Foster v. Wells Fargo Financial Ohio, Inc.

Colleen Conway Cooney, Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

{¶ 26} I concur in the majority opinion except for its creation and reversal of a separate claim for wrongful repossession. Such a claim is not set forth in the arguments Foster raises on appeal. In fact, Foster argues in his appellate brief, “Instead of applying his payment, Wells Fargo placed the loan in repossession.” Even Foster understands that the repossession was connected to the loan payments being credited pursuant to his contract, not some separate action standing as a second breach-of-contract claim, as the majority contends. Therefore, I dissent on this point and would affirm in toto.