Robert Bruce Ayres

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

o ma NO UU Fe WY NY

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

For The Northern District Of California

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

AUTHENTICATE
U.S. GOVERNME
INFORMATION

GPO

Entered on Docket
February 22, 2010

GLORIA L. FRANKLIN, CLERK
U.S BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLERK tay OO
4 grates B°Gaitorn

rite San jose)
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
In re Case No. 09-56695 ASW
ROBERT BRUCE AYRES Chapter 7

]
]
]
]
Debtor. ]
]

MEMORANDUM DECISION ON DEBTOR’S MOTION TO REDEEM VEHICLE

Before the Court is the Motion for an Order Redeeming Vehicle
Under USC § 722 and Avoiding Lien (the “Motion”) filed by Debtor
Robert Ayres (“Debtor”) on October 8, 2009. The vehicle at issue
in the Motion is a 2003 Acura 3.2 CL Type S, which, according to
Debtor’s declaration in support of the Motion, is his sole means of
transportation (the “Vehicle”). The secured creditor whose debt is
the subject of the Motion is Americredit Financial Services America
Inc. (“Americredit”).

By the Motion, Debtor seeks an order (1) fixing the redemption
value of the Vehicle in the amount of $4,000 and (2) compelling
Americredit to release its lien and provide clear title to the
Vehicle upon payment. In response to the Motion, Americredit filed
an Opposition to Debtor’s Motion to Redeem Personal Property (the

“Opposition”) and three supporting declarations -- one by Kristina

dA ROBO1s MO RH MeBronFiled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 1 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Co Oe NTN Dn nO FF WY NYO

i) NO i) iw) N bo NO NO NO — —_ — — —_ — — — —_ —_
oo ~ nN WN a w NO —_ —) Ne) oo SDN wa ASS (vs) N _ (m)

C

Keeling, the custodian of records for Americredit (the “Keeling
Declaration”); one by Americredit’s counsel, John F. Patton, Esq.
(the “Patton Declaration”); and one by Don Ferguson, an independent
auto appraiser and inspector (the “Ferguson Declaration”). The
Opposition asks that the Court determine the redemption value of
the Vehicle to be no less than $8,975. An evidentiary hearing was
held on the Motion and Americredit’s opposition thereto on December
14, 2009.

Debtor represents himself in propria persona. Americredit is
represented by John F. Patton, Esq. of the law firm of Cooksey,
Toolen, Gage, Duffy & Woog.

This Memorandum Decision constitutes the Court’s findings of
fact and conclusions of law, pursuant to Rule 7052 of the Federal

Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (“Bankruptcy Rule”).

I.

EVIDENCE PRESENTED

A. Debtor’s Schedules

Debtor’s Schedule B values the Vehicle at $4,500. Debtor’s
Schedule D shows Americredit has an outstanding debt of
approximately $13,000 which is secured by the Vehicle. Debtor’s
Schedules list no other vehicles or secured debt of any kind.

B. Debtor’s Motion

Debtor states he originally leased the Vehicle, new, beginning
in August 2002. Declaration of Robert B Ayres in Support of Motion
to Redeem Vehicle per USC § 722 and Avoiding Lien (“Debtor’s
Declaration”) at 1. Upon the expiration of his lease on August 9,

2006, Debtor purchased the Vehicle with a loan from Americredit for

FOda AR 69-51 st bORH SO ronFiled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 2 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

oo Oo NI WBN AO Fe WY YY

NO NO NBO HN NH NHN NH NH NO | FEF KF Fe Fr Fe FOO ESO
oN NO UN Be WY NY FY CO Oo eH HN DB AH SFP WY NYO YF O&O

$16,095.75, plus taxes and fees. Id. At the time of purchase, the
Vehicle had 75,334 miles and was, in Debtor’s opinion, in “good”
condition. Id.

