YES! reposession is a civil matter, reposession men have been sued over cases like this and lost. He should have approched you and stated he's there to repo the car because your behind on payments and if you declined, he should have left and came back later to get the car.
A breach of contractual duty is not considered a tort, but rather a breach of contract. Tort law deals with civil wrongs that cause harm to individuals or property, while contract law involves violations of agreements between parties.
Once the vehicle has entered into reposession, it becomes the property of the lender. If you fight or otherwise refuse to turn over the vehicle, it could be considered breach of peace. FYI, when the repo man shows up, the vehicle isn't yours any more.
The verb for breach is "to breach." For example, "The company breached the contract by failing to deliver the goods on time."
In Texas, breach of peace typically refers to acts that disrupt public order and safety, such as fighting, creating loud disturbances, or engaging in aggressive behavior in public places. It can include offenses like disorderly conduct, public intoxication, and disturbing the peace. Penalties for breach of peace can range from fines to potential jail time, depending on the specific circumstances of the incident.
Breach is to security as violation is to law. Both terms indicate an infraction or infringement, with breach typically referring to a breach of security or contract, and violation often used in the context of breaking a law or rule.
Anytime, anyplace, as long as it does not create a breach of the peace.
it depends on the stipulations in your contract. in most cases any breach of cantract can be grounds for repo
Yes, as long as the repossesor does not commit a breach of peace as defined by the laws of the state where the act takes place.
If you opt out and have the right to do so it is considered terminating a contract. If you unilaterally decide to opt out of a contract and do not have a legal basis to do so; that is considered a breach of contract. If you breach a legal contract you can be sued.
No.
No. That would not only result in a breach of peace charge, but probably trespass and tampering with private property as well.
nature of a breach
CALL a local attorney NOW. The part about "ahead on payments" scares me. How you determine you are "ahead" and how the lender determines that gets a lot of folks in trouble.
It's a breach which may be a curable breach under the loan documents. The question really becomes was the breach cured. In other words, did the person ultimately pay. If the loan documents state that the Lender doesn't waive the right to declare untimely payments a breach then a breach could be called a default and the motorcycle could be repossessed. If the Lender accepts the payments late and the language doesn't preserve the right to call a default then the payments and acceptance are a waiver of the right to declare a default.
Ferb: Listen up people and I'll teach ya'Bout Phineas and FerbAnd the backyard beach, yaEvery morning, Phineas, he gonna saySingers: Say!Ferb: "Brother, whatcha gonna do today?"Now you see we're having funPlaying under the sun,And get in line, get in lineCause the wet ski's runningA backyard beach, a backyard beachNothing's outta reach,we got the backyard beachYou can change in the broken hut,Drink out of a coconut,Three games for a token, but the rest is freeYou got skiing, parasailing,Surfing and a-flailing,Your contacts need saline,Or else you can't seeGot the backyard beach, a backyard beachNothing's out of reach, we got the backyard beachGot the backyard beach, a backyard beach,Don't fall into the breach, got the backyard beach!
A valid repossession must not cause an unlawful breach of the peace - even if the debtor is the one instigating the breach. So if the debtor gets into the car, it cannot be repossessed at that time, you'd be kidnapping them essentially. In the USA, this actually happened, the repossession was declared to be non valid and the debtor awarded a cash settlement in court.
A breach of contractual duty is not considered a tort, but rather a breach of contract. Tort law deals with civil wrongs that cause harm to individuals or property, while contract law involves violations of agreements between parties.