CO Code § 4-9-103 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 4 - Uniform Commercial Code|Article 9 - Secured Transactions|Part 1 - General Provisions|§ 4-9-103. Purchase-Money Security Interest - Application of Payments - Burden of Establishing - Definitions

  In this section:   “Purchase-money collateral” means goods or software that secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to that collateral; and    “Purchase-money obligation” means an obligation of an obligor incurred as all or part of the price of the collateral or for value given to enable the debtor to acquire rights in or the use of the collateral if the value is in fact so used.       A security interest in goods is a purchase-money security interest:   To the extent that the goods are purchase-money collateral with respect to that security interest;    If the security interest is in inventory that is or was purchase-money collateral, also to the extent that the security interest secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to other inventory in which the secured party holds or held a purchase-money security interest; and    Also to the extent that the security interest secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to software in which the secured party holds or held a purchase-money security interest.       A security interest in software is a purchase-money security interest to the extent that the security interest also secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to goods in which the secured party holds or held a purchase-money security interest if:   The debtor acquired its interest in the software in an integrated transaction in which it acquired an interest in the goods; and    The debtor acquired its interest in the software for the principal purpose of using the software in the goods.       The security interest of a consignor in goods that are the subject of a consignment is a purchase-money security interest in inventory.    In a transaction other than a consumer-goods transaction, if the extent to which a security interest is a purchase-money security interest depends on the application of a payment to a particular obligation, the payment must be applied:   In accordance with any reasonable method of application to which the parties agree;    In the absence of the parties' agreement to a reasonable method, in accordance with any intention of the obligor manifested at or before the time of payment; or    In the absence of an agreement to a reasonable method and a timely manifestation of the obligor's intention, in the following order:   To obligations that are not secured; and    If more than one obligation is secured, to obligations secured by purchase-money security interests in the order in which those obligations were incurred.          In a transaction other than a consumer-goods transaction, a purchase-money security interest does not lose its status as such, even if:   The purchase-money collateral also secures an obligation that is not a purchase-money obligation;    Collateral that is not purchase-money collateral also secures the purchase-money obligation; or    The purchase-money obligation has been renewed, refinanced, consolidated, or restructured.       In a transaction other than a consumer-goods transaction, a secured party claiming a purchase-money security interest has the burden of establishing the extent to which the security interest is a purchase-money security interest.    The limitation of the rules in subsections (e), (f), and (g) of this section to transactions other than consumer-goods transactions is intended to leave to the court the determination of the proper rules in consumer-goods transactions. The court may not infer from that limitation the nature of the proper rule in consumer-goods transactions and may continue to apply established approaches.     History. Source: L. 2001: Entire article R&RE, p. 1327, § 1, effective July 1.    Editor's note:   This section is similar to former § 4-9-107 as it existed prior to 2001.   OFFICIAL COMMENT   1. Source. Former Section 9-107.   2. Scope of This Section. Under Section 9-309(1), a purchase-money security interest in consumer goods is perfected when it attaches. Sections 9-317 and 9-324 provide special priority rules for purchase-money security interests in a variety of contexts. This section explains when a security interest enjoys purchase-money status.   3. “Purchase-Money Collateral”; “Purchase-Money Obligation”; “Purchase- Money Security Interest.” Subsection (a) defines “purchase-money collateral” and “purchase- money obligation.” These terms are essential to the description of what constitutes a purchase-money security interest under subsection (b). As used in subsection (a)(2), the definition of “purchase-money obligation,” the “price” of collateral or the “value given to enable” includes obligations for expenses incurred in connection with acquiring rights in the collateral, sales taxes, duties, finance charges, interest, freight charges, costs of storage in transit, demurrage, administrative charges, expenses of collection and enforcement, attorney's fees, and other similar obligations.   The concept of “purchase-money security interest” requires a close nexus between the acquisition of collateral and the secured obligation. Thus, a security interest does not qualify as a purchase-money security interest if a debtor acquires property on unsecured credit and subsequently creates the security interest to secure the purchase price.   