As of October 8, 2009, the date of Debtor’s Declaration, the
Vehicle had 120,900 miles and was, in Debtor’s opinion, in “fair”
condition. Id. Debtor asserts that the Vehicle currently needs
approximately $4,255.97 in repairs for a timing belt replacement,
transmission service, a major scheduled service, replacement of
struts and alignment. Id. Debtor attaches a printout of a repair
estimate from Acura of Concord dated October 7, 2009 in support of
these repairs. This printout lists $1506.02 in repairs related to
the struts. Debtor has hand-written at the bottom of this estimate
an additional $2,650 for the 105,000 mile scheduled service, which
includes the timing belt, and an additional $99.95 for alignment.

Debtor, in his opinion as the owner of the Vehicle, believes
the Vehicle has a current “liquidation value” of $4,000, given the
mileage, condition of the vehicle and market conditions. Motion
and Debtor’s Declaration. In support of this valuation, Debtor,
who is very knowledgeable about the condition and value of cars,
attaches an Intelliprice appraisal report he received from Beshoff
Infiniti of San Jose on August 18, 2009. This Intelliprice report
estimates a trade-in value of $3,065-$4,755 for the Vehicle. The
Intelliprice report notes the mileage at 119,000. The notes
regarding “trade-in condition” state that the Vehicle is in “Good”
condition and paint “still shines” although “some flaws” are noted
on the front bumper, the front spoiler and the hood and “some

dings/dents” are noted on the body.

SEAM AGGM01s rho RH A ToNFiled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 3 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Co wo NN DN A FF WY NY

NO who NO WH HNO NHN NH HN HN FF FF KF PO OSE OS ll ESESllUhc rE hl
So SN DWN UN BP WY NY F|§ DOD DO OH HN WB A FP WHO NY KK OS

C. Opposition by Americredit

Americredit opposes the Motion on two bases: (1) Debtor’s
alleged failure to value the Vehicle’s redemption amount according
to acceptable standards and (2) Americredit’s evidence with respect
to the redemption value of the Vehicle. Opposition at 2:1-3.
Americredit argues that the appropriate valuation for redemption
purposes is the retail value of the Vehicle, not the trade-in or
liquidation value relied upon by Debtor. In its Opposition,
Americredit values the Vehicle at not less than $8,975. Opposition
at 5:7-8. In support of this valuation, Americredit submits an
online printout from the N.A.D.A. Official Used Car Guide dated
October 19, 2009, which gives a “clean retail” value for the
Vehicle (with 120,000 miles) of $8,975. Exhibit D in support of
Opposition. This same printout also gives a $4,125 “rough trade-
in” value, a $5,300 “average trade-in” value and a $6,275 “clean
trade-in” value for the Vehicle. Id.

As further support for its valuation, Americredit submits a
printout of a search from AutoTrader.com performed by John Patton,
Americredit’s counsel, on October 19, 2009. Patton Declaration at
q 2 and Exhibit D in support of Opposition. The AutoTrader.com
search identifies 4 matches for a 2003 Acura CL with mileage more
than 100,000, within 500 miles of Debtor’s Postal ZIP Code. Patton
Declaration at @@ 3. The vehicles ranged in asking price (not sales
price) from $10,998 to $7,495, with an average asking price of
$9,120. Patton Declaration at — 4. Each of these AutoTrader.com
listings was with an auto retailer. Exhibit D in support of

Opposition.

S@uGQnsGb Persia Wrron-iled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 4 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 4 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Co Oo NY DWN OO SP WD YO

