PHILADELPHIA -- A district court has denied a motion to remand filed by a person who sued Capital One Auto Finance after his vehicle was repossessed.
On Jan. 23, Judge Harvey Bartle III for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied Randy Langer's motion to remand on the "ground that this court does not have subject matter jurisdiction because plaintiffs do not have standing to pursue this action."
Langer filed the motion to remand in December and is seeking to represent a similar class of individuals against Capital One Auto Finance for alleged violation of the Pennsylvania Commercial Code (PCC) and the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Sales Finance Act (MVSFA) in connection with the repossession of vehicles.
Langer's lawyers attempted to argue that they did not have standing under U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Spokeo to pursue the claim in federal court.
"Here, plaintiffs have not alleged an attenuated risk of future harm or a bare violation of statute divorced from any actual injury," Bartle wrote. "Instead, as stated above, they have alleged a particularized and concrete injury, that is, the repossession of their vehicles in a manner contrary to Pennsylvania law."
According to the complaint, Langer also filed a class action suit in Jefferson County alleging that he, along with other litigants, were charged hidden fees by Capital One in connection with their vehicle repossessions. They alleged that the company, "did not provide the minimum 15-day notice required under the PCC. Such notice period is designed to afford vehicle owners an opportunity to comply with the terms of the loan and thus keep possession of their vehicles."
They also claimed that Capital One failed to disclose that vehicles were sold at public, rather than private, auctions.