Bank Having Uniformed Officer In Marked Police Car To Reposses A Car

[digger]

My question is:
Is it legal for a bank to have a police officer in uniform
and a maked police car to come on your property and
reposses a car?
Thank You
Digger

[cdwjava]

My question is:
Is it legal for a bank to have a police officer in uniform
and a maked police car to come on your property and
reposses a car?
Thank You
Digger

Are you certain he conducted the repossession? Did he have a tow truck or actually make entry to the car to take possession of it?

Might he have, instead, been standing by with the repossessor? Or, might the vehicle have been impounded for some other reason?

Have you called the police department?

I suppose that it IS possible in some states for a law enforcement agency to be contracted to perform this duty ... though, I would find that very unusual and FILLED with potential problems.

- Carl

[digger]

Hi,
Thank you for answering my question.
The police officer did call a tow truck after he was on the
property to come and pick up the car and take it to the
bank.
He had no court order, no power of attorney and the car
was on private property, there were no past due
payments on this car.
The police officer signed a paper stating that he was here
to pick up the car for the bank and the bank was going
to hold the car.
Any comments appreciated,
digger

[cdwjava]

You might check with the police department to see why the officer was involved. Or check with an attorney. But, even if he was exceeding his authority, it might not help you get the car back if the bank wants it ... and I assume the bank holds the lien or is the legal owner of the car.

I'd call the bank and find out why they took the car back.

Do you KNOW there was no court order? If so, HOW do you "know"?

- Carl

[BOR]

My question is:
Is it legal for a bank to have a police officer in uniform
and a maked police car to come on your property and
reposses a car?
Thank You
Digger

Consult an attorney. If he was there in a marked patrol car he was clearly acting under "color of law", IMO, whether he was employed by the bank as an off duty security person or not. Some jurisdictions have ruled an officer working an off duty job acts under "color of law" and not just as a "private entity".

Your property was "siezed" under the premise you had to permit it's reposession as a lawful police order, a possible conflict of interest??

As Carl points out, it would have no bearing on any post repossession return, but that does not mean the officer acted as department policy/law dictates. It could very well be lawful though, only an IN attorney can advise.


I have some annotations in my notes from 56 ALR Fed 895. ALR is a series of case law digests; American law reports; this is the federal case law edition:

"Actions of off -duty policeman acting as private security guard as actions "under color of state law" actionable under Civil Rights act of 1871 (42 USC 1983)".

There are no Indiana cases in it, but there may be supplement's since I last checked it some years ago.

Here is a US 9th circuit case case though, as an example:

Traver v. Meshriy (1980 CA9) 627 F. 2d 934, 56 ALR Fed 885:

An off duty police officer was found to be acting under color of law, when, employed as a private security guard for a bank, detained a bank customer at the request of the bank officer, (case emphasis added), (he identified himself as a police officer).

[Mr. Knowitall]

My guess is that one of the following occurred:

• The repo man was sufficiently concerned about a breach of the peace that he asked for a Deputy to be present for the repo, and stayed out of sight until the deputy was at the scene;
• There was a court-ordered Sheriff's sale for the vehicle, and the Sheriff's department collected the car for sale pursuant to court order.

[Fraud Investigator]

Is it possible that the bank reported the car stolen? Was the financing obtained under fraudulent circumstances?
If stolen and entered into NCIC, then the officer was doing his job recovering a stolen vehicle and would not need a court order, as the bank is the legal owner of the vehicle.

[cdwjava]

Is it possible that the bank reported the car stolen? Was the financing obtained under fraudulent circumstances?
If stolen and entered into NCIC, then the officer was doing his job recovering a stolen vehicle and would not need a court order, as the bank is the legal owner of the vehicle.

Ah! Interesting take!

That IS a possibility.

- Carl