Frazier v. Courtesy Finance Co., 49388
| Decision Date | 11 July 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 49388,No. 3,49388,3 |
| Citation | 208 S.E.2d 175,132 Ga.App. 365 |
| Parties | . Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Richard D. Ellenberg, Atlanta, for appellants.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Courtesy Finance Company brought an action against Robert Lee Frazier and Christine Frazier alleging it was duly licensed under the Georgia Industrial Loan Act and seeking to recover $1,480.50 principal due on a loan agreement, dated April 30, 1971, together with attorney fees pursuant to a notice given therefor. A copy of the loan agreement and the notice were attached. The notice of attorney fees also contained a notice declaring the balance of principal due and payable. Upon failure of the defendants to answer, a judgment for the amount sued for was taken by default. Subsequently, defendants filed a motion to set aside such judgment on the grounds that the loan agreement on its face showed that it was in violation of the Industrial Loan Act and, therefore, void because of the following acceleration clause contained in the loan agreement, under the portion thereof designated as the note: 'Failure to pay any payment promptly when due, time being of the essence of this contract, shall at the option of the Holder, hereof, with or without notice, render all remaining payments due and payable.' (Emphasis supplied.) The trial judge overruled the motion and the defendants appeal to this court, in which court the appellee made no appearance. Held:
1. We are not concerned here with whether the lender, by the acceleration made, is attempting to collect more than is authorized by the Act, or whether the acceleration made was authorized by an acceleration provision in the security agreement portion of the loan agreement; but we are here concerned with whether the terms of the loan agreement, as quoted above, by the acceleration provided for, authorized a collection of more than the Industrial Loan Act permitted. See Lawrimore v. Sun Finance Co., 131 Ga.App. 96(1), 205 S.E.2d 110. This calls for a construction of the acceleration clause agreement above quoted. The amount of the loan, as shown on the face of the instrument, was $1,448.28. The amount of the note shown on the face of the instrument was $1,680 (being 2 years interest at 8% added on) payable in 24 monthly installments of $70 each. Each payment necessarily included a portion of the interest, a contract for the acceleration of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bell v. Loosier of Albany, Inc., 50840
...Corp., 131 Ga.App. 282, 205 S.E.2d 526; affirmed G. A. C. Finance Corp. v. Hardy, 232 Ga. 632, 208 S.E.2d 453; Frazier v. Courtesy Finance Co., 132 Ga.App. 365, 208 S.E.2d 175. Those actions were brought under the Industrial Loan Act, Code Ann. Ch. 25-3 (Ga.L.1955, pp. 431 et seq.). This ac......
-
Blazer Financial Services, Inc. v. Dukes
...and Guyton v. Martin Finance Corp., 135 Ga.App. 62, 217 S.E.2d 390 (1975) ("all remaining installments"); Frazier v. Courtesy Finance Co., 132 Ga.App. 365, 208 S.E.2d 175 (1974) ("all payments"); Beneficial Finance Co. of Atlanta v. Treff, 134 Ga.App. 17, 213 S.E.2d 126 (1975), cert. denied......
-
Liberty Loan Corp. of Shoals v. Childs
...Corp. v. Hardy, 232 Ga. 632, 208 S.E.2d 453; Lawrimore v. Sun Finance Co. 131 Ga.App. 96, 205 S.E.2d 110; Frazier v. Courtesy Finance Co., 132 Ga.App. 365, 208 S.E.2d 175. A related line of problems dealing with usurious interest is found in the cases dealing with accelerated payments under......
-
Harris v. Avco Finance Corp.
...at once due and collectible.' An almost identical clause was held to violate the Georgia Industrial Loan Act in Frazier v. Courtesy Finance Co., 132 Ga.App. 365, 208 S.E.2d 175. Accord: Lawrimore v. Sun Finance Co., 131 Ga.App. 96, 205 S.E.2d 110, affirmed Sun Finance Co. v. Lawrimore, 232 ......