| expiration of the lease term and the lessee has made all payments |
| due under the lease, however, then Dealer no longer has any |
| rights under the chattel paper. Dealer's interest in the goods |
| consists solely of its residual interest, as to which SP2 has no |
| claim.) This would be the case, for example, when the lessee |
| rescinds the lease or when the lessor recovers possession in the |
| exercise of its remedies under Article 2A. See, e.g., Section |
| 2A525. If SP2 enjoyed priority in the chattel paper under |
| Section 9-330 [Maine cite section 9-1330], then SP2 likewise |
| would enjoy priority in the returned goods as proceeds. This |
| does not mean that SP2 necessarily is entitled to the entire |
| value of the returned goods. The value of the goods represents |
| the sum of the present value of (i) the value of their use for |
| the term of the lease and (ii) the value of the residual |
| interest. SP2 has priority in the former, but SP1 ordinarily |
| would have priority in the latter. Thus, an allocation of a |
| portion of the value of the goods to each component may be |
| necessary. Where, as here, one secured party has a security |
| interest in the lessor's residual interest and another has a |
| priority security interest in the chattel paper, it may be |
| advisable for the conflicting secured parties to establish a |
| method for making such an allocation and otherwise to determine |
| their relative rights in returned goods by agreement. |
