CopyCited 1 times | Published | United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 1, 2001 Bankr. LEXIS 1413, 2001 WL 1326912
...The Debtors filed a petition under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code on February 16, 2001. On March 5, 2001, TranSouth filed a proof of claim (Claim No. 1) in the Debtors' bankruptcy case. Claim No. 1 was filed as a secured claim in the amount of $6,065.39. Discussion The Debtors focus on § 520.08(1)(4), Florida Statutes: 520.08....
...hat the Debtors have simply taken the figure computed as the annual percentage rate in the contract and stated it in terms of "dollars per $100." The Debtors allege that the retail installment contract that they signed on September 8, 2000, violates § 520.08(1)(d) because the finance charge set forth in the contract exceeds the rate of $17 per $100 per year....
...TranSouth also acknowledges that the statute "specifies the maximum permitted finance charge on motor vehicle sales." (TranSouth's Memorandum of Law, p. 2). In response to the Debtors' Complaint, however, TranSouth asserts that "the critical inquiry is how the finance charge is to be calculated pursuant to § 520.08(1)(d)." (TranSouth's Memorandum of Law, p. 3). According to TranSouth, the Debtors' method of determining whether a finance charge exceeds the statutory limit is inaccurate. TranSouth asserts that "when properly calculated in accordance with Section 520.08, the interest rate charged the Plaintiffs on the retail installment sales contract makes the finance charge less than the statutory cap established by the Legislature." (TranSouth's Memorandum of Law, p....
...Specifically, TranSouth asserts that the "finance charge on this loan is actually $16.22 per $100.00 per year, well below the statutory cap." (TranSouth's Memorandum of Law, p. 3). The Issue Whether the contract includes a finance charge greater than that allowed by § 520.08, Florida Statutes, depends on the method of calculating the maximum finance charge allowed under that statute....
...an, the maximum finance charge allowed by the statute is one amount. If the maximum finance charge is calculated by applying $17 per $100 of the outstanding balance over the term of the loan, the maximum finance charge is another amount. The Statute Section 520.08(1)(d), Florida Statutes, must be read in the context of other provisions *885 of the Florida Motor Vehicle Retail Sales Finance Act. CHAPTER 520. RETAIL INSTALLMENT SALES PART I. MOTOR VEHICLE SALES FINANCE 520.08....
...Any used motor vehicle not in Class 2 or Class 3 and designated by the manufacturer by a year model more than four years prior to the year in which the sale is made $17 per $100 per year. (2) Such finance charge shall be computed on the amount financed as determined under §
520.07(2). . . . . . . . .
520.085....
...subject to the following provisions: (1) Instead of a finance charge computed on the amount financed as determined under s.
520.07(2), the seller may compute the finance charge at a simple-interest rate equivalent to the finance charge permitted by s.
520.08 on the unpaid balance as it changes from time to time or by any other method....
...Adding any other amounts that are financed by the creditor and that are not part of the finance charge; and 3. Subtracting any prepaid finance charge. (b) Finance charge. The "finance charge," using that term and a brief description such as "the dollar amount the credit will cost you." Section
520.08(2) directs that the finance charge be computed on the amount financed, and the amount financed is to be determined as directed by §
520.07(2). Section
520.085 provides that the finance charge may be computed at the simple interest rate equivalent to the charge permitted by §
520.08, on the unpaid balance as it changes from time to time. When §
520.08(1) and §
520.085 are read together, it is clear that the method of computing the maximum finance charge allowed under §
520.08(1)(d) is to determine $17 per $100 of the amount financed for the term of the loan. If the maximum finance charge were limited by the application of $17 per $100 to the outstanding balance over the term of the loan, there would be no need for the alternative provisions of §
520.085. Moreover, §
520.085 demonstrates that the Florida legislature clearly knew how to describe a charge based on an outstanding balance as that balance changes from time to time, and the Florida legislature included such a provision with its authorization of a si...
