In this case an arbitration was filed against the dealer because it was alleged that they refused to return the deposit after the plaintiff returned the car. No return of deposit.
The petitioner was forced to enter the transaction when she was told that her first transaction was not approved for financing. They told her that she would not receive the deposit of $2,000 returned but they told her that she would receive credit towards the next transaction. She did receive that credit on the next transaction, although she did not purchase the vehicle or have any dealings with the defendant, but had no choice. The failure to return the money after the cancellation of the contact by the respondent constitutes unconscionable conduct, if not outright conversion. The representation that she would not receive her money when the transaction was cancelled by the dealer constitutes an affirmative representation. Then, when petitioner defaults on the payments, the car is repossessed and no post-repossession notice is provided and there is no post-sale accounting. It is unknown what occurred to the car, whether the defendants used it for personal purposes or profit. Without proof we must make such assumptions.
The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, N.J.S.A. 56:8-2, states:
“Any act, use or employment by any person of any unconscionable commercial practice, deception, fraud, false promise, misrepresentation, or the knowing concealment, suppression or omission, of material fact with intent that others rely upon such concealment, suppression, or omission in conjunction with the sale . . . or with the subsequent performance of such person as aforesaid, whether or not any person has, in fact, been misled, deceived or damaged thereby, is declared to be an unlawful practice.
All of the remedies are cumulative to any remedies that are available to claimants, such as those contained in the Uniform Commercial Code.
56:8-2.13. Cumulation of rights and remedies; construction of act The rights, remedies and prohibitions accorded by the provisions of this act are hereby declared to be in addition to and cumulative of any other right, remedy or prohibition accorded by the common law or statutes of this State, and nothing contained herein shall be construed to deny, abrogate or impair any such common law or statutory right, remedy or prohibition.
CONVERSION OF PLAINTIFF’S $2,000 Generally, one who exercises unauthorized acts of dominion over the property of another inconsistent with or to the exclusion of the latter’s rights therein is liable for conversion, although he acted in good faith and in ignorance of the rights of the owner. McGlynn v.Schultz, 90 N.J.Super. 505, 526, 218 A.2d 408 (Ch.Div.1966), aff’d 95 N.J.Super. 412, 231 A.2d 386 (App.Div.1967). Plaintiff is entitled to the value of the converted property, $2,000. The general rule with regard to the measure of damages in conversion is to award the fair and reasonable market value of the property at the time of conversion. Chemical Bank v. Miller Yacht Sales,173 N.J.Super 90, 99-100 (App.Div 1980).
The dealership has violated every provision of the Uniform Commercial Code pertaining to repossession notice and dispossession of collateral actionable permitting the plaintiff to recover statutory damages as permitted under the Code and punitive damages for conversion.
Repossession Requirements N.J.S.A. 12A:9-610 Disposition N.J.S.A. 12A:9-611 Post repossession notice required before disposition N.J.S.A. 12A:9-612 Post repossession notice requirements N.J.S.A. 12A:9-313 Notice contents
N.J.S.A. 12A:9-614 Notice contents N.J.S.A. 12A:9-616 Explanation of deficiency Penalties N.J.S.A. 12A:9-625(c)(2) Damages are finance charges plus 10% cash price N.J.S.A. 12A:9-625(e) Minimum $500 damages plus other contained in the