A dispute between Ford Motor Co. and the Michigan Department of Treasury about calculating overpayment interest is among the cases to go before the Michigan Supreme Court this week.
During oral arguments scheduled Wednesday and Thursday, the high court also will consider whether agencies involved in auto repossession engaged in soliciting a claim for collection.
Matters including restitution, court costs, expert testimony and several criminal cases are on this week’s docket as well.
During a tax audit, Ford and the state treasury officials disagreed on the amount of money owed.
The question before the court involves whether Ford’s response to an audit letter was a “petition...for refund” or “claim for refund” for purposes of calculating overpayment interest.
The court also was being asked to determine whether Ford’s request for an informal conference with the Department of Treasury, in spite of its later withdrawal of that request, was a petition or claim.
Meanwhile, in George Badeen v Par, Inc., a “forwarding company” or “forwarder” is retained by a bank or lending institution to handle collection services on delinquent accounts. The forwarder, which is unlicensed, will then hire a licensed collection agency to carry out the actual repossession of collateral from the delinquent borrower.
The dispute before the court is whether a forwarder is acting as a “collection agency” under the Occupational Code, MCL 339.901(b) and thus would need to be licensed.
The court will hear oral arguments in its courtroom on the sixth floor of the Michigan Hall of Justice on April 2 and 3, starting at 9:30 a.m. each day.
Oral arguments are open to the public.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
http://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
