615 F.2d 423 (7th Cir. 1980), 78-1814, Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co.

Docket Nº78-1814, 78-1813.
Citation615 F.2d 423
Party NameRobert N. SHARP, Mary Sharp, and James S. Brannon, Trustee in Bankruptcy for Robert N. Sharp, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO. and Louis Lakis Ford, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. Bruce CONGER and Lucille Conger, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FURNITURE FREIGHT SALES and General Finance Corporation, Defendants-Appellees.
Case DateJanuary 15, 1980
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Page 423

615 F.2d 423 (7th Cir. 1980)

Robert N. SHARP, Mary Sharp, and James S. Brannon, Trustee

in Bankruptcy for Robert N. Sharp, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO. and Louis Lakis Ford, Inc.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Bruce CONGER and Lucille Conger, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

FURNITURE FREIGHT SALES and General Finance Corporation,

Defendants-Appellees.

Nos. 78-1814, 78-1813.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

January 15, 1980

Argued April 16, 1979.

Page 424

Barry M. Barash, Galesburg, Ill., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Aaron J. Kramer, Wm. T. Kirby, Chicago, Ill., Barney Olson II, Galesburg, Ill., Wm. V. Altenberger, Peoria, Ill., for defendants-appellees.

Before SWYGERT, SPRECHER and BAUER, Circuit Judges.

BAUER, Circuit Judge.

The plaintiffs-appellants in these consolidated cases appeal from two Decisions and Orders of the district court granting summary judgments in favor of the defendants-appellees on the appellants' complaints for alleged violations of the Truth in Lending provisions of the Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601 et seq. ("Act"), and the regulations adopted pursuant thereto, 12 C.F.R. §§ 226.1 et seq. ("Regulation Z"). The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court erred in holding that the denomination of the appellees Ford Motor Credit Company and General Finance Corporation as "assignees" rather than as "creditors" on the disclosure statements made in connection with the installment credit sales to the appellants did not constitute a violation of the Act or Regulation Z. 1 We conclude that the identities of Ford Credit and General Finance were adequately disclosed to the appellants in compliance with the statute and regulations, and accordingly affirm the judgments appealed from for the reasons set forth below.

Page 425

I

The retail installment credit transactions underlying the complaints in these cases were essentially identical in all respects material to the disposition of this appeal. Appellee Ford Motor Credit Company provides financing to Ford dealers by extending operating and inventory loans, and by purchasing retail installment contracts for the sale of automobiles by its dealers. In connection with the latter program, Ford Credit provides to its dealers for their optional use forms of credit applications, installment sales contracts, and rate charts for computing finance charges. Although the dealers negotiate all terms of the installment contracts directly with their customers, the dealers, pursuant to the provisions of the Ford contract form and a standing arrangement with Ford Credit, typically assign the executed contracts to Ford Credit within a few days after the sales are consummated. Ford Credit is usually unaware of any specific sale until the contract is presented for assignment; however, dealers may obtain prior approval for customers with marginal credit ratings. Ford Credit is not obligated to purchase any contracts from its dealers, but it ordinarily rejects only a minor percentage of those proffered. Appellee General Finance Corporation undertakes similar financing arrangements with various retail dealers in consumer goods.

