SECURED TRANSACTIONS

 

In American Samoa secured transactions are governed by the common law except where those principles have been modified by statute or are otherwise inappropriate to local conditions.  Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

In order to perfect a chattel mortgage or other security agreement, the agreement (1) must be in writing signed by the person to be bound and attested to by at least one witness; (2) must be filed with the territorial registrar within 10 days after its execution; and (3) must truly state the consideration upon which it was based or the debt or liability which it was intended to secure, and contain a description of the specific article, articles, or land sold or mortgaged.  Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

One cannot grant a chattel mortgage or security interest in property without first having some rights in that property.  Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

The common law rule that title passes as soon as the bargain is struck is ill-suited for determining when the transfer of title occurs in today's sophisticated global economy.   Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

Under Uniform Commercial Code § 2-401(2) title passes to the buyer at the time and place at which the seller completes his performance with reference to the physical delivery of the goods, despite any reservation of a security interest and even though a document of title is to be delivered at a different time or place; and in particular and despite any reservation of a security interest by the bill of lading, (a) if the contract requires or authorizes the seller to send the goods to the buyer but does not require him to deliver them at destination, title passes to the buyer at the time and place of shipment; but (b) if the contract requires delivery at destination, title passes on tender there.  Uniform Commercial Code § 2-401(2) is an appropriate rule for determining when title passes in American Samoa and shall govern this issue.  Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

A “buyer in the ordinary course of business” is a U.C.C. term and is defined as a person who in good faith and without knowledge that the sale to him is in violation of the ownership rights or security interest of a third party in goods buys in ordinary course from a person in the business of selling goods of that kind but does not include a pawnbroker.   Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

Under the U.C.C., a buyer in ordinary course of business takes free of a security interest created by his seller even though the security interest is perfected and even though the buyer know of its existence.   Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

Rule regarding “buyer in the ordinary course of business” did not apply against seller-defendants were they were not in the business of selling buses, were not licensed bus dealers, and did not hold themselves out to the general public as bus dealers.  Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

Where security holder waited until over eight months after debtor transferred possession and title of chattel to third party to assert its interest, such delay was unreasonable and estopped security holder from asserting said interest.   Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

Fact that bus was of a different model year and had different VIN number was of no consequence since all parties knew that particular bus was to be covered by the security agreement. Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 51 (1997).

 

A security agreement can secure after acquired property.  Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 69 (1997).

 

Although a mortgage must truly describe the property secured by the mortgage, a description is sufficient if it furnishes a reasonable basis for identification, even though it is not specific enough to fully identify the property by itself.  Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 69 (1997).

 

Inclusion of an erroneous serial number has no effect on the validity of a security agreement when the property is otherwise adequately described.  Bank of Hawaii v. Neru, 1 A.S.R.3d 69 (1997).