Okla. Stat. tit. 12A § 2A-104
Okla. Stat. tit. 12A, § 2A-104
Oklahoma Code Comment
The reference in subsection (l)(a) to statutes of the United States recognizes that federal law may apply to leases governed by Article 2A. For example, to the extent the Magnuson-Moss Act applies to leases, it would be applicable to consumer leases under Article 2A. See C. Reitz, Consumer Product Warranties Under Federal and State Laws § 13.04 (2d ed. 1987). This provision is deleted as unnecessary by the 1991 amendments.
The reference in subsection (l)(b) to a certificate of title law of Oklahoma is to 47 Oklahoma Statutes § 1105 et seq.
The reference in subsection (l)(d) to consumer protection statutes of Oklahoma will encompass at least:
(1) the U3C, 14A Oklahoma Statutes §§ 1-101-9-101. Applicable U3C provisions include disclosure and regulation of advertising (U3C §§ 2-311 and 2-313 and Administrator's Regulation M, Part IIA § 213.1 et seq.); preservation of claims and defenses (U3C §§ 2 -403 and 2-404); restriction on balloon payments (U3C § 2-406); restriction on security (U3C § 2-407); restriction on wage assignments (U3C § 2-410); regulation of referral inducements (WC § 2-411); notice of assignment (U3C § 2-412); limitation on collection costs (U3C § 2-413); and rights and remedies including unconscionability, the ability to recover excess charges, a cause of action for disclosure violations, and the complaint procedure of the Administrator (U3C Articles 5 and 6).
(2) the Oklahoma Rental-Purchase Act, 59 Oklahoma Statutes §§ 1950 1957. Applicable provisions of this act include those that preclude a lessor from including in a rental-purchase agreement clauses authorizing the lessor or its agent to commit a breach of the peace in repossessing rental property under § 2A - 525 or waiving any defense, counterclaim, or right the lessee may have against the lessor or its agent in relation to § 2A-407 (see § 1954(C)(2) and (3)), and which confer on the lessee reinstatement rights which are not provided for under §§ 2A-502 and 2A-525 (see § 1954(D)). The reference would not encompass the Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act, 15 Oklahoma Statutes §§ 751-763, as that act does not include leases within the term "consumer transaction." See 15 Oklahoma Statutes § 752(2).
Consumer protection by case law, if the point of the decision is not covered by a provision of Article 2A, would be preserved either expressly (for example, see § 2A-216(2)) or generally (see UCC § 1-103). To illustrate, a limitation on the strict enforcement of a default provision, as in Holland et al. v. Anderson Brothers Corp., 207 F.2d 830 (10th Cir.1953), would be applicable to a lease by reason of 12A Oklahoma Statutes § 1-103. The 1991 amendments deal more explicitly with this point.
Subsection (2) of this section resolves conflicts between Article 2A and the statutes designated in subsection (1). Conflicts are resolved against Article 2A, with several exceptions relating to certificate of title laws. Thus, a provision more protective of consumers in the U3C controls over a less protective provision in Article 2A. It is in this context that one of the few non-uniform amendments to Oklahoma's Article 2A occurs. The provision creating a private right of action in a consumer for unconscionability in Article 2A ( § 2A-108) was drawn from the 1974 version of the Uniform Consumer Credit Code. Oklahoma's U3C is the earlier 1969 version, which generally is less protective of consumers. Accordingly, the normal rule of subsection (2) in favor of consumer protection laws outside of Article 2A was reversed in this one instance, and § 2A-108 on unconscionability in the case of conflict supersedes U3C § 5-108 instead (but not U3C § 6-111). Note, however, it is an incomplete replacement as consumer leases under Article 2A only include those where the amount payable does not exceed $25,000, while consumer leases under the WC include leases up through $45,000. Thus for consumer leases from $25,001 to $45,000, only the U3C applies. Arguably this is a sensible distinction because consumer lessees in larger transactions may be more sophisticated and thus need less protection. Nonetheless, the 1991 amendments bring Article 2A and the U3C into line at $45,000.
The UCC was prepared before consumer protection became an established body of law, particularly in relation to leases. Thus few consumer oriented provisions are included in UCC Article 2, which served as the model for Article 2A. Rather Article 2 for the most part looks to law outside the UCC to provide protection for consumers. See 12A Oklahoma Statutes § 2-102. Of course, today consumer protection law is well developed and might have been included in Article 2A. However, to build extensive consumer provisions into Article 2A would not only be at variance with the general approach of the UCC but it could create significant problems of integration in states like Oklahoma that have advanced protection for consumer lessees under other law. For a more extensive discussion, see Miller, Consumer Leases Under Uniform Commercial Code Article 2A, 39 Ala.L.Rev. 957 (1988). Nonetheless, it was recognized that the principle of freedom of contract embodied in Article 2A could lead to abuse in some instances involving consumer leases and, accordingly, Article 2A does have minimal consumer protections to forestall what could be the worst potential for abuse. The provisions containing these protections are listed in the Official Comment to §2A-103(1)(e).