Nw wo NO NH NH HN NH HN NO KR HF KF KF KF FOO FeO ESO Sl
oo NNO AN BR Ww NY FY ODO BO DOH HN Dn Fe WD NY KF S&S

C

D. Ferguson Declaration

On November 12, 2009, Americredit filed a Declaration of Don
Ferguson in Support of Opposition to Motion to Redeem Personal
Property (the “Ferguson Declaration”). Mr. Ferguson is an
independent appraiser and inspector of vehicles and has been so
employed for 30 years. Ferguson Declaration at f 2. Mr.
Ferguson’s employer, Property Damage Appraisers, was retained by
Americredit to appraise the Vehicle. Id. at 7 4. On October 27,
2009, Mr. Ferguson inspected the Vehicle’s exterior and interior.
Mr. Ferguson did not look under the hood or otherwise evaluate the
mechanical condition of the Vehicle at all. Based upon his limited
inspection of the Vehicle, Mr. Ferguson categorizes the Vehicle as
being in “good to excellent” condition. Id. at 4 6. The mileage
on the Vehicle at the time of Mr. Ferguson’s inspection was
121,432. Id. Based upon his inspection, his analysis of
comparable vehicles on AutoTrader.com, and the NADA Used Car Guide,
it is Mr. Ferguson’s opinion that the price a retail merchant would
charge Debtor to replace the Vehicle, given its age and condition
and without deducting the costs of sale and marketing, is
$7,883.80.

E. Testimony at Evidentiary Hearing

Debtor served as his only witness at the December 14, 2009
evidentiary hearing. Debtor testified that he worked for
approximately 12 years, from 1985 until 1997, inspecting vehicles
and/or supervising others’ inspections of such vehicles. Debtor
has been the Vehicle’s sole lessee/owner. Given Debtor’s knowledge
of automobiles, his past work experience and his sole possession of

the Vehicle, Debtor knows the Vehicle’s condition well.

SRuGArbRORR 1st eH ME1o-iled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 5 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 bs) Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Oo ceo N DB WO Fe W NO

NB bh bt KN KH KH KO KN RO me ee
oN DO CA HR WO NO KF& CO O Oo NN DBO nT FP WY NYO | OC

q

Debtor also testified that he consulted with multiple dealers
in an attempt to obtain an independent valuation. One such dealer
gave Debtor an estimated trade-in value for the Vehicle between
$3,065 and $4,755. Exhibit 2. Debtor noted that despite his
exhaustive search, he could find no like-condition comparable
vehicles for sale by a dealer in the Bay Area. Debtor testified
that he was advised by the dealers with which he consulted that the
Vehicle is not of the type that would be sold by a dealer to the
retail public, but, rather, the Vehicle would be sent by the dealer
to an auto auction. Therefore, if the Court accepts Debtor’s
position on this issue, the retail value of this automobile would
be the value that Americredit would receive at auction. That value
would be approximately $3,000 to $4,700, the same as indicated on
the Intelliprice report submitted as Exhibit 2, as Debtor
explained.

Through his testimony as the Vehicle’s owner, Debtor introduced

nine exhibits:

Exhibit Description

1 Five pages of photos of the Vehicle

2 Intellichoice appraisal dated August 18,
2009, same as previously submitted as an
exhibit to Debtor’s Declaration.

3 Edmunds.com pricing report dated December
13, 2009, which gives the following values
of the Vehicle in “rough” condition and
with 123,500 miles and within Debtor’s ZIP

code:

Trade-In $2,494
Private Party $3,427
Dealer Retail $4,288

SmeMoennGo BEc1s {eG K6rroiriled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 6 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Oo fo YN DBO WAH FF WD NS

NO po NO NO ND HN NHN HY HN Ke He FH KF KF PF OU PFO OU ES|lhUh Eh
oN NO UN FP WO NY KH TD BO fF NN DB Oo S&S WD NO KF O&O

C

4 Edmunds.com pricing report dated November
12, 2009, which gives the following values
for the Vehicle in “average” condition and
with 121,600 miles and within Debtor’s ZIP

code:
Trade-In $3,041
Private Party $4,036
Dealer Retail $4,977
5 A copy of the maintenance log for the

Vehicle showing the service items
recommended at 105,000 miles, which
includes replacing the timing belt

6 A Maintenance Schedule from AutoWest Acura
of Stevens Creek, noting that a timing belt
replacement is recommended at 105,000
miles. The second page is a photocopy of
the business card of Gloria Poirier,
Assistant Service Manager at AutoWest Acura
of Stevens Creek, above which various
maintenance items have been handwritten
with itemized costs totaling $4,451.95.

7 A printout from AutoTrader.com dated
December 12, 2009 showing two vehicles
comparable to the Vehicle listed for sale -
- one at a reduced price of $7,995 (this is
the same one previously valued as part of
the Patton Declaration at 8,995) and one at
$9,500.

