The appellant's vehicle was towed and stored by the respondents following an accident.
A dispute arose over a $2,500 contract cancellation fee, prompting the appellant to apply under section 24 of the Repair and Storage Liens Act (RSLA) for the return of the vehicle.
Before the dispute was resolved, the respondents sold the vehicle without providing the mandatory statutory notice under sections 15 and 17 of the RSLA, relying instead on their standard contract.
The Small Claims Court upheld the respondents' actions under section 23(1)(e).
On appeal, the Divisional Court set aside the decision, finding the respondents illegally contracted out of the RSLA's mandatory notice provisions and improperly used section 23(1)(e) to circumvent the appellant's section 24 rights.
