Repo Error Remedies

On February 5, Senator Elizabeth Warren announced she had “launched a probe” regarding “harmful anti-consumer practices as auto repossessions skyrocket to levels not seen since the 2008 financial crisis.” In a letter received by AFSA, Senator Warren contends that there is something wrong with repossession activity, and that consumers suffer.

All stakeholders agree that vehicle repossession is disruptive to consumers. But Senator Warren’s letter overlooks how existing laws provide ample remedies for faulty repossession.

Consider the case of Adrianna Shelton, a consumer living in Waynesboro, Virginia. She financed a vehicle that was later repossessed in error. She sought compensation for the wrongful repossession and won [Shelton v. Marshall, 724 F.Supp.3d 532 (2024)]. The court noted that a wrongful repossession creates tort liability for the creditor and repo staff, as well as liability under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Uniform Commercial Code Article 9. The vehicle Ms. Shelton purchased cost $6,000. The court granted Ms. Shelton:

$6.423.28 in actual damages
$3,000 for emotional distress
$1,000 in statutory FDCPA damages
$410.96 in statutory UCC damages
$28,239.84 in punitive damages (3x the actual damages for the tort claim)

Neither industry, consumers, nor policymakers are indifferent toward the risk of wrongful repossession. Vehicle finance companies do all they can to reduce the risk to zero, but errors occur from time to time. As shown in the case of Ms. Shelton, existing law protects consumers whose vehicles are repossessed in error. The availability of these remedies helps protect consumers and incentivize vehicle finance companies to work with consumers to avoid repossession and ensure that all repossession activity is lawful. The system is working.

February 12th, 2026

Repo Error Remedies

Repo Error Remedies

Recent Posts

Archives