Trial Court Wrongly Analyzed Rees-Levering Motor Vehicle Sales and Finance Act.

Plaintiff filed a class action pursuant to the Rees-Levering Motor Vehicle Sales and Finance Act [Civil Code section 2981] on behalf of those who had their vehicles repossessed by or voluntarily surrendered to a car dealership. Plaintiff had missed several car payments and voluntarily surrendered her car, whereupon she was sent a Notice of Intention to Dispose of Motor Vehicle [NOI]. The NOI stated plaintiff had the right to redeem the vehicle by paying the total outstanding amount due [$19,420.55] or she had the right to reinstate the installment contract and obtain a return of the vehicle if she paid $1,557.03 within 15 days. The NOI mentioned there were other costs and stated:  “To learn the exact amount you must pay, call us at the telephone number listed above.” More than 60 days later, the dealership sent a letter to plaintiff informing her the vehicle had been sold for $6,187.50 and the balance due from her was $5,574.65. The trial court denied plaintiff’s motion to certify her class action, and the appellate court reversed and remanded the action, ordering the trial court to correctly analyze the Rees-Levering Act. Ramirez v. Balboa Thrift and Loan  (Cal. App. Fourth Dist., Div. 1; April 22, 2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 765.