...uld be construed as a whole or in its entirety, and the legislative intent gathered from the entire statute rather than from any one part thereof.") The Court concludes that the appropriate method of calculating the maximum finance charge allowed by § 520.08 is to apply $17 per $100 of the amount financed for the term of the loan. When the maximum finance charge is calculated in this manner, it is clear that the amount provided in the contract entered by the Debtors does not violate § 520.08, Florida Statutes. Cases At the hearing on TranSouth's Motion to Dismiss, the parties jointly represented that no judicial decisions have been reported in Florida to assist the Court in determining how to calculate the rate of a finance charge under § 520.08....
...n the inception or execution of the contract, rather than on the basis of descending balances. Courts in other states have also construed statutes that established rates for maximum finance charges according to a formula similar to that set forth in § 520.08....
...ame calculation that the Texas court performed in Yates Ford. Application In the case at issue, the principal amount financed by the Debtors was $6,524.35, and the total amount due under the contract was to be paid in forty-two monthly installments. Section 520.08 of the Florida Statutes provides that finance charges shall not exceed the rate of "$17 per $100 per year ....
...e allowed on the Debtors' contract is $3,881.78. The finance charge actually contained in the contract was $3,704.33. Since the actual finance charge is less than the maximum charge permitted pursuant to the computation, the contract did not violate § 520.08 of the Florida Motor Vehicle Retail Sales Finance Act....
...2435 = $16.22 The result of this calculation ($16.22 per $100 per year) represents the rate of the actual finance charge contained in the Debtors' contract. This actual rate, of course, is less than the rate of $17 per *889 $100 per year provided by § 520.08 as the maximum charge allowed. Accordingly, it is clear that the finance charge contained in the Debtors' contract did not exceed the limitation set forth in § 520.08 of the Florida Statutes....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...eceptive Trade
Practices Act (“FDUTPA”) section
501.201 pertaining to
both trucks;
2) violation FDUTPA section
501.976 on the Second Truck;
3) violation of the Florida Motor Vehicle Retail Sales Finance
Act section
520.08 on the First Truck and violation of
section
520.07 on the Second Truck; and
4) fraud in the inducement.
Maroone appeals the damages awarded on Counts 2, 3, and 4, but it does
not appeal Count 1....
...payment and other payments on the First Truck.
2
Alvarado sued Maroone in late 2003, amending his complaint twice.
The third amended complaint alleged four counts for violations of FDUTPA
on both trucks, a violation of sections
520.08 and
520.07 on the First and
Second Truck, respectively, and fraud in the inducement.
The jury returned a verdict, finding Maroone:
(1) did not violate section
501.201 on the First Truck but had
violated section
501.976 on the Second Truck, awarding
Alvarado $6,768.76;
(2) willfully violated section
520.08 by charging above the
finance charge limit on the First Truck, awarding Alvarado
$1,858.85;
(3) willfully violated section
520.07 by failing to provide an
itemization of the finance charges on the Se...
...2d at 454. There simply was no competent, substantial
evidence to support the proper measure of damages, and the jury’s
ultimate damage awards pertaining to Count 2 must be reversed.
4
The Section
520.07 and Section
520.08 Claims
As to Count 3, Alvarado claimed a violation of sections
520.07 and
520.08 based on the preparation of the RISC on the Second Truck and the
preparation of the first RISC on the First Truck, respectively....
...3d 322, 327 n.3 (Fla. 4th DCA
2018)—to prove his claims under that statute, Alvarado was not entitled
to damages. We agree.
Alvarado’s claims under these sections fail for two reasons. First, there
was no delinquency. Second, and more importantly, section 520.08 limits
finance charges on new and used motor vehicles depending on the age of
the vehicle....
...he
maximum finance charge to $15.00 per $100.00 per year on year-models
“not more than 4 years prior to the year in which the sale is made.”
Because the First Truck was ultimately determined to be a 1998 vehicle,
the maximum finance charge under section 520.08(1)(c) was $15.00 per
$100.00 per year.
In Nolden, we explained the “formula for calculating the finance charge
in terms of dollars per $100.00 per year.” Nolden, 244 So....
