Document: 444 U.S. 555 100 S.Ct. 790 63 L.Ed.2d 22 FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY et al., Petitioners,v.Dennis MILHOLLIN* al. No. 78-1487. Argued Dec. 4, 1979. Decided Feb. 20, 1980. Syllabus Respondents financed their purchases of automobiles through standard retail installment contracts that were assigned to petitioner finance company. Each contract provided respondents pay a precomputed charge, and, as required by the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and implementing Federal Reserve Board (FRB) Regulation Z, front page each disclosed explained certain features contract, including disclosure buyer could prepay his obligations under full at any time prior maturity final if he did so would receive rebate unearned portion charge. The face also stated temporary default on particular result delinquency but no mention was made clause giving creditor right accelerate payment entire debt upon buyer's default. thereafter brought separate suits District Court, alleging, inter alia, company had violated TILA Z failing disclose retained debt. Court two held facial acceleration clauses mandated provisions TILA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1638(a)(9), 1639(a)(7), compel publication "default, delinquency, or similar charges, payable event late payments." On consolidated appeal, Appeals agreed imposes general acceleration-clause requirement, rather than holding is based its decision principle must whether interest will be method which amount computed accelerated. In holding, court rejected FRB staff's contrary interpretation pertinent statutory regulatory specific an policy only necessary when varies from custom with respect voluntary prepayment rebates. Held: does not mandate rule for clauses. Pp. 559-570. (a) issue governed clear expression statute regulations. An cannot equated charg[e]," subject 1638(a)(9) 1639(a)(7) requirement fails afford direct support invariable rule. 559-562. (b) absence express procedures invariably disclosed, high degree deference consistent administrative regulations impose such uniform warranted. Although staff might have decided rebates are analytically distinct identical warrant disclosure, it reasonable conclude, alternatively, ordinary consumers concerned chiefly about differing financial consequences. 562-570. 588 F.2d 753, reversed remanded. William M. Burke, Newport Beach, Cal., petitioners. Stuart A. Smith, Washington, D. C., United States, amicus curiae, petitioners, special leave Court. Richard Slottee, Portland, Or., respondents. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion 1 this case (TILA), 82 Stat. 146, amended, § 1601 seq., requires existence always credit agreement. has consistently construed imposing requirement. Because we believe warranted, hold 2 * several purchased various dealers, financing Ford Motor Credit Co. (FMCC), As implements Act, See 1631; 12 CFR 226.6(a) (1979). Among these disclosures paragraph informing 3 "may instalment hereunder, so, shall Finance Charge sum digits method. . ." 4 predetermined Not mentioned body default.1 5 subsequently commenced four against FMCC States Oregon, debt.2 suits,3 provision compels charges payments," 1639(a)(7). App. 30-31, 37, 69-71. other actions prevailed different grounds.4 All cases appeal Ninth Circuit. 6 requirement.5 Rather resting Court's however, narrower "[t]he accelerated." 757 (1978), quoting St. Germain v. Bank Hawaii, 573 572, 577 (CA9 1977). 226.8(b)(7) Implicit conclusion Appeals—and explicit preceding decision—was rejection provisions. adopting approach, mapped path thicket diverges routes traveled Courts Circuits.6 We granted certiorari, 442 940, 99 2880, 61 309 (1979), resolve conflict. reverse. II 7 broad purpose promoting "the informed use credit" assuring "meaningful terms" consumers. 1601. complexity variety, transactions defy exhaustive regulation single statute. Congress therefore delegated expansive authority elaborate expand legal framework governing commerce credit. 1604; Mourning Family Publications Service, Inc., 411 356, 93 1652, 36 318 (1973). executed responsibility promulgating Part 226 least partly fills gaps. Even speak explicitly every issue. At threshold, therefore, demands examination language; absent expression, becomes consider implicit character scheme. For reasons following, conclude regulation, appropriate defer determining what resolution implied truth-in-lending enactments. 