Appellants Robert and Mary Sharp sought credit from appellee Louis Lakis Ford, Inc. for the purpose of purchasing a new Ford automobile from Lakis. Appellants Bruce and Lucille Conger sought credit from appellee Furniture Freight Sales for the purpose of purchasing certain household goods and furniture. Accordingly, the Sharps completed a credit application on a form supplied to Lakis by Ford Credit and the Congers completed a credit application on a General Finance form provided to Furniture Freight Sales. The finance companies approved the submitted credit applications and informed the dealers that they would purchase the proposed installment contracts upon execution by the appellants and the dealers. The executed contracts were subsequently assigned by the dealers to the finance companies in accordance with the assignment provisions contained therein. The finance companies remitted cash less discounts to the dealers, notified the appellants of the assignments, and provided...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • 713 F.2d 225 (7th Cir. 1983), 81-1897, De La Fuente v. Stokely-Van Camp, Inc.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
    • June 29, 1983
    ...179, 184 n. 8 (7th Cir.1983); Phillips v. Hunter Trails Community Ass'n, 685 F.2d 184, 191 (7th Cir.1982); Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 615 F.2d 423, 424 n. 1 (7th Cir.1980). Even if we did reach the issue of whether class actions are permissible under FLCRA, we would find no merit in ap......
  • 559 F.Supp. 273 (S.D.N.Y. 1983), 80 Civ. 4431, Kramer v. Marine Midland Bank
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Southern District of New York
    • February 24, 1983
    ...bank provided is at least as generous as that found satisfactory in many cases. See, e.g., Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co. (7th Cir.1980) 615 F.2d 423, 426; Augusta v. Marshall Motor Co. (6th Cir.1979) 614 F.2d 1085, 1086. Accordingly, we find plaintiff's claim that the bank was not properly......
  • 8 F.Supp.2d 1031 (N.D.Ill. 1998), 96 C 7091, Greisz v. Household Bank (Illinois)
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 7th Circuit Northern District of Illinois
    • March 25, 1998
    ...customers with understandable disclosure statements."); Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 452 F.Supp. 465, 468 (N.D.Ill.1978), aff'd, 615 F.2d 423 (7th Cir. "[I]n implementing TILA, Congress 'delegated expansive authority to the Federal Reserve Board to elaborate and expand the lega......
  • 673 F.2d 256 (9th Cir. 1981), 77-2965, Boncyk v. Cavanaugh Motors
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
    • September 28, 1981
    ...____________ Title ___ The use of the word "creditor" was held not to be required. Id.; accord, Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 615 F.2d 423, 426 (7th Cir. 1980); Augusta v. Marshall Motor Co., 614 F.2d 1085, 1086 (6th Cir. 1979). The Supreme Court in Ford Motor Credit Company v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • 713 F.2d 225 (7th Cir. 1983), 81-1897, De La Fuente v. Stokely-Van Camp, Inc.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
    • June 29, 1983
    ...179, 184 n. 8 (7th Cir.1983); Phillips v. Hunter Trails Community Ass'n, 685 F.2d 184, 191 (7th Cir.1982); Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 615 F.2d 423, 424 n. 1 (7th Cir.1980). Even if we did reach the issue of whether class actions are permissible under FLCRA, we would find no merit in ap......
  • 559 F.Supp. 273 (S.D.N.Y. 1983), 80 Civ. 4431, Kramer v. Marine Midland Bank
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 2nd Circuit Southern District of New York
    • February 24, 1983
    ...bank provided is at least as generous as that found satisfactory in many cases. See, e.g., Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co. (7th Cir.1980) 615 F.2d 423, 426; Augusta v. Marshall Motor Co. (6th Cir.1979) 614 F.2d 1085, 1086. Accordingly, we find plaintiff's claim that the bank was not properly......
  • 8 F.Supp.2d 1031 (N.D.Ill. 1998), 96 C 7091, Greisz v. Household Bank (Illinois)
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 7th Circuit Northern District of Illinois
    • March 25, 1998
    ...customers with understandable disclosure statements."); Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 452 F.Supp. 465, 468 (N.D.Ill.1978), aff'd, 615 F.2d 423 (7th Cir. "[I]n implementing TILA, Congress 'delegated expansive authority to the Federal Reserve Board to elaborate and expand the lega......
  • 673 F.2d 256 (9th Cir. 1981), 77-2965, Boncyk v. Cavanaugh Motors
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
    • September 28, 1981
    ...____________ Title ___ The use of the word "creditor" was held not to be required. Id.; accord, Sharp v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 615 F.2d 423, 426 (7th Cir. 1980); Augusta v. Marshall Motor Co., 614 F.2d 1085, 1086 (6th Cir. 1979). The Supreme Court in Ford Motor Credit Company v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results