...period is divided by the amount financed divided by one hundred. 3 Id.
Alvarado did not use the formula provided in Nolden but instead used his
own calculation, resulting in a purported finance charge of 27.95% on the
First Truck—well over the 11% limit provided by section 520.08(1)(b) or
the 15% limit provided by section 520.08(1)(c)....
...section
520.07 by failing to disclose the $12,000.00 discount on the
Second Truck on the second RISC when it reduced the cost of the truck
by the original $12,000.00 down payment on the First Truck. Alvarado’s
counsel asked for $297.17. Even if this penalty was wrongly derived from
section
520.08, as was done with the First Truck, the wrong formula was
used to derive the figure.
Under the penalties section found in section
520.12(2) applicable to
violations of section
520.08:
In the case of a willful violation of this part with respect to any
retail installment sale, the buyer may recover from the person
committing such violation, or may set off or counterclaim in
any action agains...
...ce of any diminution in the
value of the Second Truck, we reverse the FDUTPA liability and damages
awarded in Count 2 and remand for the court to vacate that award.
Because Alvarado used the incorrect formula for the violation of sections
520.07 and
520.08 in Count 3, we also reverse the finding of liability and
damages on that count....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...of the parties, and the conduct of the parties. B. Rules of Statutory Construction Compel the Conclusion That the Legal Interest Rate Set Forth in Chapter 520 Applies to This Transaction, and Not the 18% Interest Rate Contained in the Usury Statute Section 520.08 identifies four classes of vehicles and sets forth a sliding scale which allows the imposition of a higher finance charge for transactions involving older vehicles. For the buyer's car, Chapter 520 dictated that the finance *327 charge "shall not exceed ... $17 per $100 per year." § 520.08(1)(d), Fla. Stat. (2009). In lieu of a "finance charge," Chapter 520 permits imposition of "simple interest" so long as the simple interest rate does not exceed the finance charge permitted by section 520.08 on the unpaid balance. § 520.085, Fla....
...the buyer for the deficiency. Id. The buyer argued that the contract was usurious "on its face." Id. The court disagreed, finding that the contract was controlled by Chapter 520 and that the finance charges were not in excess of those authorized by section 520.08....
...ear Financed See In re Corcoran ,
268 B.R. 882 , 888 (M.D. Fla. 2001). Plugging in the numbers in this case, leads to the conclusion that the finance charge in this case was $16.48 per $100 per year, which is less than the $17.00 per year allowed by section
520.08(1)(d) : $8163.71 ÷ $11,883.01 = $16.48/year 4.17 years $100
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...of the parties, and the conduct of the parties.
B. Rules of Statutory Construction Compel the Conclusion That the Legal
Interest Rate Set Forth in Chapter 520 Applies to This Transaction, and Not
the 18% Interest Rate Contained in the Usury Statute
Section 520.08 identifies four classes of vehicles and sets forth a sliding
scale which allows the imposition of a higher finance charge for
transactions involving older vehicles. For the buyer’s car, Chapter 520
dictated that the finance charge “shall not exceed . . . $17 per $100 per
year.” § 520.08(1)(d), Fla. Stat. (2009). In lieu of a “finance charge,”
Chapter 520 permits imposition of “simple interest” so long as the simple
interest rate does not exceed the finance charge permitted by section
520.08 on the unpaid balance. § 520.085, Fla....
...Financed
See In re Corcoran,
268 B.R. 882, 888 (M.D. Fla. 2010). Plugging in the numbers
in this case, leads to the conclusion that the finance charge in this case was
$16.48 per $100 per year, which is less than the $17.00 per year allowed by
section
520.08(1)(d):
$8163.71 ÷ $11,883.01 = $16.48/year
4.17 years $100
-6-
Under the usury statute, interest exceeding 18% is usurious....
...buyer for
the deficiency. Id. The buyer argued that the contract was usurious “on
its face.” Id. The court disagreed, finding that the contract was controlled
by Chapter 520 and that the finance charges were not in excess of those
authorized by section 520.08....
