Ford Motor Credit Corporation v. Paul Winson; Paul Winson v. Ford Motor Credit Corporation
Published: May 13, 1995 | Result Date: May 2, 1995 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: GC009948 – $80,000
Facts
In July of 1990, Defendant/Cross-complainant Paul Winson purchased a used 1988 Corvette Roadster with only 3,000 miles on the speedometer. The purchase was financed through Plaintiff/Cross-defendant Ford Motor Credit Company. Winson, the owner of an auto body shop and a race car driver and car enthusiast, purchased the vehicle as an investment. He was habitually late in his monthly payments to Ford, but would always pay the late payment charge. In July and August of 1991, he was having financial difficulty and could not make his monthly payments. Ford agreed to defer the July and August (1991) payments to the end of the loan. Winson continued to have trouble making his monthly payments and was late with his November and December (1991) payments. On January 14, 1992, Winson had a conversation (by phone) with a Ford Credit customer-service representative from Gardena, Curtis Bowie. Bowie testified that he told Winson that he must make 2 payments (November and December of 1991) in person at the Gardena office by January 15, 1992. Winson testified that there was no discussion of where the payments were to be made, but that he had traditionally made his payments at the Pasadena branch of Ford Credit and that on January 15, 1992, he personally made the 2 payments at the Pasadena branch. On January 17, 1992, Bowie, apparently not aware that Winson had made his payments at the Pasadena branch, sent out a repossession order to Crown Auto Recovery to repossess the vehicle. At 4:00 a.m. on Monday, January 20, 1992, which was the national Martin Luther King holiday, repossessors from Crown Auto Recovery repossessed the car from Winson's residence and the car was damaged in the process. Winson was unable to reach Ford Credit on January 20, to find out where his car was located. On January 21, Winson called Ford Credit to complain that his vehicle had been repossessed even though he was current on his payments; he demanded the return of the vehicle. Ford Credit could not locate the vehicle for several days and did not return it to Winson until 7 days later; January 27, 1992. When Ford Credit returned the car to Winson, he determined that it had been cosmetically and mechanically damaged and refused to make any further payments to Ford Credit until they agreed to repair the damages; which Winson estimated to be $6,800. Ford refused to repair the vehicle and, in March of 1992, filed a lawsuit in the Pasadena Municipal Court for claim and delivery and a deficiency judgment. The Municipal Court granted Ford a writ of possession. Winson Cross-complained for damages for conversion and had the Municipal Court case transferred to Superior Court. In the meantime, Ford again repossessed the car through the marshal's office on July 13, 1992 and sold it at auction on August 28, 1992 through the Los Angeles Dealers' Auto Auction. The vehicle was sold for $7,800 less than the balance due on the note. Ford pressed its claim against Winson for the $7,800 deficiency; and Winson pursued his Cross-complaint against Ford for damages.
Settlement Discussions
Winson contends his demand was $25,000 net and Ford Credit offered to dismiss its deficiency claim and further offered to pay $5,000 as nuisance value to Winson on his Cross-complaint.
Damages
Plaintiff/Cross-defendant claimed $7,800 deficiency on the remainder of the loan. Defendant/Cross-complainant's damages claim was not specified.
Result
On Winson's Cross-complaint, the jury returned a general verdict of $80,000 for economic and emotional distress damages and, after deliberating on punitive damages, returned a verdict against punitive damages.
Other Information
Ford's deficiency Complaint and Winson's Cross-complaint for conversion were tried concurrently, but Ford's Complaint was to be determined by the Court and Winson's Cross-complaint was to be determined by the jury. On Ford's deficiency Complaint, the Court granted Defendant Winson's motion for nonsuit on the ground that Ford did not comply with the California Automobile Sales Finance Act. A prior arbitration by Robert Charbonneau resulted in a Plaintiff/Cross-defendant award in the amount of $3,000; trial de novo by Defendant/Cross-complainant. This case was filed on March 31, 1992; three years, one month and two days prior to this result.
Deliberation
9 hours compensatory, 9 hours punitive
Poll
9-3 conversion, 9-3 punitives
Length
10 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390