## Facts

- Robert and Karla Osborne financed a pickup truck through a loan secured by a lien held by Ford Motor Credit Company (FMCC).
- After the Osbornes defaulted, FMCC retained Minnesota Recovery Bureau, Inc. (MRB), which assigned employees Todd Davis and Drew Stafford to repossess the truck.
- On October 19, 2003, Davis and Stafford went to the Osbornes’ home to repossess the truck and spoke with Robert Osborne; he told them to contact the Osbornes’ attorney, and the parties disputed whether Robert told the agents to leave the property.
- About an hour later, Davis and Stafford returned; Davis approached the garage and shined a flashlight through a garage window.
- Believing an intruder was entering, Robert Osborne opened the door and tackled Davis; Stafford called 911 and police responded; the repossession agents left without taking the truck.
- Afterward, Davis and MRB representatives repeatedly called the Osbornes seeking release of the truck for repossession.
- The Osbornes sued, alleging violations of Minnesota’s UCC repossession provision (requiring no breach of the peace), an FDCPA claim under 15 U.S.C. § 1692f(6), and related state-law tort theories (including trespass and emotional-distress-type damages).

## Issues

1. Whether Minn. Stat. § 336.9-609 applies to third-party repossession companies acting for a secured creditor and, if so, whether the attempted repossession involved a “breach of the peace” that precluded summary judgment.
2. Whether MRB and its agents violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692f(6) by attempting nonjudicial dispossession when they allegedly lacked a “present right to possession” of the collateral.

## Decision

- The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.
- The court denied the Osbornes’ motion for partial summary judgment on the UCC breach-of-the-peace theory because material factual disputes remained.
- The court granted summary judgment to MRB and its agents on the FDCPA § 1692f(6) claim, concluding defendants had a present right to possession at least up to their return to the residence.
- The court granted in part and denied in part defendants’ summary-judgment motion, leaving the UCC breach-of-the-peace claim and certain related state-law theories for trial.

## Legal Principles

- Minnesota’s UCC self-help repossession rule (Minn. Stat. § 336.9-609), including the requirement that repossession proceed “without breach of the peace,” can apply to repossession companies and agents acting on behalf of a secured party.
- Whether conduct during an attempted self-help repossession constitutes a “breach of the peace” is typically fact-dependent and may be unsuitable for summary judgment when key events and communications are disputed.
- An FDCPA claim under 15 U.S.C. § 1692f(6) requires proof that the repossessor took or threatened nonjudicial dispossession when there was “no present right to possession”; where a present right exists under governing law, the claim fails as a matter of law.

## Conclusion

The court treated Article 9’s breach-of-the-peace limitation as applicable to repossession agents but found genuine disputes requiring trial on that theory, while dismissing the FDCPA § 1692f(6) claim because the defendants had a present right to possession of the truck during the relevant time.


Osborne v. Minnesota Recovery Bureau, Inc., No. 04-1167, 2006 WL 1314420 (D. Minn. May 12, 2006)