| Effect of noncompliance: "Rebuttable presumption" test. |
| Section 9-626 [Maine cite section 9-1626] adopts the "rebuttable |
| presumption" test for the failure of a secured party to proceed |
| in accordance with certain provisions of Part 6. (As discussed |
| in Comment 4.j., the test does not necessarily apply to consumer |
| transactions.) Under this approach, the deficiency claim of a |
| noncomplying secured party is calculated by crediting the obligor |
| with the greater of the actual net proceeds of a disposition and |
| the amount of net proceeds that would have been realized if the |
| disposition had been conducted in accordance with Part 6 (e.g., |
| in a commercially reasonable manner). For non-consumer |
| transactions, Section 9-626 [Maine cite section 9-1626] rejects |
| the "absolute bar" test that some courts have imposed; that |
| approach bars a noncomplying secured party from recovering any |
| deficiency, regardless of the loss (if any) the debtor suffered |
| as a consequence of the noncompliance. |