Bell v. Loosier of Albany, Inc.
| Decision Date | 08 September 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 30868,30868 |
| Parties | Lucy Ella BELL v. LOOSIER OF ALBANY, INC. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Sharon L. Tucker, Dublin, Charles M. Baird, H. Winthrop Pettigrew, Atlanta, for appellant.
Black & Black, Eugene C. Black, Jr., Albany, for appellee.
Robert N. Dokson, Davis A. Webster, Robert E. Stagg, Atlanta, amicus curiae.
We granted this application for writ of certiorari to review the judgment and Division One of the opinion of the Court of Appeals in Bell v. Loosier of Albany, Inc., 137 Ga.App. 50, 222 S.E.2d 839 (1975). The Court of Appeals divided 6-3 on the issue that we have under review. See also the subsequent decisions of the Court of Appeals that relate to the issue under review: Harrison v. Goodyear Service Stores, 137 Ga.App. 223, 223 S.E.2d 261 (1976); and Douglas v. Dixie Finance Corp., 139 Ga.App. 251, 228 S.E.2d 144 (1976).
The facts in this case are adequately set forth in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, Bell v. Loosier of Albany, Inc., supra. The issue posed by Division One of that opinion is one of statutory construction: Had the seller, by accelerating and filing a complaint in the trial court against the buyer, 'charged' the buyer rates in excess of those provided for in Code Ann. Sec. 96-903(d) so as to invoke the penalty provisions of Code Ann. Sec. 96-910(b)?
We hold that acceleration by the seller under the contract involved in this case plus the filing of a complaint in the trial court against the buyer seeking recovery of the balance due, without deducting therefrom unearned rates that would have been earned except for acceleration, amounted to a 'charge' by the seller in violation of the Retail Installment and Home Solicitation Sales Act.
The contract in this case, when entered into by the parties, did not violate the Act; the rates charged over the entire term of the contract did not violate the Act; the presence of the acceleration clause in the contract did not violate the Act; but acceleration by the seller plus the filing of a complaint against the buyer which sought recovery of unearned and therefore excessive rates amounted to a 'charge' by the seller that violated the Act. And that 'charge' invoked the penalty provision: 'A violation of Sec. 96-903(d) shall bar recovery of any finance charge, delinquency or collection charge on the contract.' Code Ann. Sec. 96-910(b).
The judgment of the Court of Appeals, which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Watson v. Union Camp Corp., CV493-124.
... ... PIPING SYSTEMS, INC. and Richard Barrow, Third Party Defendants ... No. CV493-124 ... United ... See Glover v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 229 Ga. 874, 195 S.E.2d 11, 11-12 (1972) (contrasting ... Frazer v. City of Albany, 245 Ga. 399, 265 S.E.2d 581, 583 (1980). The Frazer court considered two ... ...
-
Ford v. Termplan, Inc. of Georgia, Civ. A. No. C78-1907.
...in 1967, requires a different result. See Bell v. Loosier of Albany, Inc., 137 Ga.App. 50, 222 S.E.2d 839 (1975), vacated 237 Ga. 585, 229 S.E.2d 374 (1976), on remand, 140 Ga.App. 393, 231 S.E.2d 142 (1976). The Court believes that judicial construction of a different statute, enacted at a......
-
Bozeman v. Tifton Federal Sav. and Loan Ass'n, 63843
...Sales Act (RIHSSA), Code Ann. § 96-901 et seq. Following the buyer's default, the plaintiff-seller in Bell v. Loosier of Albany, Inc., 237 Ga. 585, 229 S.E.2d 374 (1976) brought suit for an accelerated amount computed under the Rule of 78. The seller later amended its complaint to deduct th......
-
Rigdon v. Walker Sales & Service, Inc.
...to 'Let the seller beware,' " Bell v. Loosier of Albany, 137 Ga.App. 50, 57, 222 S.E.2d 839 (1975), vacated on other grounds, 237 Ga. 585, 229 S.E.2d 374 (1976), and is applicable to retail installment contracts involving the sale of "all personalty when purchased primarily for personal, fa......