PHILADELPHIA – A local woman argues that while six months pregnant, she was seriously injured by repo men who came to her home to take possession of her vehicle, while a bank entity alleges her complaint has no standing and is barred by several statutory avenues of law.
Siani Goodwin of Philadelphia filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Aug. 1 versus J. Michaels Auto Sales, Inc., Michael Simmons and Janet B. Simmons, also all of Philadelphia, plus Recovery Management Systems, John Doe Repo Men One and Two, all of Collegeville, and Crescent Bank of New Orleans, La.
In her lawsuit, Goodwin says she went to J. Michaels Auto Sales on March 9, 2016 and purchased a pre-owned 2010 Nissan Altima, however, she said it was sold in a “defective, unfit, unmerchantable and dangerous condition.”
“Defendants represented that they were signing the Title Certificate of the car over to plaintiff by representing that it would process the Title with the Department of Motor Vehicles, by acting as an agent of the Department of Motor Vehicle to provide hers with a temporary tag and a temporary registration, and by using various contract documents that asserted that she was the owner of the car and was giving up a security interest in the car. Although defendants gave plaintiff possession of the car on the aforementioned date, because defendants did provide the vehicle as represented and promised,” the lawsuit said.
On Feb. 6 of this year, believing the plaintiff was in default of the sales agreement, the car seller hired defendant Recovery Management Services and both John Doe repo men to retake possession of the vehicle. Several weeks later, on March 9, the repo men came to the plaintiff’s residence to do just that at 1:30 a.m., the suit says.
Goodwin was pregnant and also had a four year-old daughter in her residence, who were all awoken by the knock on the door of the repo men defendants, the suit says. When learning of their purpose for being there, Goodwin provided proof of payment and that she was current on her account, but allegedly, the repo men were not to be deterred in their mission to take the vehicle back.
Goodwin asked to retrieve her wallet and her daughter’s school and book bag from the vehicle, which she was allowed to do, but then the first repo man allegedly grabbed her by the neck, twisted and pulled her out of the vehicle and threw her to the ground, yelling for the second repo man to drive away. The first repo man then released the plaintiff, ran down the block and caught up to the vehicle down the street, and the pair of repo men drove off into the night.
Goodwin says she and her daughter were left terrified and crying, with her having sustained an injured back and a cut to her leg, which was bleeding. Goodwin was 24 weeks pregnant at the time, leading her to call 911 for the police and an ambulance. She was taken to the emergency room at Albert Einstein Medical Center, treated and released – and allegedly, never received the necessary post-vehicle repossession notice.
“As a result of the defendants’ unlawful actions, the plaintiff suffered physical injury to her neck, shoulder and back, laceration and abrasion to her leg, contusions requiring medical treatment, suffered pregnancy complications requiring medical treatment, suffered and suffers from mental and emotional injuries, including anxiety, nightmares and upset stomach, has been deprived of the use of the vehicle, has incurred expenses for replacement transportation, has suffered damage to her credit rating and credit reputation, and has suffered extreme emotional distress, frustration, humiliation and/or embarrassment,” the suit says.
On Aug. 24, defendant Crescent Bank filed an answer to the complaint categorically denying the plaintiff’s assertions, saying her suit fails to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and that it lacks personal jurisdiction over it, that she failed to mitigate her damages, that her own conduct caused her damages and that the complaint was barred by the statute of limitations, res judicata, collateral estoppel, payment and release, waiver, accord and satisfaction.
It also asserted cross-claims on behalf of Crescent Bank versus the other defendants.
The plaintiff is represented by William C. Bensley of Bensley Law Offices, in Philadelphia.
The defendants are represented by Gerard X. Smith and Michael J. Follett of Naulty Scaricamazza & McDevitt in Philadelphia, plus Brendan H. Little of Lippes Mathias Wexler Friedman, in Buffalo, N.Y.
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 180703681
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com