Even if he did receive it, he should not have fought the repo. man. The repo. man was just doing his job. Since I do not know the details, I have to assume the man was not lying. We are innocent until proven guilty, right?

I cannot say for certain but I believe that there is enough of a possibility to warrant investigation. Let me give you two good reasons why. 1) Sometimes there are things in the mail that my wife takes and I never see. I honestly have no idea about our utility bills half the time due to that. 2) Our mailman is a fucking moron. Sometimes we get mail for people that moved out of here six years ago. Sometimes we get mail for totally different people who live at the same number house on a different road. I assume they sometimes get our mail too. How do you think one of my cards went into default? They sent statements to the right address but I rarely got/get them. For that reason, certain things need to be sent certified mail. Considering the value of a car, I think a couple of extra dollars to the USPS would've been a wise investment on the part of the financial institution and/or repo company. I don't know how the burden of proof works in this sort of situation down in Tennessee, but I would imagine that they would have to prove that he DID get a notice. Of course, there are other relevant facts to consider when it comes to determining the legitimacy of the repo. Regardless, the assault charges are a separate issue and must be considered as such.

Like the others, I would have to give the benefit of the doubt to the man losing his vehicle; I can certainly understand his frustration, though getting into a fight with the repo man was unwarranted. Certainly the repo man had a boss or somesuch that should have been called. Or- I have no idea how this works, so toss this out if it doesn't- couldn't that man just have gotten in his car and driven away? Anyway, short answer: Yeah, I believe the vehicle owner. Mail can get lost far too easily. How many notices supposedly got lost?

Sorry, but I'm not sure the bank has to give you special notice that they are repossessing the car. I believe when you signed the loan documents stating that you would repay the loan, every month on time, that it spelled out what would happen if you didn't pay appropriately. Either way, fighting the repo man is not the answer. You can get the car back if it was taken from you illegally.

Most likely, the repo man was at least partly at fault. Auto repossession is strictly a civil matter, and it is illegal for a repo man to commit a Breach Of The Peace when towing a vehicle. This means that if you're repo-ing a car and the driver shows up and complains, you have a legal duty to walk away immediately and not get into any arguments with him. You can not, in any way, use any threats or force against the driver just to try to get the car. You wait and come back later when you're sure he's not around, and then try again, but no violence is allowed.

Frankly, fellow Answerbagger, I don't believe this is the whole story. If a vehicle is repossessed it is quite likely the No.1 reason is because of failure to make payments. I don't expect the lien holder is obligated to notify the debtor, and is perfectly within his right to repo. The moral to the story is to be a real man and live up to your obligations responsibilities. After all, it is YOUR good name name which is at stake. I'd like to know who came out on top in the ensuing fight.

One is not required to be notified of such. If you're not paying your premiums, you can expect someone to come and repossess it.