4. Cross-Collateralization of Purchase-Money Security Interests in Inventory. Subsection (b)(2) deals with the problem of cross-collateralized purchase-money security interests in inventory. Consider a simple example:   Example: Seller (S) sells an item of inventory (Item-1) to Debtor (D), retaining a security interest in Item-1 to secure Item-1's price and all other obligations, existing and future, of D to S. S then sells another item of inventory to D (Item-2), again retaining a security interest in Item-2 to secure Item-2's price as well as all other obligations of D to S. D then pays to S Item-1's price. D then sells Item-2 to a buyer in ordinary course of business, who takes Item-2 free of S's security interest.   Under subsection (b)(2), S's security interest in Item-1 securing Item-2's unpaid price would be a purchase-money security interest. This is so because S has a purchase-money security interest in Item-1, Item-1 secures the price of (a “purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to”) Item-2 (“other inventory”), and Item-2 itself was subject to a purchase-money security interest. Note that, to the extent Item-1 secures the price of Item-2, S's security interest in Item-1 would not be a purchase-money security interest under subsection (b)(1). The security interest in Item-1 is a purchase-money security interest under subsection (b)(1) only to the extent that Item-1 is “purchase-money collateral,” i.e., only to the extent that Item-1 “secures a purchase-money obligation incurred with respect to that collateral” (i.e., Item-1). See subsection (a)(1).   5. Purchase-Money Security Interests in Goods and Software. Subsections (b) and (c) limit purchase-money security interests to security interests in goods, including fixtures, and software. Otherwise, no change in meaning from former Section 9-107 is intended. The second sentence of former Section 9-115(5)(f) made the purchase-money priority rule (former Section 9-312(4)) inapplicable to investment property. This section's limitation makes that provision unnecessary.   Subsection (c) describes the limited circumstances under which a security interest in goods may be accompanied by a purchase-money security interest in software. The software must be acquired by the debtor in a transaction integrated with the transaction in which the debtor acquired the goods, and the debtor must acquire the software for the principal purpose of using the software in the goods. “Software” is defined in Section 9-102.   6. Consignments. Under former Section 9-114, the priority of the consignor's interest is similar to that of a purchase-money security interest. Subsection (d) achieves this result more directly, by defining the interest of a “consignor,” defined in Section 9-102, to be a purchase-money security interest in inventory for purposes of this Article. This drafting convention obviates any need to set forth special priority rules applicable to the interest of a consignor. Rather, the priority of the consignor's interest as against the rights of lien creditors of the consignee, competing secured parties, and purchasers of the goods from the consignee can be determined by reference to the priority rules generally applicable to inventory, such as Sections 9-317, 9-320, 9-322, and 9-324. For other purposes, including the rights and duties of the consignor and consignee as between themselves, the consignor would remain the owner of goods under a bailment arrangement with the consignee. See Section 9-319.   7. Provisions Applicable Only to Non-Consumer-Goods Transactions.   a. “Dual-Status” Rule. For transactions other than consumer-goods transactions, this Article approves what some cases have called the “dual-status” rule, under which a security interest may be a purchase-money security interest to some extent and a non-purchase-money security interest to some extent. (Concerning consumer-goods transactions, see subsection (h) and Comment 8.) Some courts have found this rule to be explicit or implicit in the words “to the extent,” found in former Section 9-107 and continued in subsections (b)(1) and (b)(2). The rule is made explicit in subsection (e). For non-consumer-goods transactions, this Article rejects the “transformation” rule adopted by some cases, under which any cross-collateralization, refinancing, or the like destroys the purchase-money status entirely.   Consider, for example, what happens when a $10,000 loan secured by a purchase- money security interest is refinanced by the original lender, and, as part of the transaction, the debtor borrows an additional $2,000 secured by the collateral. Subsection (f) resolves any doubt that the security interest remains a purchase-money security interest. Under subsection (b), however, it enjoys purchase-money status only to the extent of $10,000.   b. Allocation of Payments. Continuing with the example, if the debtor makes a $1,000 payment on the $12,000 obligation, then one must determine the extent to which the security interest remains a purchase-money security interest $9,000 or $10,000. Subsection (e)(1) expresses the overriding principle, applicable in cases other than consumer-goods transactions, for determining the extent to which a security interest is a purchase-money security interest under these circumstances: freedom of contract, as limited by principle of reasonableness. An unconscionable method of application, for example, is not a reasonable one and so would not be given effect under subsection (e)(1). In the absence of agreement, subsection (e)(2) permits the obligor to determine how payments should be allocated. If the obligor fails to manifest its intention, obligations that are not secured will be paid first. (As used in this Article, the concept of “obligations that are not secured” means obligations for which the debtor has not created a security interest. This concept is different from and should not be confused with the concept of an “unsecured claim” as it appears in Bankruptcy Code Section 506(a).) The obligor may prefer this approach, because unsecured debt is likely to carry a higher interest rate than secured debt. A creditor who would prefer to be secured rather than unsecured also would prefer this approach.   