8 Lease Turn-In / PDA Package description
from www.pdacorporation.com, which includes
a road test and under-hood component check.
Debtor emphasized that Mr. Ferguson failed
to do either as part of his appraisal, but
should have.

9 The repair estimate dated October 17, 2009
from Acura of Concord previously submitted
as a Exhibit to Debtor’s Declaration

At the evidentiary hearing, Americredit submitted two exhibits.
The appraisal by Don Ferguson valuing the Vehicle at $7,833.80 and

dated October 28, 2008 was admitted as Exhibit A. (This valuation

was revised to $7,617.85 through Mr. Ferguson’s testimony on the

SRA e RHO rs RO RH MA TONFiled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 7 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

oo Oe ND OO FF WY NO —

BR bh NO HNO NO HN NO NO HN Se Se BORO Re eS ee
oN NON UN FR WY NOK OO ON DRO AW BR WD HY KS CO

stand, in light of a mathematical error by Mr. Ferguson discovered
in the course of Mr. Ferguson’s testimony.) A printout from
Edmunds.com obtained by Mr. Patton on December 1, 2009 showing the
“True Market Value” for the Vehicle to be $6,523 (assuming the
Vehicle is in “clean” condition and has 121,600 miles) was admitted
as Exhibit B.

The primary witness called by Americredit was Mr. Ferguson.?
Mr. Ferguson testified that he did a physical “walk around”
inspection of the Vehicle. As part of this inspection, Mr.
Ferguson asked Debtor if there was anything that would increase or
decrease the value of the Vehicle. Debtor’s response was that the
Vehicle was behind on two scheduled maintenance services and that a
timing belt needed to be replaced. Mr. Ferguson testified that he
included the costs to remedy the maintenance items indicated by
Debtor in his valuation of the Vehicle. Mr. Ferguson reaffirmed
his opinion that the Vehicle, at the time of his inspection, was in
average to above average condition.

To take into account the repairs that may need to be made to
the Vehicle, Mr. Ferguson consulted with the service department of
an Acura dealer in Los Gatos. After eliminating the redundant
items on the two missing scheduled maintenance services, the
service agent provided an estimate of $1,795.85 to complete the
service items needed, including replacement of the timing belt.
After considering these service estimates, Mr. Ferguson arrived at

an estimated retail price for the Vehicle of $7,617.85.

' Mr. Patton, Americredit’s counsel, was also sworn in as a
witness to help admit Exhibit B.

CaS @ivdQopee SacrsheGt AGrrofriled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 8 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

0 Co N DB vn FP W NO

NM NO NO HN HN HO PO KN ROR Rm mr et
oo SN DN UW FP WY NY KY§ OF BO DB NH HDB HD FP WD NY KF CO

Tt

On cross-examination, Debtor asked Mr. Ferguson for his
estimate to complete the body work Debtor believes is needed to
render the Vehicle in saleable condition. Mr. Ferguson disagreed
with Debtor as to the appropriate means of remedying the body
defects, and estimated that the body work could be obtained for a
total cost of $300 from a body repair specialist, although Mr.
Ferguson did not have a written estimate from any such specialist.
If the same body work were done by the dealer itself, then Mr.
Ferguson estimated the cost would be $600. However, Mr. Ferguson
also stated that, in his opinion, a dealer could sell the vehicle
“as is”, without the body work, for his estimated value of

$7,617.85.

Il.
ANALYSIS
By the Motion, Debtor seeks to redeem the Vehicle for the
Vehicle’s “liquidation value” of $4,000.00 citing In re

Weathington, 254 B.R. 895 (6% Cir. BAP 2000). However, Weathington

was decided prior to the Bankruptcy Abuse and Consumer Protection
Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”), Pub.L. No. 109-8, 119 Stat. 23 (2005) and
the law on redemption was substantially changed under BAPCPA.

