In support of his argument that the Guardian`s security interest has not been enhanced under Ohio law, the agent invokes Law 1309.324 (A), which states in a relevant part that “an advanced purchase currency has security on goods other than inventory or livestock before a conflicting interest in the safety of the same property . . . . if the guarantee of the purchase money is strengthened, when the debtor is in possession of the guarantee, or within twenty days. In its response, the agent notes that it “does not assert that the right to pledge was not registered in accordance with the deed of the title, but that its date avoided it under Section 544 of the Bankruptcy Code,” since the debt mark was made outside the 20-day period covered by section 1309.324 (A). Answer at 2:00 a.m. See also the answer to 1 (arguing that the agent can avoid the Guardian`s security interest because it was not perfected in the time intended for such perfection in the Ohio Revised Code Section 1309.324″). Guardian responds by saying that p.
1309.324 (A) does not apply here. See the answer in point 4. However, the Court does not have to decide whether section 1309.324 (A) applies in the context of competing safety interests on a motor vehicle. Indeed, even if the provision did not have the effect sought here by the agent, the provision would not have the effect sought here by the agent. The agent simply did not support his argument with case law or other authority. Similarly, the Court`s independent investigation shows no support for the position of agent. The Tribunal considers that the agent could implicitly argue that S. 1309.324 (A) has substantially the same effect as the defence of the 11 .C authorization loans. However, as explained below, the statutes are not similar in their operation, even remotely.
However, unlike Morgan`s debtors, Charley`s Automotive and Huyck, the debtor filed his petition after Guardian`s pledge rating was entered on the title deed. And Guardian`s duly improved right to pledge is not subordinated to the rights of a hypothetical pawnbroker, because “the sophisticated security interest reigns primarily over a later deposit-taking creditor,” such as the agent. Jackson, 52 B.R. to 710. See also Johnson, 380 B.R. to 475 (Latta, J., derogatory) (“If a pledge right is perfected under state law before bankruptcy proceedings are filed, it is perfected for bankruptcy proceedings. The “strong arm” powers of the agent after 11 U.S.C. .
. . . Masters, 137 b.R. to 259 (“As an agent, a creditor must have a perfect security interest on the day the debtor has filed for bankruptcy”). Therefore, Guardian`s interest in security is not circumvented. 544 (a). The attorney bases his appeal No. 544 entirely on the basis that Guardian`s interest in motorcycle safety “was not perfected by the Ohio Act” Motion at 3 because the safety interest “was not perfected within 20 days of the debtor taking over the motorcycle.” Id. But this premise is false. Division (A) of Ohio`s Revised Code 4505.13 (A) (2) is irrelevant in this regard.
It provides that Chapter 1309 “is considered to be an interest in the safety of a motor vehicle owned for sale by a dealer.” However, the Court finds that under section 4505.13 (B), which applies specifically to motor vehicles, priority is given to the safety interests of security parties “registered in the automated title processing system with respect to a specified title certificate, that a physical title certificate be issued, according to the order in which they are entered by the officer in the automated title processing system.” Ohio Rev.