Detailed Notes for dispute:

-Buyer accepted and tendered (by paying to the order of the account name) issued negotiable credit instrument
by order of signature for credit. Credit profile was assigned to Capital One, Capital One issued the credit
instrument, statement is the negotiable instrument from the credit from the credit profile that we issued in the
contract. Capital One guaranteed the usable credit. The account is obligated to pay and I am the Holder in Due
Course, as Holder in Due Course, I have a responsibility to act.

Now that the instrument has been tendered back, paying on behalf of the credit account, as the creditor in use.
If credit is not accepted extortion of credit has officially been sighted as a violation of law.

As the holder in due course the account has been claimed via acceptace of the corrected statement, signed, and
returned via United States Postal Office certified mail.

file:///C:/Users/Lenovo/Downloads/SEC%20Case%20Public%20Response.pdf

§ 7-102. Definitions and Index of Definitions.

[Gematria – Goal of the code = ORDINAL PERFECTION. Words/phrases to use to dominate

spell: Spiritual Perfection, Unity and commencement, Importance and emphatic, difference, and
the sense of opposition or division.]

(a) In this Article, unless the context otherwise requires:

(1) "Bailee" means a person that by a warehouse receipt, bill of lading, or other document of
title acknowledges possession of goods and contracts to deliver them.
(2) "Carrier" means a person that issues a bill of lading.
(3) "Consignee" means a person named in a bill of lading to which or to whose order the bill
promises delivery.
(4) "Consignor" means a person named in a bill of lading as the person from which
the goods have been received for shipment.
(5) "Delivery order" means a record that contains an order to deliver goods directed to a
warehouse, carrier, or other person that in the ordinary course of business issues warehouse
receipts or bills of lading.
(6) "Good faith" means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards
of fair dealing.
(7) "Goods" means all things that are treated as movable for the purposes of a contract for
storage or transportation.
(8) "Issuer" means a bailee that issues a document of title or, in the case of an
unaccepted delivery order, the person that orders the possessor of goods to deliver. The term
includes a person for which an agent or employee purports to act in issuing a document if the
agent or employee has real or apparent authority to issue documents, even if the issuer did not
receive any goods, the goods were misdescribed, or in any other respect the agent or employee
violated the issuer's instructions.
(9) "Person entitled under the document" means the holder, in the case of a negotiable
document of title, or the person to which delivery of the goods is to be made by the terms of, or
pursuant to instructions in a record under, a nonnegotiable document of title.
(10) "Record" means information that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an
electronic or other medium and is retrievable in perceivable form.
(11) "Sign" means, with present intent to authenticate or adopt a record:
(A) to execute or adopt a tangible symbol; or
(B) to attach to or logically associate with the record an electronic sound, symbol, or
process.
(12) "Shipper" means a person that enters into a contract of transportation with a carrier.
(13) "Warehouse" means a person engaged in the business of storing goods for hire.

(b) Definitions in other articles applying to this article and the sections in which they
appear are:
(1) "Contract for sale", Section 2-106.
(2) "Lessee in ordinary course of business", Section 2A-103.
(3) "Receipt" of goods, Section 2-103.

(c) In addition, Article 1 contains general definitions and principles of construction and
interpretation applicable throughout this article.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-106. Definitions: "Contract"; "Agreement"

(1) In this Article unless the context otherwise requires "contract" and "agreement" are limited
to those relating to the present or future sale of goods. "Contract for sale" includes both a
present sale of goods and a contract to sell goods at a future time. A "sale" consists in the
passing of title from the seller to the buyer for a price (Section 2-401). A "present sale" means
a sale which is accomplished by the making of the contract.

(2) Goods or conduct including any part of a performance are "conforming" or conform to
the contract when they are in accordance with the obligations under the contract.

(3) "Termination" occurs when either party pursuant to a power created by agreement or law
puts an end to the contract otherwise than for its breach. On "termination" all obligations which
are still executory on both sides are discharged but any right based on prior breach or
performance survives.

(4) "Cancellation" occurs when either party puts an end to the contract for breach by the other
and its effect is the same as that of "termination" except that the cancelling party also retains
any remedy for breach of the whole contract or any unperformed balance.

Each provision of this Article with regard to the rights, obligations and remedies of the seller,
the buyer, purchasers or other third parties applies irrespective of title to the goodsexcept where
the provision refers to such title. Insofar as situations are not covered by the other provisions of
this Article and matters concerning title become material the following rules apply:
§ 2-401. Passing of Title; Reservation for Security; Limited Application of This Section
[Gematria – Goal of the code = SPIRITUAL PERFECTION. Words/phrases to use to
dominate spell: Difference, and the sense of opposition or division, Creative Works (Always in
reference to the material creation), and completion/ resurrection, Unity and commencement,
Importance and emphatic,.]

(1) Title to goods cannot pass under a contract for sale prior to their identification to
the contract (Section 2-501), and unless otherwise explicitly agreed the buyer acquires by their
identification a special property as limited by this Act. Any retention or reservation by
the sellerof the title (property) in goods shipped or delivered to the buyer is limited in effect to a
reservation of a security interest. Subject to these provisions and to the provisions of the Article
on Secured Transactions (Article 9), title to goods passes from the seller to the buyer in any
manner and on any conditions explicitly agreed on by the parties.
(2) Unless otherwise explicitly agreed title passes to the buyer at the time and place at which
the seller completes his performance with reference to the physical delivery of the goods,
despite any reservation of a security interest and even though a document of title is to be
delivered at a different time or place; and in particular and despite any reservation of a security
interest by the bill of lading
 (a) if the contract requires or authorizes the seller to send the goods to the buyerbut does
not require him to deliver them at destination, title passes to the buyer at the time and
place of shipment; but
 (b) if the contract requires delivery at destination, title passes on tender there.
(3) Unless otherwise explicitly agreed where delivery is to be made without moving the goods,
 (a) if the selleris to deliver a document of title, title passes at the time when and the place
where he delivers such documents; or
 (b) if the goods are at the time of contracting already identified and no documents are to
be delivered, title passes at the time and place of contracting.
(4) A rejection or other refusal by the buyer to receive or retain the goods, whether or not
justified, or a justified revocation of acceptance revests title to the goods in the seller. Such
revesting occurs by operation of law and is not a "sale".

1. § 2-403. Power to Transfer; Good Faith Purchase of Goods; "Entrusting".

(1:12 min mark)
[Gematria – Goal of the code = FINALITY OF JUDGEMENT. Words/phrases to use to
dominate spell: Difference, and the sense of opposition or division, Creative Works (Always in
reference to the material creation), and completion/ resurrection]

(1) A purchaser of goods acquires all title which his transferor had or had power to transfer
except that a purchaser of a limited interest acquires rights only to the extent of the interest
purchased. A person with voidable title has power to transfer a good title to a good
faithpurchaser for value. When goods have been delivered under a transaction of purchase the
purchaser has such power even though
 (a) the transferor was deceived as to the identity of the purchaser, or
 (b) the delivery was in exchange for a check which is later dishonored, or
 (c) it was agreed that the transaction was to be a "cash sale", or
 (d) the delivery was procured through fraud punishable as larcenous under the criminal
law.
(2) Any entrusting of possession of goods to a merchant who deals in goods of that kind gives
him power to transfer all rights of the entruster to a buyerin ordinary course of business.
(3) "Entrusting" includes any delivery and any acquiescence in retention of possession
regardless of any condition expressed between the parties to the delivery or acquiescence and
regardless of whether the procurement of the entrusting or the possessor's disposition of
the goodshave been such as to be larcenous under the criminal law.
[Note: If a state adopts the repealer of Article 6-Bulk Transfers (Alternative A), subsec. (4)
should read as follows:]
(4) The rights of other purchasers of goodsand of lien creditors are governed by the Articles on
Secured Transactions (Article 9) and Documents of Title (Article 7).
[Note: If a state adopts Revised Article 6-Bulk Sales (Alternative B), subsec. (4) should read as
follows:]
(4) The rights of other purchasers of goodsand of lien creditors are governed by the Articles on
Secured Transactions (Article 9), Bulk Sales (Article 6) and Documents of Title (Article 7).
[Note: As amended in 1988.]

15 USC § 1692 – §1692a. Definitions

As used in this subchapter-

(1) The term "Bureau" means the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

(2) The term "communication" means the conveying of information regarding a debt directly or
indirectly to any person through any medium.

(3) The term "consumer" means any natural person obligated or allegedly obligated to pay any
debt.

(4) The term "creditor" means any person who offers or extends credit creating a debt or to
whom a debt is owed, but such term does not include any person to the extent that he receives
an assignment or transfer of a debt in default solely for the purpose of facilitating collection of
such debt for another.

(5) The term "debt" means any obligation or alleged obligation of a consumer to pay money
arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services which are the
subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, whether or
not such obligation has been reduced to judgment.
(6) The term "debt collector" means any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate
commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any
debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due
or asserted to be owed or due another. Notwithstanding the exclusion provided by clause (F) of
the last sentence of this paragraph, the term includes any creditor who, in the process of
collecting his own debts, uses any name other than his own which would indicate that a third
person is collecting or attempting to collect such debts. For the purpose of section 1692f(6) of
this title, such term also includes any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate
commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the enforcement of
security interests. The term does not include-

(A) any officer or employee of a creditor while, in the name of the creditor, collecting debts for
such creditor;

(B) any person while acting as a debt collector for another person, both of whom are related by
common ownership or affiliated by corporate control, if the person acting as a debt collector
does so only for persons to whom it is so related or affiliated and if the principal business of
such person is not the collection of debts;

(C) any officer or employee of the United States or any State to the extent that collecting or
attempting to collect any debt is in the performance of his official duties;

(D) any person while serving or attempting to serve legal process on any other person in
connection with the judicial enforcement of any debt;

(E) any nonprofit organization which, at the request of consumers, performs bona fide
consumer credit counseling and assists consumers in the liquidation of their debts by receiving
payments from such consumers and distributing such amounts to creditors; and

(F) any person collecting or attempting to collect any debt owed or due or asserted to be owed
or due another to the extent such activity (i) is incidental to a bona fide fiduciary obligation or a
bona fide escrow arrangement; (ii) concerns a debt which was originated by such person; (iii)
concerns a debt which was not in default at the time it was obtained by such person; or (iv)
concerns a debt obtained by such person as a secured party in a commercial credit transaction
involving the creditor.

(7) The term "location information" means a consumer's place of abode and his telephone
number at such place, or his place of employment.

(8) The term "State" means any State, territory, or possession of the United States, the District
of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any political subdivision of any of the
foregoing.
§1692b. Acquisition of location information

Any debt collector communicating with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of
acquiring location information about the consumer shall-

(1) identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting location information concerning
the consumer, and, only if expressly requested, identify his employer;

(2) not state that such consumer owes any debt;

(3) not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such
person or unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person
is erroneous or incomplete and that such person now has correct or complete location
information;

(4) not communicate by post card;

(5) not use any language or symbol on any envelope or in the contents of any communication
effected by the mails or telegram that indicates that the debt collector is in the debt collection
business or that the communication relates to the collection of a debt; and

(6) after the debt collector knows the consumer is represented by an attorney with regard to the
subject debt and has knowledge of, or can readily ascertain, such attorney's name and address,
not communicate with any person other than that attorney, unless the attorney fails to respond
within a reasonable period of time to communication from the debt collector.

18 USC Ch. 42: EXTORTIONATE CREDIT TRANSACTIONS

§891. Definitions and rules of construction
[Gematria – Goal of the code = HUMANITY. Unity and commencement / Importance and
emphatic, new beginning, finality of judgment, Creative Works (Always in reference to the
material creation), Difference, and the sense of opposition or division]

§891. Definitions and rules of construction

For the purposes of this chapter:
(1) To extend credit means to make or renew any loan, or to enter into any agreement, tacit or
express, whereby the repayment or satisfaction of any debt or claim, whether acknowledged or
disputed, valid or invalid, and however arising, may or will be deferred.
(2) The term "creditor", with reference to any given extension of credit, refers to any person
making that extension of credit, or to any person claiming by, under, or through any person
making that extension of credit.
(3) The term "debtor", with reference to any given extension of credit, refers to any person to
whom that extension of credit is made, or to any person who guarantees the repayment of that
extension of credit, or in any manner undertakes to indemnify the creditor against loss resulting
from the failure of any person to whom that extension of credit is made to repay the same.
(4) The repayment of any extension of credit includes the repayment, satisfaction, or discharge
in whole or in part of any debt or claim, acknowledged or disputed, valid or invalid, resulting
from or in connection with that extension of credit.
(5) To collect an extension of credit means to induce in any way any person to make repayment
thereof.
(6) An extortionate extension of credit is any extension of credit with respect to which it is the
understanding of the creditor and the debtor at the time it is made that delay in making
repayment or failure to make repayment could result in the use of violence or other criminal
means to cause harm to the person, reputation, or property of any person.
(7) An extortionate means is any means which involves the use, or an express or implicit threat
of use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to the person, reputation, or property
of any person.
(8) The term "State" includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and
territories and possessions of the United States.
(9) State law, including conflict of laws rules, governing the enforceability through civil judicial
processes of repayment of any extension of credit or the performance of any promise given in
consideration thereof shall be judicially noticed. This paragraph does not impair any authority
which any court would otherwise have to take judicial notice of any matter of State law.
(Added Pub. L. 90–321, title II, §202(a), May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 160.)

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Congressional Findings and Declaration of Purpose
Pub. L. 90–321, title II, §201, May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 159, provided that:
"(a) The Congress makes the following findings:
"(1) Organized crime is interstate and international in character. Its activities involve many
billions of dollars each year. It is directly responsible for murders, willful injuries to person and
property, corruption of officials, and terrorization of countless citizens. A substantial part of the
income of organized crime is generated by extortionate credit transactions.
"(2) Extortionate credit transactions are characterized by the use, or the express or implicit
threat of the use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to person, reputation, or
property as a means of enforcing repayment. Among the factors which have rendered past
efforts at prosecution almost wholly ineffective has been the existence of exclusionary rules of
evidence stricter than necessary for the protection of constitutional rights.
"(3) Extortionate credit transactions are carried on to a substantial extent in interstate and
foreign commerce and through the means and instrumentalities of such commerce. Even where
extortionate credit transactions are purely intrastate in character, they nevertheless directly
affect interstate and foreign commerce.
"(4) Extortionate credit transactions directly impair the effectiveness and frustrate the purposes
of the laws enacted by the Congress on the subject of bankruptcies.
"(b) On the basis of the findings stated in subsection (a) of this section, the Congress determines
that the provisions of chapter 42 of title 18 of the United States Code are necessary and proper
for the purpose of carrying into execution the powers of Congress to regulate commerce and to
establish uniform and effective laws on the subject of bankruptcy."
Annual Report to Congress by Attorney General
Pub. L. 90–321, title II, §203, May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 162, directed Attorney General to make
an annual report to Congress of activities of Department of Justice in enforcement of this
chapter, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 97–375, title I, §109(b), Dec. 21, 1982, 96 Stat. 1820.

Editorial Notes
Amendments
1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–322 substituted "fined under this title" for "fined not more than
$10,000".

§892. Making extortionate extensions of credit

[Gematria – Goal of the code = START OF JUDGEMENT. New Beginning, finality of
judgment, Difference, and the sense of opposition or division]

(a) Whoever makes any extortionate extension of credit, or conspires to do so, shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
(b) In any prosecution under this section, if it is shown that all of the following factors were
present in connection with the extension of credit in question, there is prima facie evidence that
the extension of credit was extortionate, but this subsection is nonexclusive and in no way limits
the effect or applicability of subsection (a):
(1) The repayment of the extension of credit, or the performance of any promise given in
consideration thereof, would be unenforceable, through civil judicial processes against the
debtor
(A) in the jurisdiction within which the debtor, if a natural person, resided or
(B) in every jurisdiction within which the debtor, if other than a natural person, was
incorporated or qualified to do business at the time the extension of credit was made.
(2) The extension of credit was made at a rate of interest in excess of an annual rate of 45
per centum calculated according to the actuarial method of allocating payments made on a
debt between principal and interest, pursuant to which a payment is applied first to the
accumulated interest and the balance is applied to the unpaid principal.
(3) At the time the extension of credit was made, the debtor reasonably believed that either
(A) one or more extensions of credit by the creditor had been collected or attempted to be
collected by extortionate means, or the nonrepayment thereof had been punished by
extortionate means; or
(B) the creditor had a reputation for the use of extortionate means to collect extensions of
credit or to punish the nonrepayment thereof.

(4) Upon the making of the extension of credit, the total of the extensions of credit by the
creditor to the debtor then outstanding, including any unpaid interest or similar charges,
exceeded $100.
 (c) In any prosecution under this section, if evidence has been introduced tending to show the
existence of any of the circumstances described in subsection (b)(1) or (b)(2), and direct
evidence of the actual belief of the debtor as to the creditor's collection practices is not
available, then for the purpose of showing the understanding of the debtor and the creditor at
the time the extension of credit was made, the court may in its discretion allow evidence to be
introduced tending to show the reputation as to collection practices of the creditor in any
community of which the debtor was a member at the time of the extension.

§893. Financing extortionate extensions of credit

[Gematria – Goal of the code = DIFFERENCE/THE SENSE OF OPPOSITION OR DIVISION.
New Beginning, finality of judgment, completion and resurrection]

Whoever willfully advances money or property, whether as a gift, as a loan, as an investment,

pursuant to a partnership or profit-sharing agreement, or otherwise, to any person, with
reasonable grounds to believe that it is the intention of that person to use the money or property
so advanced directly or indirectly for the purpose of making extortionate extensions of credit,
shall be fined under this title or an amount not exceeding twice the value of the money or
property so advanced, whichever is greater, or shall be imprisoned not more than 20 years, or
both.
(Added Pub. L. 90–321, title II, §202(a), May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 161; amended Pub. L. 103–
322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

Editorial Notes
Amendments
1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted "fined under this title" for "fined not more than $10,000".

§894. Collection of extensions of credit by extortionate means

[Gematria – Goal of the code = COMPLETION/RESURRECTION, New Beginning, finality of
judgment, Creative Works (Always in reference to the material creation),]

(a) Whoever knowingly participates in any way, or conspires to do so, in the use of any
extortionate means
(1) to collect or attempt to collect any extension of credit, or
(2) to punish any person for the nonrepayment thereof,

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
(b) In any prosecution under this section, for the purpose of showing an implicit threat as a
means of collection, evidence may be introduced tending to show that one or more extensions
of credit by the creditor were, to the knowledge of the person against whom the implicit threat
was alleged to have been made, collected or attempted to be collected by extortionate means or
that the nonrepayment thereof was punished by extortionate means.
(c) In any prosecution under this section, if evidence has been introduced tending to show the
existence, at the time the extension of credit in question was made, of the circumstances
described in section 892(b)(1) or the circumstances described in section 892(b)(2), and direct
evidence of the actual belief of the debtor as to the creditor's collection practices is not
available, then for the purpose of showing that words or other means of communication, shown
to have been employed as a means of collection, in fact carried an express or implicit threat, the
court may in its discretion allow evidence to be introduced tending to show the reputation of the
defendant in any community of which the person against whom the alleged threat was made
was a member at the time of the collection or attempt at collection.
(Added Pub. L. 90–321, title II, §202(a), May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 161; amended Pub. L. 103–
322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

§896. Effect on State laws

This chapter does not preempt any field of law with respect to which State legislation would be
permissible in the absence of this chapter. No law of any State which would be valid in the
absence of this chapter may be held invalid or inapplicable by virtue of the existence of this
chapter, and no officer, agency, or instrumentality of any State may be deprived by virtue of
this chapter of any jurisdiction over any offense over which it would have jurisdiction in the
absence of this chapter.

6500 - Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

PART 1026—TRUTH IN LENDING (REGULATION Z)
A.K.A
C.F.R. § 1026.13 Billing error resolution.

(a) Definition of billing error. For purposes of this section, the term billing error means:

(1) A reflection on or with a periodic statement of an extension of credit that is not made to the
consumer or to a person who has actual, implied, or apparent authority to use the consumer's
credit card or open-end credit plan.

(2) A reflection on or with a periodic statement of an extension of credit that is not identified in
accordance with the requirements of §§ 1026.7(a)(2) or (b)(2), as applicable, and 1026.8.

(3) A reflection on or with a periodic statement of an extension of credit for property or

services not accepted by the consumer or the consumer's designee, or not delivered to the
consumer or the consumer's designee as agreed.

(4) A reflection on a periodic statement of the creditor's failure to credit properly a payment or
other credit issued to the consumer's account.

(5) A reflection on a periodic statement of a computational or similar error of an accounting

nature that is made by the creditor.
(6) A reflection on a periodic statement of an extension of credit for which the consumer
requests additional clarification, including documentary evidence.

(7) The creditor's failure to mail or deliver a periodic statement to the consumer's last known
address if that address was received by the creditor, in writing, at least 20 days before the end of
the billing cycle for which the statement was required.

(b) Billing error notice. A billing error notice is a written notice from a consumer that:

(1) Is received by a creditor at the address disclosed under § 1026.7(a)(9) or (b)(9), as

applicable, no later than 60 days after the creditor transmitted the first periodic statement that
reflects the alleged billing error;

(2) Enables the creditor to identify the consumer's name and account number; and

(3) To the extent possible, indicates the consumer's belief and the reasons for the belief that a
billing error exists, and the type, date, and amount of the error.

(c) Time for resolution; general procedures. (1) The creditor shall mail or deliver written
acknowledgment to the consumer within 30 days of receiving a billing error notice, unless the
creditor has complied with the appropriate resolution procedures of paragraphs (e) and (f) of
this section, as applicable, within the 30-day period; and

(2) The creditor shall comply with the appropriate resolution procedures of paragraphs (e) and
(f) of this section, as applicable, within 2 complete billing cycles (but in no event later than 90
days) after receiving a billing error notice.

(d) Rules pending resolution. Until a billing error is resolved under paragraph (e) or (f) of this
section, the following rules apply:

(1) Consumer's right to withhold disputed amount; collection action prohibited. The consumer
need not pay (and the creditor may not try to collect) any portion of any required payment that
the consumer believes is related to the disputed amount (including related finance or other
charges). If the cardholder has enrolled in an automatic payment planoffered by the card issuer
and has agreed to pay the credit card indebtedness by periodic deductions from the cardholder's
deposit account, the card issuer shall not deduct any part of the disputed amount or related
finance or other charges if a billing error notice is received any time up to 3 business days
before the scheduled payment date.

(2) Adverse credit reports prohibited. The creditor or its agent shall not (directly or indirectly)
make or threaten to make an adverse report to any person about the consumer's credit standing,
or report that an amount or account is delinquent, because the consumer failed to pay the
disputed amount or related finance or other charges.
(3) Acceleration of debt and restriction of account prohibited. A creditor shall not accelerate
any part of the consumer's indebtedness or restrict or close a consumer's account solely because
the consumer has exercised in good faith rights provided by this section. A creditor may be
subject to the forfeiture penalty under 15 U.S.C. 1666(e) for failure to comply with any of the
requirements of this section.

(4) Permitted creditor actions. A creditor is not prohibited from taking action to collect any
undisputed portion of the item or bill; from deducting any disputed amount and related finance
or other charges from the consumer's credit limit on the account; or from reflecting a disputed
amount and related finance or other charges on a periodic statement, provided that the creditor
indicates on or with the periodic statement that payment of any disputed amount and related
finance or other charges is not required pending the creditor's compliance with this section.

(e) Procedures if billing error occurred as asserted. If a creditor determines that a billing error
occurred as asserted, it shall within the time limits in paragraph (c)(2) of this section:

(1) Correct the billing error and credit the consumer's account with any disputed amount and
related finance or other charges, as applicable; and

(2) Mail or deliver a correction notice to the consumer.

(f) Procedures if different billing error or no billing error occurred. If, after conducting a
reasonable investigation, a creditor determines that no billing error occurred or that a different
billing error occurred from that asserted, the creditor shall within the time limits in paragraph
(c)(2) of this section:

(1) Mail or deliver to the consumer an explanation that sets forth the reasons for the creditor's
belief that the billing error alleged by the consumer is incorrect in whole or in part;

(2) Furnish copies of documentary evidence of the consumer's indebtedness, if the consumer so
requests; and

(3) If a different billing error occurred, correct the billing error and credit the consumer's
account with any disputed amount and related finance or other charges, as applicable.

(g) Creditor's rights and duties after resolution. If a creditor, after complying with all of the
requirements of this section, determines that a consumer owes all or part of the disputed amount
and related finance or other charges, the creditor:

(1) Shall promptly notify the consumer in writing of the time when payment is due and the
portion of the disputed amount and related finance or other charges that the consumer still
owes;
(2) Shall allow any time period disclosed under § 1026.6(a)(1) or (b)(2)(v), as applicable, and §
1026.7(a)(8) or (b)(8), as applicable, during which the consumer can pay the amount due under
paragraph (g)(1) of this section without incurring additional finance or other charges;

(3) May report an account or amount as delinquent because the amount due under paragraph
(g)(1) of this section remains unpaid after the creditor has allowed any time period disclosed
under § 1026.6(a)(1) or (b)(2)(v), as applicable, and § 1026.7(a)(8) or (b)(8), as applicable or 10
days (whichever is longer) during which the consumer can pay the amount; but

(4) May not report that an amount or account is delinquent because the amount due under
paragraph (g)(1) of the section remains unpaid, if the creditor receives (within the time allowed
for payment in paragraph (g)(3) of this section) further written notice from the consumer that
any portion of the billing error is still in dispute, unless the creditor also:

(i) Promptly reports that the amount or account is in dispute;

(ii) Mails or delivers to the consumer (at the same time the report is made) a written notice of
the name and address of each person to whom the creditor makes a report; and

(iii) Promptly reports any subsequent resolution of the reported delinquency to all persons to
whom the creditor has made a report.

(h) Reassertion of billing error. A creditor that has fully complied with the requirements of this
section has no further responsibilities under this section (other than as provided in paragraph (g)
(4) of this section) if a consumer reasserts substantially the same billing error.

(i) Relation to Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E. A creditor shall comply with the
requirements of Regulation E, 12 CFR 1005.11, and 1005.18(e) as applicable, governing error
resolution rather than those of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (e), (f), and (h) of this section if:

(1) Except with respect to a prepaid account as defined in § 1026.61, an extension of credit that
is incident to an electronic fund transfer occurs under an agreement between the consumer and a
financial institution to extend credit when the consumer's account is overdrawn or to maintain a
specified minimum balance in the consumer's account; or

(2) With regard to a covered separate credit feature and an asset feature of a prepaid account
where both are accessible by a hybrid prepaid-credit card as defined in § 1026.61, an extension
of credit that is incident to an electronic fund transfer occurs when the hybrid prepaid-credit
card accesses both funds in the asset feature of the prepaid account and a credit extension from
the credit feature with respect to a particular transaction.

[Codified to 12 C.F.R. § 1026.13]

C. NEGOTIABLE AND NON-NEGOTIABLE DOCUMENTS OF TITLE

23. Distinction between negotiable and non-negotiable documents of title of critical

importance. Documents of title are of two types -- negotiable documents of title and non-
negotiable documents of title. With regard to the ownership function of documents of title, this
distinction between negotiable documents and non-negotiable documents is the distinction of
fundamental importance.

24. Negotiable documents created by specific words. Negotiable documents must be

recognizable as negotiable documents on the face of the document by the terms of the document
itself. In other words, any person who reads a document of title must be able to know from the
terms of the document itself that the document is negotiable. In light of this requirement, certain
terms have come to be recognized as the terms of negotiable documents. Any other terms are
unacceptable and do not make a document a negotiable document.
a) Bearer documents. A document of title which on its face states that the goods covered
by the document are to be "delivered to bearer" is a negotiable document. The legally important
words are the words in quotation marks œ —delivered to bearer“.58 If a document of title is a
bearer document, the document of title is quite similar to money currency -- whoever has the
document (the money) in possession is presumed to be the owner of the document (the money)
and the goods it covers. One must safeguard bearer documents as carefully as one safeguards
money.
b) "Order" documents. A document of title which on its face states that the goods
covered by the document are to be "delivered to the order of a named person" is a negotiable
document.59 Bills of lading that use this "delivered to the order of" language have traditionally
been known as "order" documents. In the transportation industry an "order" document was the
common name for a negotiable document.
c) By agreement of the parties the document is non-negotiable. Even if the document of
title has the words of negotiability œ —delivered to bearer or to the order of a named person“ œ
the bailor or bailee may agree that a particular document of title will not be a negotiable
document. The parties must reach this agreement before issuance of the document. The parties
evidence their agreement that a document will not be a negotiable document by adding a
conspicuous legend to the face of the document stating that the document is non-negotiable.
The usual way the parties add the conspicuous legend is for them to stamp the document NON-
NEGOTIABLE.6

25. Non-negotiable documents -- all others without special words. Any document of title
which lacks the —bearer“ or —order“ language described in Paragraph 24 is a non-negotiable document no
matter what the document says on its face. For instance, if the document says that goods are to be —delivered
to a named person,“ the document is a non-negotiable document. For instance, if the document says that goods
are to be —delivered to a named person upon that person's endorsement and surrender of the document,“ the
document is a non-negotiable document despite the endorsement and surrender requirements before the bailee
must deliver the goods to the name person.61
 In the transportation industry, non-negotiable bills of lading have commonly been called "straight bills
of lading". It is also common, mandatory in the transportation industry under the Pomerene Act, for non-
negotiable documents of title to carry a legend on their face: "Nonnegotiable" or "Not Negotiable."62

26. The ownership function: comparing negotiable and non-negotiable documents of

title. By law and legal perspective, negotiable documents of title embody the goods that the negotiable
document covers. In other words, a negotiable document of title is considered to be the goods covered by the
document -- i.e. the goods have lost their separate identity and become embodied in the negotiable document of
title. Consequently, one who possesses a negotiable document of title is, in most instances, legally considered
to be in possession of the goods themselves. Once a negotiable document of title issues for goods, the bailor,
the bailee, and third parties to the bailment relationship thereafter must relate to one another through the
negotiable document itself because the negotiable document is (embodies, reifies) the goods. By contrast, non-
negotiable documents of title do not embody the goods covered by the document. Non-negotiable documents
give rights in the goods. Persons entitled to non-negotiable documents of title have claims to the goods
represented by the non-negotiable document of title through the non-negotiable document of title. However,
bailors, bailees, and third parties to the bailment relationship may still relate to one another through the goods
themselves. Non-negotiable documents of title create claims to the goods bailed but non-negotiable documents
of title are not the goods.

D. NEGOTIATION COMPARED TO TRANSFER

27. Negotiation of a negotiable tangible document: endorsement and/or delivery by voluntary

transfer of possession. Only a negotiable document of title can be "negotiated". If the negotiable tangible
document is a bearer document, negotiation occurs by delivery of the document to another person. Delivery
alone is sufficient for negotiation of a tangible bearer document. If the negotiable tangible document is "to the
order of a specific person," negotiation occurs when the specific person endorses the document with his or her
61 See, UCC ' 7-104(b) and Official Comment 1and UCC § 7-501(c)&(d); Pomerene Act, 49 U.S.C.A. '
80103(b)(1) (2000).62 See, Pomerene Act, 49 U.S.C.A. ' 80103(b)(2) (2000).21
signature and delivers the document. If the specific person endorses in blank -- i.e. by simply signing
his or her name, the signature in blank turns the negotiable tangible document into a bearer document. After
endorsement in blank, negotiation occurs by delivery alone of the tangible document to another person. If the
specific person endorses by signature to the order of a second specific person, negotiation occurs when the
endorser delivers to the second specific person. Once in the hands of the second specific person, the second
specific person can further negotiate the negotiable tangible document in accordance with the rules set forth in
this paragraph relating to signature and delivery.63 With respect to tangible documents of title, the word —
delivery“ means the voluntary transfer of possession.64 When a first person negotiates a negotiable document
of title to a second person, the first person hands on his ownership claims in the document of title and the goods
the document represents to the second person. PART V of this chapter provides fuller discussion of the
ownership claims that documents of title give to various persons.

31. Transferee of a non-negotiable document. A non-negotiable document, by its nature, cannot be

negotiated. A non-negotiable document, by its terms, is to a specific person and only that specific person.
Hence, even if the specific person named in the non-negotiable document endorses the non-negotiable
document, the endorsement and delivery do not constitute a negotiation of the non-negotiable document.
Although it is legally impossible to negotiate a non-negotiable document, the specific person named in the non-
negotiable title may transfer the non-negotiable document by sale or gift. Consequently, if the specific person
were to endorse or deliver the non-negotiable document to another person, the endorsement and delivery may
mean that the specific person has sold or gifted the non-negotiable document to the other person. The other
person to whom the non-negotiable document of title is transferred is a "transferee". One should not confuse a
transferee with a "holder" because these are different legal categorizations. Transferees and —holders“ have
different ownership claims to the document and the goods covered by the document. These ownership claims
for holders and transferees are more fully discussed in Part V of this chapter.

32. Transfer of a negotiable tangible document: compelling endorsement. If a

negotiable tangible document is to the order of a specific person, the specific person may
transfer the negotiable tangible document by sale or gift to another person by delivery (by
voluntary transfer of possession) alone but without endorsement. The person who receives
the negotiable tangible document lacking an endorsement is a transferee of the document.
The person who receives the negotiable tangible document only becomes a holder of the
tangible document when, and if, the endorsement occurs. If the person who receives the
negotiable tangible document lacking an endorsement has paid value for the document, that
transferee has the legal right to compel the specific person to endorse the document in order
for that transferee to become a holder of the tangible document by negotiation.

A. WHO IS THE CORRECT PERSON TO WHOM REDELIVERY IS OWED BY A BAILEE

34. Holder of a negotiable document of title. If the bailee (the warehouse or the
carrier) issues a negotiable document of title, the bailee must redeliver the goods to
whomever the negotiable document of title is negotiated. If the negotiable document is a
bearer document, the bailee must redeliver to the bearer of the document who asks for the
return of the goods. If the negotiable document is a document "to the order of a specific
person," the bailee must redeliver the goods to that specific person, or to whomever that
specific person has endorsed and delivered the negotiable tangible document, or to
whomever that specific person has delivered the negotiable electronic document. Holders of
negotiable documents are entitled to demand that bailees return the goods to them. 79
35. Others to whom delivery can be made without liability. As a general rule, which
includes the discussion in ' 34 supra and ' 36 infra, bailees may redeliver to persons entitled
under the document -- i.e. in accordance with the terms of the document – without liability. 80
Persons entitled under the document includes holders of a negotiable document (see '34,
supra) and the following persons:

a) Persons to whom delivery is to be made by the terms of a non-negotiable document

of title -- the person named in the non-negotiable document itself. Bailees can redeliver to the
bailor of a non-negotiable warehouse receipt. Bailees can redeliver to the consignee of a non-
negotiable bill of lading. When the warehouse receipt and the bill of lading are non-negotiable,
the terms of the document indicate that the bailor and the consignee are the person to whom
the document is issued. Consequently, under the terms of the document, the bailor and the
consignee are entitled to the redelivery of the goods because they are the person entitled
under the document.81
b) Persons to whom delivery is to be made pursuant to written instructions under a
non-negotiable document -- delivery orders. As discussed in ' 31 supra, although a non-
negotiable document cannot be negotiated, it can be transferred. If the bailor or the
consignee named in the non-negotiable document of title has transferred the non-negotiable
document, the bailee may redeliver the goods to the transferee if the transferee can present
to the bailee written instructions, from the bailor or the consignee named in the non-
negotiable document of title, directing the bailee to deliver to the transferee. 82 These written
instructions are called "delivery orders".83
If a person demanding redelivery from the bailee claims to be a transferee because the
demanding person has possession of the non-negotiable document of title and a contract for
purchase of the goods covered by the document, the warehouse or carrier should be very
reluctant to deliver the goods to the demanding person until that person can produce delivery
orders from the bailor or the consignee named in the non-negotiable document of title. Until
the bailee sees delivery orders, the bailee would be redelivering to a person who is not, per
the terms of the document, a person entitled under the document. Even though the bailee
might have an excuse for delivering to the demanding person, 84 until a person who is not
named in the document of title has delivery orders from the bailor or consignee named in the
non-negotiable document of title, the person is not a person entitled under the document.
Bailees may safely redeliver without liability only to person entitled under the document.

36. Bailee protected from liability for redelivery in good faith. If the bailee redelivers the goods to a
holder of a negotiable document of title, a bailor or consignee of a non-negotiable document of title, or a
transferee of a non-negotiable document of title who also has a delivery order, the bailee is protected from
liability for misdelivery so long as the bailee has acted in good faith. The UCC defines —good faith“ as —
honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing.“86
Consequently, a bailee who acts in good faith is protected from liability for misdelivery even if it is
factually true that the holder, bailor, consignee, or transferee was not the actual owner of the goods or otherwise
entitled to the goods.87 In other words, a bailee is protected from liability if the bailee redelivers to the person
entitled under the document even though as a factual matter the person entitled under the document is not the
actual owner of the goods. Under these circumstances, the actual owner has no legal claim against the bailee
for having misdelivered. Several illustrations help explain these legal principles:

a) Thief of goods. If a thief stole a truckload of furniture and stored the furniture in a warehouse under
a non-negotiable warehouse receipt, the warehouse would be free of liability to the true owner of the furniture if
the warehouse redelivered the goods to the thief in accordance with the terms of the warehouse receipt. This is
true so long as the warehouse acted in good faith. The warehouse would be acting in good faith, as an example,
if the warehouse was not acting in collusion with the thief and if the warehouse had no information about the
true owner‘s claim prior to the redelivery under the warehouse receipt.
b) Child with bearer documents. A woman stores several expensive fur coats in a warehouse and
receives a bearer (negotiable) warehouse receipt from the warehouse at the time of the delivery into storage.
Several weeks later, a 10-year old child comes to the warehouse with the bearer receipt and asks the warehouse
to redelivery the coats to him. Even though the child possesses the bearer documents, the warehouse should
probably not redeliver the fur coats to the child. If the warehouse gave the fur coats to the child, the warehouse
would likely not satisfy the requirement that the warehouse make redelivery in accordance with good faith.
Warehouses that redeliver to persons who are obviously unlikely to be the owners of the bailed goods have
probably failed to observe reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing.88
c) Transferee who notifies a bailee of transferee's claim to the goods. If a transferee of a document
of title notifies the warehouse or carrier of the transfer, and therefore of the transferee=s claim to the goods,89
the warehouser or carrier should be reluctant to redeliver the goods to the bailor or the consignee in whose name
the non-negotiable document of title was issued.90 Once the transferee has given the bailee notice of the
transfer, the bailee whoredelivers to the bailor or the consignee named in the non-negotiable document of title
may not be acting in accordance with good faith. Bailees should not choose between these competing claimants
on the hope that they are making the correct choice91 or that they are acting in accordance with good faith.92
Bailees should act as discussed in ' 37 infra.
d) True owner who notifies a bailee of the true owner‘s claim to the goods. As explained in § 36(a)
supra, in certain circumstances a baile may be free from liability to a true owner of goods even when the bailee
has redelivered the goods to a thief. However, if the true owner, prior to the redelivery, notifies the bailee that a
thief has stored the true owner‘s goods with the bailee, the bailee is at risk of liability for redelivering to the
person (the thief) to whom the bailee issued the document of title. Once the true owner gives this notice to the
bailee, the bailee who redelivers to the person named in the document of title is likely not acting in good
faith.93 Bailees should act as discussed in § 37 infra.

37. Bailees who face competing claims to the bailed goods. In the four illustrations in ' 36 above,
bailees could face competing claims to the bailed goods. Consider the illustrations in ' 36(a) and (d). A person
could tell the warehouse that he is the owner of the stolen furniture and demand that the warehouse give the
furniture back. How does the warehouse know that this claimant is the true owner rather than a second thief?
How does the warehouse know that the person accused of being a thief is really a thief rather than someone who
bought the furniture for cash from this claimant without receiving a bill of sale in return?
If bailees face demands for redelivery from two or more credible competing claimants to bailed goods,
bailees should not redeliver until the dispute is resolved. Bailees should be reluctant to resolve the dispute
between credible claimants. If the bailee redelivers to the incorrect person, the bailee is at risk of liability for the
misdelivery through the tort of conversion.94 Bailees facing multiple credible claims to bailed goods should
take advantage of the procedure of interpleader in the courts. Through an interpleader action, the bailee may ask
a court to settle the dispute between the competing claimants with the promise that the bailee will abide by the
judgment and will redeliver to whomever the court renders the favorable judgment. Both the UCC and the
Pomerene Act have specific provisions for bailees to use when facing conflicting claims to bailed goods.95
When a bailee initiates an interpleader action, the bailee incurs costs and attorney‘s fees. Moreover, the
bailee may have a lien to assert against the bailed goods. The UCC and Pomerene Act interpleader
procedures do not address whether the bailee may recover the costs and attorney‘s fees
associated with the interpleader action or whether the bailee may assert a lien in the
interpleader action. These issues of costs, attorney‘s fees, and liens are issues that the federal
or state process of interpleader address and resolve.96
B. WHEN TO REDELIVER AND THE CONDITIONS OF REDELIVERY

38. On demand and the conditions of demand redelivery. Bailees must redeliver to the
correct person entitled to the bailed goods upon the demand of the person entitled to the
goods.97 When a proper demand for redelivery is made, several conditions exist before the
bailee legally must comply with the redelivery demand.

a) Payment of the charges owed the bailee. The bailee may lawfully insist that the
person properly demanding redelivery pay any charges or fees owed to the bailee for
providing bailment services. Indeed, under some American laws, bailees are prohibited by law
from redelivering until the charges and fees are paid.98
b) Return of negotiable document for cancellation or notation of partial redelivery. If
the person making the proper demand for redelivery possesses a negotiable document of title,
the bailee should not redeliver unless the person making the demand surrenders the
negotiable document to the bailee. If the bailee redelivers all the bailed goods, the bailee
should cancel the negotiable document and remove it from further circulation as a negotiable
document. If the bailee only redelivers a part of the bailed goods, the bailee should either
cancel the original negotiable document and issue a new negotiable document for the goods
remaining in the bailment, or conspicuously note the partial delivery on the face of the
negotiable document before it is returned to the person entitled to the document. 99 If a bailee
redelivers goods covered by a negotiable document of title without taking up the negotiable
document for cancellation or notation of partial delivery, the bailee is responsible to any
person who buys the negotiable document for value in good faith. The bailee is accountable to
the good faith purchaser of the negotiable document because the bailee failed to take actions
to remove the negotiable document, now containing incorrect information about the bailed
goods, from circulation. As between a bailee who could have prevented an incorrect
negotiable document remaining in circulation and a purchaser for value in good faith, bailment
law protects the purchaser for value in good faith.100
c) Receipt for redelivery. Bailees should insist that the person to whom the goods are
redelivered signs a receipt evidencing the return of the goods. As a practical matter, the
returned negotiable document stamped with the legend "CANCELLED" often serves as the
receipt for redelivery against a negotiable document. If bailees redeliver against a non-
negotiable document of title, bailees ordinarily should insist upon a separate signed receipt
evidencing the redelivery of the bailed goods. Bailees should keep the canceled negotiable
documents and the signed receipts as evidence of what goods were redelivered, to whom they
were redelivered, and when they were redelivered. Indeed, regulatory laws usually require
that bailees keep adequate records of redelivery.101

b) Judicial liens. A third party may win a lawsuit against a bailor of goods represented
by a document of title, either negotiable or non-negotiable. The third party may then ask the
court to attach the goods represented by the document of title to satisfy the judgment won in
the lawsuit. If the court grants the attachment, the court has created a judicial lien against the
goods represented by the document of title. While the bailee must obey the court order
attaching the goods, the precise timing for the bailee's obedience depends upon whether the
goods are represented by a non-negotiable or a negotiable document of title. i) With respect
to goods covered by a non-negotiable document of title. As to these goods, the bailee can
comply with the judicial lien and redeliver the
Terms:

Bailment:
The delivery of possession of personal property for a certain purpose other than the intent to transfer title to
he recipient.
Possession:
The holding of personal property so that the holder has the power to exercise complete dominion and control
over the property.
Custody:
The holding of personal property so that the holder merely has control over it for the purpose of inspection,
 preservation or security of the property.
Gratuitous Bailee:
A bailee who is watching over bailment property for no compensation and who is receiving no benefit from the
bailment relationship.
Bailment for Hire:
A bailment relationship, in which both parties benefit.

A bailment is the rightful possession of goods by someone who is not the owner of the goods.
The owner is the bailor. The person in possession is the bailee. For example:
Hertz owns a car rental business. OJ rents a new Cadillac SUV for a week. Hertz, as the
owner of the car, is the bailor. OJ, as the renter and as the one who has rightful possession of
the car, is the bailee.
The requirements for a bailment and, as such, the creation of the bailor-bailee
relationship, are very similar to the requirements of an inter-vivos gift. That is, the bailor must
intend to give the property to the bailee, there must be a delivery and there must be an
acceptance.
The differences between the elements of the formation of a bailment and the elements
of the formation of an inter-vivos gift are that, in the formation of a bailment: 1) The intent
must be to deliver possession of the property, not title; and 2) the acceptance of the bailee is
not presumed, as it is in the case of an inter-vivos gift.
In order to form a bailment, the bailee must accept possession of the property. It is not
enough that the bailee accept mere custody of the property. The difference between custody
and possession is that a possessor has complete dominion over the property while a custodian
merely has the duty of care or supervision over the property. For example:
1. Grace lends her car to Will for the weekend. Clearly, she intends for him to have
dominion and control over the car. Therefore, a bailment is created between Grace and
Will.
2. Grace parks her car in Will’s commercial parking lot. In this case, although Will may have
custody of the car because he is charged with supervision and/or care of the car, there
is no bailment that is formed. Grace clearly does not intend for Will to have dominion
and control over the car, as she has not given him the keys to the car. Therefore, she
does not intend to give him possession so there is no bailment.
3. Grace pulls into Will’s commercial parking garage, where Will is the valet parking
attendant. She gives Will the keys so that Will can park the car for her and retrieve the
car when she comes back for it. In this case, most courts would hold that there is a
bailment. Allowing a person to drive a car would probably be considered giving over
enough dominion and control of the car to be considered giving over possession rather
than mere custody. Nevertheless, this is a borderline case and could probably be argued
either way.
The issue of whether or not a bailment has been created is important because, once a
bailment has been established, a duty of care attaches to the bailee. Failure to live up to this
duty of care can cause the bailee to be liable for any harm that results to the property from
the failure of the bailee to properly care for the property. However, if there is no bailment
(only a custodial arrangement), the custodian has no affirmative duty to safeguard the
property.
Bailee’s Standard of Care
The standard of care owed by the bailee depends on who benefits from the bailment
relationship.
If the bailor is the sole beneficiary of the bailment relationship (i.e., the bailee is
watching the object without compensation), then the bailee is considered a “gratuitous
bailee.” In such a scenario, the bailee’s duty of care is at its lowest. The bailee will only be
liable if the property gets damaged through his or her “gross negligence.”
If the bailment relationship benefits both parties (e.g., when a person rents a car from a
car rental agency), the term for the relationship is “bailment for hire.” In such a case, the
bailee will be liable if the bailment gets damaged through his or her "ordinary negligence."
Finally, if the bailee is the sole beneficiary in the relationship (i.e., the bailee borrows
the property and doesn’t pay for its usage), then the bailee will be liable even if harm comes to
the property through his or her "slight negligence."
Note that if harm comes to the property through no fault of the bailee, he or she will
never be liable for the damages, unless the parties agreed to a contrary arrangement at the
time the bailment was created.
Regardless of who benefits from the bailment and what standard of care the bailee
must use, all bailees are held to strict liability when it comes to redelivering the property to
the true owner. Therefore, if the bailee misdelivers the property, he will be held liable even if
he uses better than reasonable care. For example:
Fred borrows a car from Barney to go on a fishing trip. When Fred returns from the
fishing trip, he returns the car to Mr. Slate. As a result, Barney incurs some economic damage
because he has lost the use of his car temporarily. In this case, Fred will be held liable for the
misdelivery even if he used reasonable care in delivering the car. This strict liability will apply
even if Fred did Barney a favor by washing the car.
Although a typical bailment agreement is consensual between both parties, there are
situations in which someone can become a bailee involuntarily. Typically, involuntary (or
“constructive”) bailees are people who have found lost property and are holding it until the
rightful owner can be found.
If a bailor gives a piece of property to a bailee but doesn’t tell the bailee the true value
of the property, a bailment is created and the bailee assumes the risk of caring for the article,
even if the bailee did not know of the article’s true value. However, if the bailee was unaware
and had no reason to be aware of the existence of a certain part of the property that was
entrusted to him, he will not be liable to care for the part that he did not know about. For
example:
1. Roger has a rare buffalo nickel that’s worth one million dollars. Roger gives the nickel to
Kate to look after. Kate has no idea that the nickel is worth so much and thinks it is
worth a standard five cents. Even though Kate does not know the true value of the
 property, she is responsible to care for the property in any case. Therefore, if she were
to be negligent in her care of the nickel, Kate can be held liable for the full value of the
nickel.
2. Roger lends his car to Kate. The car is worth $10,000. Unbeknownst to Kate, there is a 4
carat diamond in the glove compartment that is worth $75,000. Roger makes no
mention of the diamond when he gives the car to Kate. If Kate forgets to lock the car
and thus negligently allows the car to be stolen, she can be liable for the $10,000 car,
but not for the $75,000 diamond.

Central Government Act

The Indian Contract Act, 1872
The Indian Contract Act, 1872

1. Short title.—This Act may be called the Indian Contract Act, 1872. —This Act may be called the Indian
Contract Act, 1872." Extent, Commencement.—It extends to the whole of India 1 [except the State of
Jammu and Kashmir]; and it shall come into force on the first day of September, 1872.
(Saving) — 2 [***] Nothing herein contained shall affect the provisions of any Statute, Act or Regulation
not hereby expressly repealed, nor any usage or custom of trade, nor any incident of any contract, not
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act.
2. Interpretation-clause.—In this Act the following words and expressions are used in the following senses,
unless a contrary intention appears from the context:— —In this Act the following words and expressions
are used in the following senses, unless a contrary intention appears from the context\:—"
(a) When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a
view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal;
(b) When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be
accepted. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise;
(c) The person making the proposal is called the “promisor”, and the person accepting the proposal is called
the “promisee”;
(d) When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing,
or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or
abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise;
(e) Every promise and every set of promises, forming the consideration for each other, is an agreement;
(f) Promises which form the consideration or part of the consideration for each other, are called reciprocal
promises;
(g) An agreement not enforceable by law is said to be void;
(h) An agreement enforceable by law is a contract;
(i) An agreement which is enforceable by law at the option of one or more of the parties thereto, but not at
the option of the other or others, is a voidable contract;
(j) A contract which ceases to be enforceable by law becomes void when it ceases to be enforceable.
3. Communication, acceptance and revocation of proposals.—The communication of proposals, the
acceptance of proposals, and the revocation of proposals and acceptances, respectively, are deemed to be
made by any act or omission of the party proposing, accepting or revoking, by which he intends to
communicate such proposal, acceptance or revocation, or which has the effect of communicating it. —The
communication of proposals, the acceptance of proposals, and the revocation of proposals and acceptances,
respectively, are deemed to be made by any act or omission of the party proposing, accepting or revoking,
by which he intends to communicate such proposal, acceptance or revocation, or which has the effect of
communicating it."
GA Notice

Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 44-12-217, the State Revenue Commissioner gives notice that they will release for
sale abandoned securities currently being held by the Georgia Department of Revenue. Securities listed
on an established stock exchange will be sold at prices prevailing at the time of the sale on the stock
exchange. Other securities will be sold over the counter at prices prevailing at the time of sale or by any
other method the State Revenue Commissioner considers reasonable. Any party wishing to determine
whether they have an ownership interest in such securities should search the Department's unclaimed
property database on its internet website.

For additional questions about unclaimed property, please call or write:

Georgia Department of Revenue

Local Government Services
Unclaimed Property Program
4125 Welcome All Road
Atlanta, Georgia 30349
(855) 329-9863