WISCONSIN AUTO TITLE LOANS, INC. V. JONES
290 Wis.2d 514, 714 N.W.2d 155 (2006)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Wisconsin (P) appealed a decision of the court of appeals affirming
an order by the circuit court, which denied P's motion to stay judicial proceedings on
Jones's (D) counterclaims and to compel D, the borrower, to arbitrate his counterclaims.
FACTS: D, the borrower, obtained an $800 loan from P. They entered into a loan agreement,
promissory note, and security agreement providing the borrower an $800 loan. It was a
pre-printed standard form short-term loan agreement provided by P. To receive the loan, D
had to deliver a security interest in his motor vehicle, a 1992 Infiniti, in the form of a
title to P; purchase a $150, one-year membership in Wisconsin Auto Title Loans' 'Continental
Car Club'; and pay a $4 filing fee on the motor vehicle title. The loan agreement calls for
a single payment of $1,197.08, due on January 3, 2002, which includes the original $800 loan
amount, $243.08 of finance charges, and the $154 the borrower borrowed from P to pay P's
loan fees. P represents in its loan agreement that the annual percentage rate for the
finance charge is 300%. The arbitration provision broadly states that all disputes,
controversies, or claims between the parties relating to the loan agreement shall be decided
by binding arbitration. The arbitration provision carves out for P the right to enforce D's
payment obligations in the event of default by judicial or other process, including
self-help repossession. If D initiates arbitration, D must also pay the first $125.00 of the
filing fee required by the Arbitration Rules. D made several partial cash payments on the
loan, and P served a notice of default on the loan. The amount owing as of April 22, 2002
was $1,509.72. The amount owing as of May 6, 2002 was stated to be $1,627.32. P commenced an
action to recover possession of D's 1992 Infiniti. D alleged counterclaims both for himself
and as class claims (on behalf of a class of all similarly situated customers of P). The
counterclaims assert that P willfully and knowingly conceals consumer loan transaction costs
to its customers, imposes loan interest and other finance charges without proper
disclosures, engages in collection practices without properly advising its customers of
their rights and obligations, and imposes unconscionably exorbitant loan rates and charges,
and that the loan agreement was unconscionable under Wis. Stat. 425.107. D made a jury
demand for his counterclaims and the case was transferred from small claims to the circuit
court. P moved to compel arbitration. The circuit court held the arbitration provision
unconscionable. The court of appeals granted P's request to appeal the nonfinal order of the
circuit court and affirmed the circuit court's order denying P's motion to compel
arbitration. P petitioned for review.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment