Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448"This is a pawn transaction.Failure to make your payments as described in this document can result in the loss of the pawned item.The pawnbroker can sell or keep the item if you have not made all payments by the specified maturity date.";
"Failure to make your payment as described in this document can result in the loss of your motor vehicle.The pawnbroker can also charge you certain fees if he or she actually repossesses the motor vehicle.";
(Code 1981, §44-12-138, enacted by Ga. L. 1992, p. 3245, § 4.)
- For annual survey of local government law, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 289 (2005). For note on 1992 enactment of this Code section, see 9 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 323 (1992).
- In single advance, single payment transactions in which the term is less than a year and equal to a whole number of months, pawnbroker-creditors may make the unit period determination in the alternative, that is, on the basis of the term as a number of months or on the basis of the term as a number of days. Hooks v. Cobb Ctr. Pawn & Jewelry Brokers, Inc., 241 Ga. App. 305, 527 S.E.2d 566 (1999).
- O.C.G.A. § 44-12-138(b)(15) regulates the fees a pawnbroker may charge to register a lien against an automobile title and clearly evinces the legislature's intent to require pawnbrokers to record their liens in order to put innocent third parties on notice of their claims. Cobb Ctr. Pawn & Jewelry Brokers, Inc. v. Gordon, 242 Ga. App. 73, 529 S.E.2d 138 (2000).
- Pawnshop customer's action, alleging that a pawnshop failed to disclose all of the interest and charges that it assessed against the customer and against purported class members who were similarly situated, as required by O.C.G.A. § 44-12-138(b)(6) and (8), failed upon a finding that the pawnshop had made a good faith offer to avoid litigation by tendering to the customer a check in the amount collected beyond the principal, as required by O.C.G.A. § 44-12-131(a)(7)(A); accordingly, the court found that the customer had not sufficiently complied with the ante litem notice provisions with respect to the other members of the class, who were not sufficiently identified in order to allow a good faith offer to be made to them. Mack v. Ga. Auto Pawn, Inc., 262 Ga. App. 277, 585 S.E.2d 661 (2003).
- Since the stated purpose of Gwinnett County, Ga., Ord. No. 82-11 was to impede the sale of stolen property, and its requirements were designed to achieve that end, it was a proper use of the county's police power; further, by expressly preserving local laws in O.C.G.A. § 44-12-135, which included county ordinances, the legislature had in effect "authorized" them, and so Gwinnett County, Ga., Ord. No. 82-11 did not conflict with O.C.G.A. § 44-12-138. Pawnmart, Inc. v. Gwinnett County, 279 Ga. 19, 608 S.E.2d 639 (2005).
Total Results: 1
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2005-02-07
Citation: 608 S.E.2d 639, 279 Ga. 19, 2005 Fulton County D. Rep. 344, 2005 Ga. LEXIS 121
Snippet: contends that there is a conflict with OCGA § 44-12-138(e), which provides that: Notwithstanding anything