The appellant purchased a used vehicle financed by the respondent.
After experiencing issues with the vehicle, the appellant defaulted on payments and returned the vehicle to the dealership.
The respondent sold the vehicle at public auction and obtained summary judgment for the deficiency balance.
On appeal, the appellant argued the dealership made misrepresentations and the respondent failed to provide proper notice of sale under the Personal Property Security Act.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no evidence of a close relationship between the dealership and the respondent to attribute misrepresentations, and concluding that any failure to provide notice did not undermine the right to claim a deficiency absent proof of damages.