The redemption of property by a debtor is governed by
Bankruptcy Rule 6008 and Bankruptcy Code* sections 722 and 506(a).
Bankruptcy Rule 6008 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

On motion by the debtor . .. and after hearing on notice
as the court may direct, the court may authorize the

* Unless otherwise provided, all references to code sections
shall mean the Bankruptcy Code, as codified in Title 11 of the
United States Code, 11 U.S.C. § 101, et seg., including all
amendments thereto, including BAPCPA.

Sanda eH O01 s 1 ORE eA 1onFiled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 9 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

oo ea NN DBD nD FF WD HNO

NO NO WN NO KN HN KN KN ORR eR ee ee ee ee
oN DO Ue Ff WY NY KH TD OBO CoO NN DB A BR WO NO KK CO

Ca

redemption of property from a lien or from a sale to
enforce a lien in accordance with applicable law.

Bankruptcy Rule 6008. Bankruptcy Code § 722, in turn, provides:

An individual debtor may, whether or not the debtor has

waived the right to redeem under this section, redeem
tangible personal property intended primarily for personal,
family, or household use, from a lien securing a dischargeable
consumer debt, if such property is exempted under section 522
of this title or has been abandoned under section 554 of this
title, by paying the holder of such lien the amount of the
allowed secured claim of such holder that is secured by such
lien in full at the time of redemption.

11 U.S.C. § 722. Finally, Bankruptcy Code § 506(a) (2) provides:
If the debtor is an individual in a case under chapter 7 or
13, such value with respect to personal property securing
an allowed claim shall be determined based on the
replacement value of such property as of the date of the
filing of the petition without deduction for costs of sale
or marketing. With respect to property acquired for
personal, family, or household purposes, replacement value
shall mean the price a retail merchant would charge for

property of that kind considering the age and condition of
the property at the time value is determined.

11 U.S.C. § 506(a) (2) .?

Although the language of Bankruptcy Code § 506(a) (2) appears to
be quite specific, the Bankruptcy Code does not articulate a
specific methodology to obtain the “price a retail merchant would
charge for property of that kind considering the age and condition

of the property.” The Ninth Circuit has not yet established a

method for retail valuation under § 506(a) (2), and courts outside

3 Debtor argued in the Motion that the valuation should be

made as of the date of the hearing under In re Lopez, 224 B.R. 439
(Bankr. C.D. Ca. 1998). However, Lopez was issued prior to the
enactment of BAPCPA. The changes made to Bankruptcy Code § 506 by
BAPCPA now make clear that the valuation is “as of the date of the
filing of the petition.”

Ginetten RGOGscr PACKESorréniled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 10 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 10 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Co Se JN DBD WO FP WY YN

iw) bo tO iw) iw) N iw) ie} ho — —= —= —_ — —_ — — —y —
oo ~] ON GN - WwW No —_ So No) oo ~ nN ws & ive) No — (an)

Ca

the Ninth Circuit have adopted a variety of methods.‘ The two
cases from within the Ninth Circuit to address the issue have
calculated retail value “by adjusting the Kelley Blue Book or
N.A.D.A. Guide retail value for a like vehicle by a reasonable
amount in light of the evidence presented regarding the condition
of the vehicle and any other relevant factors.” In re Morales, 387

B.R. 36, 45 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. 2008); accord, In re Guerra, 2008 WL

3200831, *3 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2008).

