The American Recovery Association recently posted a message to the industry headed “Compliance check: Are you inadvertently crossing lines you didn’t know existed? ”. “Quick reminder of what’s NEVER okay in repossession work:”
After listing 5 bullet points they stated, “These aren’t just “best practices” they’re legal requirements that protect both you and the industry.”
I have no problem with bullet points 1. “Entering locked garages or secured areas”, 2. “Using or threatening physical force”, and 5. “Misrepresenting yourself or your authority” as these are “GIVENS” that any professional recovery agent should know and follow.
I do however take issue with bullet points 3. “Breaking into vehicles to retrieve them” and 4. “Taking personal property that’s not collateral “.
I am amazed, bewildered, and deeply concerned by these two statements which were published by a major national trade association, and I wonder whether this article was written by AI or someone who has never worked a repossession in their life as these two actions are taken on almost every repossession and are a long recognized part of the repossession process.
I also think someone should be proofreading these messages for content and factualness before they are circulated and memorialized on the internet.
The ”DOMINO EFFECT” of these two statements published by the American Recovery Association, a national trade association can be far reaching when a recovery agency is sued by a consumer attorney representing a consumer who uses the fact that the repossessor “Broke into the vehicle” in order to secure the steering wheel for towing or to inventory the personal property as a first cause of action … which brings up the second cause of action, “The repossessor took my personal items in the vehicle which were not part of the collateral”.
The attorney bringing the action on behalf of the consumer can now clearly show where ARA, claiming to be “The World’s Largest Association of Recovery Professionals” has published a statement that these two actions” aren’t just “best practices”, they’re legal requirements… “
As a recognized “EXPERT WITNESSES”, who have collectively written opinions and provided testimony in over 100+ wrongful repossession litigations across the nation, Mark Lacek and I can clearly see where this type of public posting can and will precipitate a multitude of claims where the consumer attorneys can make use of these two unfounded but published and memorialized statements by a major national trade association.
We, the following signors, would strongly urge, on behalf of the entire recovery industry, that ARA, their Board of Directors, their attorney, and their publicist company print an open retraction with clarifications related to these two unfounded statements and carefully analyze any statements related to best practices or legal requirements they might post or publish in any form in the future.
Respectfully Submitted,
Ron L. Brown, EAGLE GROUP XX/USA, LITIGATION REPOSSESSION EXPERT
George Badeen, PRESIDENT, ALLIED FINANCE ADJUSTERS
Mark Lacek, NATIONALL Y RECOGNIZED LITIGATION REPOSSESSION EXPERT
Creating Dire Consequences for the Recovery Industry Agencies – Creating Dire Consequences for the Recovery Industry Agencies – Creating Dire Consequences for the Recovery Industry Agencies
Creating Dire Consequences for the Recovery Industry Agencies – Eagle Group XX – Eagle Group XX – Allied Finance Adjusters – AFA – Repossess – Repossession – Repossession Agency – Repossessor – Repossession
More Stories
Bad Apples in the Repossession Industry
Why Self-Help Repossession Is Taken for Granted — and Why Losing It Would Hurt Consumers Most
A Necessary Distinction: Financial Oversight vs. Financial Control
When Oversight Becomes Overreach: Why Demanding Subcontractor Financials Is Wrong
Outdated Contracts Are Costing You
Snitching vs. Standing on Principle: Calling Out Bad Actors in the Repossession Industry