8 advanced theories buttress claim expressly they contended comprehended prescription included within requiring "amount, computing amount, default, 226.8(b)(4) Before follow arguing may source obligation accrue acceleration. That section commands 9 "[i]dentification charge includes statement computation deducted credited refunded customer." 10 A fair reading sustain respondents' contention terms. 11 226.8(b)(4). prerogative affords mechanism collecting outstanding there been partial itself, entails monetary penalty, although independently example, charges. charge[e]," hand, self-evidently refers assessable sum. Thus, trade, understood compensation receives debtor's delay making timely CCH Consumer Guide &Par; 4230, 4231 (1977) (emphasis added). Acceleration compensatory; accelerates avoid further demanding immediate id., ¶ 4231; Uniform Code 1968, 2.203, official comment 2, U.L.A. 315-316 (1978); 2.204(3), 317. language employed confirms "charges" penalty sums. "charges (Emphasis added.) one considers burdensomeness form "charge" debtor, hardly make sense burden "payable" creditor. Similarly orders command sensible application remedy short, stretch beyond obvious limits construe them clauses.7 13 To sure, debtor response deemed ambit regulation. But long creditor's practice prepayments, seem obligatory literal Section 226.8(b)(7), squares position Official Staff Interpretation FC-0054, Appendix, p. 627 III 14 Notwithstanding "creditor [always] F.2d, 577; accord, 757-758. deciding, view need differs prepayment. supra ; see Public Information Letter 851, [1974-1977 Transfer Binder] 31,173; 1208; 31,647; 1324, 31,827 (1979).8 Rather, declared "choose direction makes more us trying achieve congressional providing meaningful costs borrowing." 576-577. It commonplace courts legislative goals filling interstitial silences legislators foresee all eventualities, judges decide unanticipated extrapolating related statutes silence lack prescience; instead betoken permission or, perhaps, considered abstention event, accredited supersede agency embellishing Accordingly, caution temper judicial creativity silence. 16 very least, attentiveness views entity appointed apply enforce And especially process interpreting Z. Unless demonstrably irrational, opinions construing should dispositive reasons. 17 often repeated proposition considerable due " 'the given [a] officers charged administration.' Zenith Radio Corp. 437 443, 450, 98 2441, 2445, 57 337 Udall Tallman, 380 1, 16, 85 792, 801, 616 (1965); see, e. g., Power Reactor Electricians, 367 396, 408, 81 1529, 1535, 924 (1961). agency's construction own regarded respect. Bowles Seminole Rock Co., 325 410, 413-414, 65 1215, 1217, 89 L.Ed. 1700 (1945). This traditional acquiescence expertise particularly apt because played pivotal role "setting [the statutory] machinery motion. Norwegian Nitrogen Products 288 294, 315, 53 350, 358, 77 796 (1933). emphasized (1973), lawmaking power framed TILA. best those who gave substance thereunder.9 18 Furthermore, specifically designated primary law. creditors sure guidance "highly technical" S.Rep.No. 93-278, twice acted promote reliance pronouncements. 1974, amended provide defense liability good-faith compliance "rule, interpretation" itself. 406, 88 1518, codified 1640(f). amendment relieve choosing "between Board's assessment how interpret Act." supra, 13. same rationale prompted change 1976, authorizing "conformity approval employee System duly authorized interpretations approvals 3(b), 90 197, 1640(f); 122 Cong.Rec. 2836 (1976) (remarks Sen. Garn); 2852 Rep. Annunzio, chairman Affairs Subcommittee); ibid. Rousselot); 121 36927 (1975) Annunzio); 36927-36928 Wylie).10 19 enactment expansion 1640(f) significance creation immunity.11 signals unmistakable treat rulemaking authoritative. Moreover, history evinces preference resolving interpretive issues decision, piecemeal litigation.12 13-14; Annunzio). honor choice. while abdicating ultimate determine law, cf. generally SEC Chenery Corp., 80, 92-94, 454, 461-462, 87 626 (1943), ought refrain substituting Reserve, latter's irrational. 20 Finally, wholly apart jurisprudential considerations intent, compelled necessity; tries chart true course Act's embarks voyage without compass disregards views. concept disclosure" animates Germain, 577, applied abstract. Meaningful mean disclosure. describes balance between "competing complete [informational overload.]" S.Rep. 96-73, (1979) (accompanying S. 108, Simplification Reform Act); 95-720, pp. 2-3 Board, Ann.Rep. 326, 349-350 (1976); Comment, Clause Disclosure Under Colum.L.Rev. 649, 662-663 (1977). striking empirical investigation into consumer psychology presupposes experience practices. Administrative agencies simply better suited engage process. 