“See, e.g., In re De Anda-Ramirez, 359 B.R. 794 (10% Cir. BAP
2007) (Rejecting the application of the Kelley Blue Book “retail
value” as the appropriate measure under the circumstances and
noting: “Other than both containing the word “retail,” the Code and
KBB definitions have little in common. The Bankruptcy Code's
definition of “retail” includes an adjustment for the age and
condition of the vehicle; KBB defines “retail” as the price fora
vehicle that is in “excellent condition” with the proviso that less
than 5% of vehicles for sale qualify as “excellent.” Clearly, these
two are not equivalent and Midwest's reliance on the KBB retail
value is misplaced.”); In re Cook, 415 B.R. 529 (Bankr. D. Kan.
2009) (“[I]n this case, NADA Clean Retail, adjusted for needed
mechanical, body, and interior repairs, as well as for other Rash
items that the debtor does not receive (like reconditioning or
detailing), is the best approximation of value for personal use
vehicles subject to § 506(a) (2) treatment.”); In re Berry, 2008 WL
2064777, at *4 (Bankr. D. Vt. 2008) (refusing to invalidate a
bankruptcy local rule using the starting point for valuation as the
midpoint between the N.A.D.A. wholesale value and the N.A.D.A.
retail value, and noting “that ‘the price a retail merchant would
charge’ is not necessarily equivalent to ‘the retail value.’”); In
re Young, 390 B.R. 480, 488 (Bankr. D. Me. 2008) (rejecting Debtor’s
valuation as insufficient because it started with the Kelley Blue
Book “trade-in” value rather than retail value); In re Clark, 2007
WL 671346 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio Feb. 27, 2007) (calculating retail
value of car as the midpoint between two proffered retail values);
In re Kidwell, 2007 WL 2934866, at *5 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 2007)
(calculating retail value of car based on Kelley Blue Book private
party value based on appraiser testimony that private party value
approximates retail price if paid in cash in full); In re Ortiz,
2007 WL 1176019, at *2-3 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2007) (calculating
retail value of car by deducting the hypothetical cost of repairs
from the retail value established by expert testimony); In re
Mayland, 2006 WL 1476927, at *3 (Bankr. M.D.N.C. May 26, 2006)
(calculating retail value of car as 90% of N.A.D.A. Guide retail
value, less cost of necessary repairs).

b Gini Aan Re OoecrdIDACHEs@rrdniled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 11 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 11 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Oo Oo IN DBO WO F&F WD NO

mM DN BN HN LC HO KR KR RO mm eee ee
[oo >) 2 i so} On \ > Sn > Sn. © oo? Ps ©) i ©) Se sO. Sn ©

Cas

The parties have submitted evidence valuing the Vehicle between
$2,494 and $8,975. While there are slight discrepancies in the
mileage used by the parties at various times to arrive at these
valuations, the variance in valuation depends primarily on two
other factors -- the category used for the Vehicle’s condition and
the category for the type of sale.

As to the issue of the Vehicle’s condition, Debtor testified
that the Vehicle is in “fair” or “rough to average” condition.
Debtor’s Declaration, Trial Exhibits 3 and 4. Americredit, in
turn, believes the Vehicle is in “good to excellent” condition.
Ferguson Declaration at 7 6. The Vehicle is neither “rough” nor
“clean” -- the outward limits to which the parties push their
respective opinions -- but, rather, precisely in the middle where
both parties agreed it might also be. Weighing the evidence
presented, the Court finds the Vehicle is “average” under the
Edmunds.com and N.A.D.A. guidelines.

The category selected for the type of sale also greatly impacts
the resulting valuation. The types of sale considered by the
N.A.D.A. Guide and Edmunds.com range from “trade-in” to “private
sale” to “dealer retail” or “clean retail.” While it might be
tempting to equate “dealer retail” or “clean retail” with “the
price a retail merchant would charge” under Bankruptcy Code
§ 506(a) (2), it would be a mistake to do so:

Other than both containing the word “retail,” the Code and

KBB definitions have little in common. The Bankruptcy

Code's definition of “retail” includes an adjustment for

the age and condition of the vehicle; KBB defines “retail”

as the price for a vehicle that is in “excellent condition”

with the proviso that less than 5% of vehicles for sale

qualify as “excellent.” Clearly, these two are not

equivalent and [the creditor’s] reliance on the KBB retail
value is misplaced.