After the unsecured debt is paid, payments are to be applied first toward the obligations secured by purchase-money security interests. In the event that there is more than one such obligation, payments first received are to be applied to obligations first incurred. See subsection (e)(3). Once these obligations are paid, there are no purchase-money security interests and no additional allocation rules are needed.   Subsection (f) buttresses the dual-status rule by making it clear that (in a transaction other than a consumer-goods transaction) cross-collateralization and renewals, refinancings, and restructurings do not cause a purchase-money security interest to lose its status as such. The statutory terms “renewed,” “refinanced,” and “restructured” are not defined. Whether the terms encompass a particular transaction depends upon whether, under the particular facts, the purchase-money character of the security interest fairly can be said to survive. Each term contemplates that an identifiable portion of the purchase-money obligation could be traced to the new obligation resulting from a renewal, refinancing, or restructuring.   c. Burden of Proof. As is the case when the extent of a security interest is in issue, under subsection (g) the secured party claiming a purchase-money security interest in a transaction other than a consumer-goods transaction has the burden of establishing whether the security interest retains its purchase-money status. This is so whether the determination is to be made following a renewal, refinancing, or restructuring or otherwise.   8. Consumer-Goods Transactions; Characterization Under Other Law. Under subsection (h), the limitation of subsections (e), (f), and (g) to transactions other than consumer-goods transactions leaves to the court the determination of the proper rules in consumer-goods transactions. Subsection (h) also instructs the court not to draw any inference from this limitation as to the proper rules for consumer-goods transactions and leaves the court free to continue to apply established approaches to those transactions.   This section addresses only whether a security interest is a “purchase-money security interest” under this Article, primarily for purposes of perfection and priority. See, e.g., Sections 9-317, 9-324. In particular, its adoption of the dual-status rule, allocation of payments rules, and burden of proof standards for non-consumer-goods transactions is not intended to affect or influence characterizations under other statutes. Whether a security interest is a “purchase-money security interest” under other law is determined by that law. For example, decisions under Bankruptcy Code Section 522(f) have applied both the dual-status and the transformation rules. The Bankruptcy Code does not expressly adopt the state law definition of “purchase-money security interest.” Where federal law does not defer to this Article, this Article does not, and could not, determine a question of federal law.   ANNOTATION   Annotator's note. Since § 4-9-103 is similar to § 4-9-107 as it existed prior to the 2001 repeal and reenactment of this article, relevant cases construing that provision have been included in the annotations to this section.   A purchase money security interest in property takes precedence over any preexisting lien. Chambers v. Nation, 178 Colo. 124 , 497 P.2d 5.   If property comes into the hands of a purchaser already encumbered with a purchase money lien, a prior lien remains subordinate to the purchase money mortgage, and it cannot displace the security interest which is the subject matter of the purchase money agreement. Chambers v. Nation, 178 Colo. 124 , 497 P.2d 5 (1972).   Loan may be partly purchase money and partly nonpurchase money. There is no requirement that an item secure only its purchase price, and a loan may be partly purchase money and partly nonpurchase money. In re Stevens, 24 B.R. 536 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1982 ).   The purchase money character of a security interest should be determined from all the surrounding circumstances. In re Stevens, 24 B.R. 536 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1982 ); In re Billings, 63 B.R. 717 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1986 ).   Refinancing will not always have the effect of destroying the purchase money security interest. In re Billings, 63 B.R. 717 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1986 ).   Refinancing of a purchase money loan does not automatically extinguish the creditor's purchase money security interest in the debtor's collateral and, thus, debtors could not avoid creditor's interest in bankruptcy proceeding. In re Billings, 838 F.2d 405 (10th Cir. 1988).   Negative equity financing of a vehicle trade-in is not a purchase-money obligation. In re McCauley, 398 B.R. 41 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2008 ).   Bankruptcy court applied dual status rule to case involving financing of negative equity on a vehicle trade-in. Lender had a purchase-money security interest only to the extent of the purchase price of the new vehicle and the incidental transactional expenses. Financing of negative equity for trade-in vehicle was not entitled to purchase-money security interest treatment. Thus debtors had to treat proportion of debt attributable to purchase price of new vehicle and the incidental expenses as a secured claim. In re McCauley, 398 B.R. 41 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2008 ).