21 treatment rationally accommodates conflicting completeness simplicity. practices diverge practices, adopted termed "bottom-line" approach: most important information purchase explains net rates. Cf. 3-4; Ann.Rep., 350-352. consequences.13 Faced apparent lacuna prescriptions ground displacing expert judgment. erred rejecting staff, required.14 23 Reversed 24 BLACKMUN, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, concurring. 25 I join write separately do fully agree note opinion, ante, 569, approach "equally logical" alternatives chosen. particular, am emphasis rights steers away moorings law manner prove salutary welfare 26 contemplating "bottom line," much pay. little doubt, my view, read disclosurers think description obligations, merely explanation "practices" "policies" changed detriment will. reason major company, adhere despite demand said would, sanguine less responsible organization same. confusion loss, well fruitless litigation. 27 Ultimately, Fifth Circuit McDaniel Fulton Nat. Bank, 571 948 (en banc), clarified, 576 1156 (1978) retain prepayment, sounder durable currently Board. Nevertheless, reasonable. order uphold position, "we find one, even reached question arisen first instance proceedings." (1965), quotingUnemployment Comm'n Aragon, 329 143, 153, 67 245, 250, 91 136 (1946). add outlined opinions. spell name "Millhollin," throughout litigation misspelled "Milhollin." research catalogs computers consistency, correctness, feel constrained erroneous spelling. "In Buyer defaults Seller declare amounts become hereunder immediately payable. individual Milhollin Civ.No. 75-334 Eaton 76-575 (1977); Andresen 76-1090 Messinger 76-475 Eaton, n. 2. Messinger, grounds relied remanded consideration theory. Eighth Tenth Circuits flatly never disclosed. Griffith Superior Ford, 455 (CA 1978); ex rel. Hornell One 1976 Chevrolet, 585 978 (CA10 1978). Third Columbia policies state acceleration, Johnson McCrackin-Sturman 527 257 (CA3 1975); Price Franklin Investment 187 U.S.App.D.C. 383, 574 594 (1978). obliged alike purposes; critical factor rebate, unbidden policy. banc). Seven Appeals, Circuit, refused simpliciter 265-268 (CA3); 1157 (CA5) banc); Croysdale Sav. Assn., 601 1340, 1342-1343, (CA7 1979); 457-459 (CA8); 573-574 1977); 981 (CA10); U.S.App.D.C., 393, 604. FC-0054 provides, part: "It phrase 'default, payments,' found 128(a)(9) 129(a)(7) sums assessed borrower solely failure payments due. mere contained contractual sets out (generally obligor's due) payment. Therefore, "Your [sic ] refer Letter, discusses understands letter say early customer essentially obligation. accordance pays rebated represent type 226.8(b)(4)." 851 states, "For purposes disclosures, such, Regulation, require identify rebating made, apply. If another both methods identified 226.8(b)(7). "If, provision, additional 'charge' unpaid remainder total payments, 1208 took obligor context went state, since former situation extra 1324 "The connection using properly However, pursuant spurned letters "conflicting signals." 576. Opinion Letters, fundamentally consistent, somewhat inartfully drafted. appears unnecessary parallel where rebates, perhaps well, Neither nor Letters suggest instances. proffered issued extent bottomed expertise, unrealistic draw radical distinction imprimatur submitted memoranda. [1969-1974 30,640. rate, explore Board/staff difference length, conferred status interpretations. 226.1(d) Title authorizes issuance trigger published Register, opportunity public requested. 226.1(d). Unofficial claims pre-1976 comported (issued 1977), argued before entitled immunity afforded decide, invoked formed conformity constitutes "compliance" terms understandable. divergence illustrates, 6, optimal means formulate coherent predictable technical rules. reasonably focusing rights, operating 1157. But, again, equally logical actual unexercised affirmance, contend formation guarantee some future date, after limitations run. 1640(e). genuine occurs itself arguably contemplate immune liability. 1634; 392, 90th Cong., 1st Sess., (1967). envisioned contemporaneously force, then conceivably fraud. open reviewing argue petitioners concerning assertedly contradicted contract. contradiction, present, run afoul 226.6(c) staff. 8. broader rulings required; neither addressed allegation contradiction. presented, contradiction remand.

Category: 7