GiehGehGG0 bec SOC RES for1éNled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 12 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 1 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

oO Oo NN Dn TD FF W NYO

NM NO NO NO NO WH HN NO NO KR Fe Fe Hee Fe Rr Oe
oo NN HW FR WH NY F&F DOD CO FH NAN Dn Hw FP WY NY KF OS

Ca

In re De Anda-Ramirez, 359 B.R. 794, 797 (10th Cir. BAP 2007);

accord, Morales, 387 B.R. at 45-46. That being said, many courts,

including the two decisions from within the Ninth Circuit which
have addressed this issue, have used the “retail” value of these
guides as a starting point and then adjusted the values downward to
account for the vehicles mileage and condition, or other applicable
factors. See supra p. 11 and note 4. Rather than starting at the
high end and adjusting downward, other courts have chosen to use
the “private sale” category since it allows for the valuation of
vehicles in a variety of less than “clean” conditions. In
addition, as already noted by one court, an all-cash payment at the
time of sale -- which is required under Bankruptcy Code § 506(a) (2)
-- is more akin to a “private sale” than a sale through a

dealership. In re Kidwell, 207 WL 2934866, at *5 (Bankr. E.D.

Tenn. 2007). Regardless of which approach is taken -- either start
high and deduct the costs necessary to bring that vehicle to the
“clean” sale condition, or use a valuation that already takes into
account the less-than-perfect condition and an all cash sale --

the end result at which you arrive should be roughly the same.°

° This case also raises another interesting issue -- how to

value a vehicle under the post-BAPCPA version of Bankruptcy Code

§ 506(a) (2) where the vehicle is of such an age and/or condition
that it is of the type that a retailer would likely only sell it at
a wholesale auction. Debtor asserts that because of its condition,
the Vehicle would likely be sold at a car auction and not be sold
by a retail car dealer. Creditor, through Mr. Ferguson’s
testimony, claims that the Vehicle could (but not necessarily
would) be sold by a dealer. The Court finds that both Debtor and
Mr. Ferguson are telling the truth. Debtor is correct that because
of its mechanical and body condition there is a substantial
likelihood that the Vehicle would be sold “as is” at an auction
and, if so, would be sold for approximately $3,000 to $4,700, as
noted on the Intelliprice report submitted as Exhibit 2. The Court

(continued...)

GiedaDGAicrdPACHEADridalled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 13 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17. «13 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Oo Oo JIT DH WD FP WO NO

NO NO NO HO HNO NY ND NHN NO HK KF KF FF KF OF OO PSF ESellUlhUhc El
oN NO AN PRP WD NY FY DOD CO OST DRO rR Re YD NY ES OS

Although Mr. Ferguson’s appraisal used the N.A.D.A. Guide as a
starting point, both parties cited and relied upon the “True Market
Value” derived from Edmunds.com at the evidentiary hearing as being
representative of the actual value that would be received, not the
suggested retail value as appears to be the case of values given in
the KBB and N.A.D.A. Guide. Indeed, Edmunds “True Market Values”
purport to be based on “a proprietary formula developed by
Edmunds.com” to take “into account, for each vehicle” a litany
some ten separate market factors including “current actual
transaction prices.” Exhibit 4, page 2.

Neither party used the Petition Date as the valuation date.
While the $4,036 private party sale valuation listed on Debtor’s
Exhibit 4 may be close, it is nonetheless dated roughly four months

after the Petition Date and, therefore, necessarily lower. Based

5(...continued)
accepts Debtor’s testimony that many dealers, especially higher-end
dealers, would not carry this car on their lots, especially in its
present condition. However, the Court also accepts Mr. Ferguson’s
position that the Vehicle could be sold by a car dealer. The Court
believes that Americredit could find used car dealers in the Bay
Area that would be willing to fix up this car and put it on their
lots or even some car dealers that might be willing to sell it “as
is.” One way to handle this situation could be to determine a
percentage likelihood that the Vehicle would be sold at auction and
a separate percentage likelihood that the Vehicle would be sold on
a dealer’s lot. Then, one would multiply the likely auction price
by the percentage likelihood that the Vehicle would be sold at an
auction and multiply the dealer lot price by the percentage
likelihood that the Vehicle would be sold on a dealer’s lot. Then
those two resulting numbers would be added together to arrive at a
valuation. This approach, which is similar in methodology to a
standard litigation analysis, does not have case support as of the
present time. The Court has decided, for the purposes of the case
at hand, to turn to the Edmonds valuations for guidance. However,
the Court recognizes that in some circumstances, the only, or the
most, realistic “retail” market for a vehicle will be a wholesale
auction.

