Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Dale (In Re Dale)
2009 WL 2857998, 582 F.3d 568 (2009)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The "hanging paragraph" in 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a) prevents the bifurcation of a creditor's purchase-money security interest in a motor vehicle acquired for a debtor's personal use within 910 days of bankruptcy filing, and this interest extends to sums financing negative equity in a trade-in vehicle, gap insurance, and extended warranties as these are considered "purchase-money obligations" under state Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) definitions.
Facts:
- Rebecca Ann Dale purchased a 2006 Ford F150 pick-up truck for her personal use from Gullo Ford Mercury of Conroe, Texas.
- Ford Motor Credit Company, LLC (Ford) financed the sale, retaining a security interest in the new vehicle to secure the unpaid balance.
- As part of the transaction, Dale traded in a 2003 Ford Expedition which had a negative equity of $4,760, meaning Dale owed $4,760 more on the vehicle than its market value.
- Ford paid off this negative equity, as required by Texas law, and included this sum in the new vehicle's total sale price.
- The total sale price also included a gap insurance premium of $576.84, taxes totaling $1,450.03, fees totaling $162.73, and an extended warranty charge of $3,030.
- Dale financed the entire amount, totaling $48,271.02, through Ford.
- Less than one year after purchasing the 2006 Ford F150, Dale filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy.
Procedural Posture:
- Rebecca Ann Dale filed a Chapter 13 reorganization plan, proposing to pay Ford Motor Credit Company, LLC (Ford) $23,900 as a secured claim for her 2006 Ford F150, with the remaining $17,934.94 treated as an unsecured claim.
- Ford objected to Dale's proposed plan, filing a proof of claim for the full $41,834.94 as secured.
- The bankruptcy court declined to approve Dale's Chapter 13 plan and sustained Ford's objection in part, ruling that Ford's purchase-money security interest did not extend to the portions of the loan attributable to negative equity, gap insurance, and the extended warranty, deeming these portions unsecured.
- Dale appealed the bankruptcy court's ruling to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Dale as appellant, Ford as appellee).
- The district court reversed the bankruptcy court's decision, holding that Ford had a purchase-money security interest in the entire Sales Contract, including the portions attributable to negative equity, gap insurance, and the extended warranty.
- Dale appealed the district court's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Dale as appellant, Ford as appellee).
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the purchase-money security interest exception, found in the "hanging paragraph" of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a), apply to portions of a vehicle loan attributable to the pay-off of negative equity in a trade-in, gap insurance, and an extended warranty?
Opinions:
Majority - Haynes, Circuit Judge
Yes, the purchase-money security interest exception contained in the "hanging paragraph" of 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a) applies to those portions of a claim attributable to the pay-off of negative equity in a trade-in vehicle, gap insurance, and an extended warranty. The court affirmed the district court's reversal, adopting the emerging majority position among circuit courts. Since the Bankruptcy Code does not define "purchase-money security interest," the court looked to state UCC law, specifically Texas Business and Commerce Code § 9.103. Under Texas law, a "purchase-money obligation" includes "an obligation . . . incurred as all or part of the price of the collateral or for value given to enable the debtor to acquire rights in or the use of the collateral if the value is in fact so used." The court emphasized that Official Comment 3 to the UCC explicitly expands "price" and "value given to enable" to include "obligations for expenses incurred in connection with acquiring rights in the collateral, sales taxes, duties, finance charges, interest, freight charges, costs of storage in transit, demurrage, administrative charges, expenses of collection and enforcement, attorney’s fees, and other similar obligations." The court found that negative equity financing, gap insurance, and extended warranties fit within this broad definition because they are expenses incurred in connection with acquiring rights in the collateral or constitute "value given to enable" the debtor to acquire the new vehicle, dispelling any notion that "price" is limited to the vehicle's tag price alone. The court also noted that from a practical perspective, enabling the transaction to occur is indistinguishable from enabling the debtor to acquire rights in the collateral.
Analysis:
This case significantly broadens the scope of a creditor's purchase-money security interest under the "hanging paragraph" of the Bankruptcy Code, especially concerning vehicle financing. By including negative equity, gap insurance, and extended warranties within the definition of a "purchase-money obligation," the decision strengthens creditors' positions in Chapter 13 bankruptcies involving recent car purchases. It curtails debtors' ability to "strip down" these additional debts, ensuring creditors receive the full contract price rather than just the vehicle's current depreciated value. This ruling aligns the Fifth Circuit with an emerging majority of circuits and provides a more uniform interpretation of a key BAPCPA provision, impacting how car loans are treated in bankruptcy nationwide.
