors knowledge and end up gettig sued, I guess you better hope your hold harmlesss stands up. Usaully a few key questions will establish if the debtor is really exempt from repo, or if it is a ploy to fool you.

[CWM Asset Recovery]

This is what I always asked in the situation you describe . The debtors wife says her husband is on active duty. "What is the date he went active"? If he went active before they bought the car , take it . If he went active after they bought the car, he is covered under the "Solders and sailors Relife Act", DON'T TAKE THE CAR ! A lot of the time they have no idea they are covered. You have to determone this and inform them.

[bigdaddy]

And if they inform you wrong either falsely or because they are not sure then what?

[CWM Asset Recovery]

Ask the date of his going on active duty first . Don't explain the law. I always asked this in the course of general conversation. "Realy , your husband is in Iraq ? When did he go active"? I already know when they bought the car. Most of the time the debtor is totaly unaware that the Act exists. If it applies, they find that out from me.