QQ BOG GScrsRQCH: 2rrdriled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 14 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 +214 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

Oo fo NH DH UA FSF WD NO KF

MM NO NO HN NHN HN HN NY NO KF KF HF KF FO OF OO PSF OO Shc EeShlhlhc
oo NN NDB WA FS WwW NO KK TD BO fH NN WB Tn FP WW NO YK OO

on the Court’s own research, the private party resale “true market
value” for the Vehicle as of the Petition Date is $5,136 per
Edmunds.com.

If the alternative approach of starting with the “clean” dealer
retail number and adjusting downward is taken, then the result, as
predicted, is roughly the same. Mr. Ferguson’s valuation adopted
this approach. While Mr. Ferguson’s appraisal accounts for the
regular scheduled maintenance services that are needed for the
Vehicle, including the replacement of the timing belt, his
appraisal does not include the costs for the replacement of the
Vehicle’s struts or the body work needed to bring the Vehicle up to
clean saleable condition. Americredit did not dispute the need for
the replacement of the struts. In addition, Mr. Ferguson did not
dispute the fact that some body work was needed on the Vehicle,
although Mr. Ferguson did disagree with Debtor on the means of
remedying the body defects. Mr. Ferguson testified that the
Vehicle could be sold “as is” with only the maintenance work he had
accounted for in his appraisal, and without the body work or
struts. However, Mr. Ferguson also indicated that “it could take a
while” for a dealer to sell the Vehicle in that condition. If the
costs for the struts ($1,506.02) and the minimal body work Mr.
Ferguson agreed is needed ($600) are taken into account, the value

of the Vehicle would be $5,511.83° -- which is quite close to the

$5,136 value reached under the other methodology.

6 The value arrived at by Mr. Ferguson, as stated at the

evidentiary hearing, is $7,617.85. Debtor’s estimate for replacing
the struts, which Mr. Ferguson verified is reasonable, is
$1,506.02. Mr. Ferguson estimated the cost of the body work which
Mr. Ferguson agreed is necessary is approximately $600 if performed
by a dealer.

CagdentGcnSG9 Becr BOCs Gorr6yled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 15 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 15 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

So oN DBD AN Se YD NYO eS

Ny NO NO NY NHN NY NY NN NO KF | Fe |e FeO OF OES OO eS
oo NY WB WA fF WD NY KF§ DTD ODO OH HIT DB ATW FBP WY NYO YH OC

Ca

IIl.

CONCLUSION

Given the evidence presented regarding the Vehicle’s condition,
the Court finds that the replacement value of the Vehicle is
$5,136. Debtor shall submit a proposed form order authorizing the
redemption of the Vehicle under Bankruptcy Code § 722 upon the

payment of $5,136 to Americredit.

Dated:

AN fig Chbu.

ARTHUR S. WEISSBRODT
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE

Gea Aec1dSRACHESrrdylled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 16 of

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17 Case No. 09-56695 ASW

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

For The Northern District Of California

oO Oo NY HN A FS WY YO =

Oo bho NO HPO KC KN KR HRN RO wm — RR ee ee ee
ao NN UO Ff WY NY K§ DT Oo Oo HN DH WW F&F WO HPO KF C

Cas

Court Service List

Robert Bruce Ayres
142 N. Milpitas Blvd. #117
Milpitas, CA 95035

John F. Patton, Esq.

Cooksey, Toolen, Gage, Duffy & Woog
535 Anton Boulevard, Tenth Floor
Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1977

Mohamed Poonja
P.O. Box 1510
Los Altos, CA 94023-1510

Office of the U.S. Trustee
U.S. Federal Bldg.

280 S. 1% St. #268

San Jose, CA 95113-3004

QinhGenGGO bect PACES Horréyled: 02/16/10 Entered: 02/22/10 15:55:49 Page 17 of

09-56695 ASW

TO REDEEM VEHICLE 17