We had a car that we were leasing. On January 26th 2005 the car was repossessed because we had no insurance on it. It wasn't being driven it was stored while we were looking for cheaper insurance.
It was repossessed. We aren't fighting the repo, we are fighting the amount they are charging after the repo.
When the car was taken on Jan 26th we called to ask them to give us time to find insurance we could afford. They told us we had until the 12th of Feb 2004 to ge the insurance. On Feb 02 2005 we arranged insurance on amonthly basis which is what we had origionally but wee found an insurance company that was 2000.00 cheaper.
We had all the nessasary papers faxed to the leasing company to prove we had insurance.
The leasing company said " sorry, unless you pay insurance for a year in full, we are selling the car"
Nothing in the original lease says we have to pay insurance in full.
We arranged the insurance, paid for first and last month and thought that was all there was to it.
They sold the car on February 12th while we still had insurance on it. We continued to pay insurance premiums for 3 months.
We got a bill from the leasing company in March saying we owed 6000.00 for the balance of what they din't get when they sold it.
We want to take them to court to have the 6000.00 removed from our credit record and need to know if we can charge them with unfair business practice since we did do what they asked and out the insurance on but they changed their mind about the insurance.

The car was also sold way below fair market value.

If we can file, does the statute start from when we got the bill for the balance.

First $6K is above the threshold for most small claims courts.
Second, I don't think you have a case. I'm assuming the lease states that you are responsible for maintaining insurance on the car, but it doesn't specify what arrangements you make with an insurer EITHER WAY. So what the leasing company is going to say is that you let the insurance lapse once. Therefore, they were afraid you would do it again. This is a reasonable concern on their part. Therefore, their reposession and refusal to return the leased car would, most likely, be upheld by a court. Once that is upheld, then you are responsible for the balance of the lease less what they can get for the car. Unless you can show that they deliberately accepted lower than market value for the car, you are responsible for the difference.

I'm wondering though, if you informed them that you were looking for new insurance or they found out when the old insurer informed them that the policy had lapsed. If you had gone to them, explained the circumstances, told them the car would be stored until you got new insurance, they might have been more lenient with you.

I did explain to the insurance dept of the leasing company about the storage and such. The one girl I got on the phone was very helpful and said she would speak to the person who was holding my account. The person holding my account was the one that would not budge.
I spoke to more then one person in the leasing company who were all sympathetic to my case and offered to help me out. It was the person holding my file that basically said, too bad.

I did find out that small claims in Ontario is 10,000

If you can document that you spoke to the leasing company and informed them prior to the lapse of insurance that you would be changing insurers, then you might have a case. Since it does qualify under small claims limits in Ontario, it seems worth the try.

One more thing, would the statute timje start when they took the car or when I got the bill for 6000.00

Probably when you were billed.