Danco Fin. Inc. v. Mauldin Body Shop Inc.

A body shop forfeited its right to storage fees under the abandoned motor vehicle statute, O.C.G.A. § 40-11-2, because it failed to timely notify the vehicle's lien holder and strict compliance with the statute is a prerequisite to recovery.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

We granted discretionary review in this case to determine whether the trial court erred in awarding damages to Mauldin Body Shop, Inc., despite Mauldin’s failure to strictly comply with the abandoned motor vehicle statute, OCGA § 40-11-2. Because we find that strict compliance with the statute is a prerequisite to recovery, we reverse the trial court’s award of damages to Mauldin. The applicable facts of the case are not in dispute. Danco is a lien holder of a vehicle that was involved in an accident on September 11, 2007. The registered owner’s son subsequently brought the vehicle to Mauldin for repairs. Because of the owner’s failure to pay for the repairs or remain in contact with Mauldin, Mauldin declared the vehicle abandoned on December 20, 2007. Upon Mauldin’s request, the Sheriff’s office notified Mauldin on December 28, 2007 that Danco was a lien holder of the vehicle. On January 7, 2008, Mauldin mailed notice to Danco that it was in possession of the vehicle and demanded $4,754.60 for “towing and administrative” fees, plus a $75 notification fee and storage at a rate of $20 per day from the date of the towing. The notice also informed Danco that the vehicle would be sold at a public auction if the fees were not paid. This was the first time Danco became aware that the vehicle was at Mauldin’s facility.

When the parties could not reach an agreement about the vehicle fees, Danco filed an action in magistrate court asking the court to 1 determine the validity of the lien and the proper party to have possession of the vehicle, and 2 issue an order requiring Mauldin to surrender possession of the vehicle. Mauldin denied wrongfully holding the vehicle, claiming it had a lien on it for repairs, towing, and storage. Following a bench trial, the magistrate court awarded Mauldin $3,045.00 as a lien against the vehicle for storage fees, finding that Mauldin was not entitled to fees for the repair of the abandoned vehicle under OCGA § 40-11-2.

Danco Fin. Inc. v. Mauldin Body Shop Inc.

A body shop forfeited its right to storage fees under the abandoned motor vehicle statute, O.C.G.A. § 40-11-2, because it failed to timely notify the vehicle's lien holder and strict compliance with the statute is a prerequisite to recovery.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report