Utah Court of Appeals
Can towing companies establish liens without proper statutory notice? Granite Credit Union v. Remick Explained
Summary
Granite Credit Union had a perfected security interest in a vehicle that was towed by Wasatch Towing. When the towing company failed to provide timely notice to the credit union as required by statute, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the credit union, ordering return of the vehicle.
Analysis
Background and Facts
Granite Credit Union held a perfected security interest in a 1997 Plymouth Voyager that secured a $5,500 loan to Hernan Rosales. When the loan became delinquent in 2003, Granite began searching for the vehicle to repossess it. Wasatch Towing had towed the vehicle, but did not notify Granite until more than 100 days after the towing occurred. Remick, operating Wasatch Towing, claimed he was entitled to $1,682 in towing and storage fees and eventually obtained a new title in his company’s name.
Key Legal Issues
The central issue was whether Remick complied with Utah Code section 72-9-603, which governs notification requirements for tow truck operators. The statute requires operators to: (1) immediately notify local law enforcement upon impounding a vehicle, and (2) send certified letters to the registered owner and lienholder within two business days. The statute prohibits collection of fees until proper notification occurs.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Granite. The court found that the undisputed facts failed to demonstrate Remick’s compliance with section 72-9-603’s notification requirements. Specifically, there was no evidence that Remick contacted local law enforcement with the required information, and his notice to Granite came more than 100 days after towing—far beyond the two-business-day requirement. Additionally, Remick’s notice failed to include all the content required by statute.
Practice Implications
This decision emphasizes that strict statutory compliance is necessary for towing companies to establish valid possessory liens. For practitioners representing secured creditors, this case highlights the importance of monitoring compliance with notification requirements and acting quickly when vehicles are improperly held. The decision also demonstrates that perfected security interests maintain priority over invalid possessory liens, providing protection for properly secured creditors in vehicle financing transactions.
Case Details
Case Name
Granite Credit Union v. Remick
Citation
2006 UT App 115
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20040985-CA
Date Decided
March 23, 2006
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
A tow truck operator cannot establish a possessory lien for towing and storage fees when they fail to comply with the notification requirements of Utah Code section 72-9-603.
Standard of Review
Correctness for summary judgment decisions, granting no deference to the trial court’s determination
Practice Tip
When representing secured creditors, document all communications with towing companies and verify compliance with statutory notice requirements to protect priority interests.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.