Domestic Credit Corp. v. Vazquez (69 Ohio St. 2d 527, 1982)

Per Curiam.

This case presents the question of whether the seller contracted for a charge prohibited by the Ohio Retail Installment Sales Act, R. C. 1317.01 et seq., thus rendering the contract unenforceable. In particular, appellees contend that the default provisions of the contract permit the seller to levy a delinquency charge greater than is allowed under the Act. Appellant contends that the Act does not preclude the holder of the contract from accelerating the maturity of both principal and interest in the event of default by the buyer. For the following reasons, we hold that the contract does not violate the Ohio Retail Installment Sales Act.

The contract entered into by appellees contains the following provisions regarding recourse by the holder in the event of default:

“Default Charge: The undersigned agrees that if the obligation hereby evidenced, or any part thereof, is not paid at the maturity thereof, whether such maturity be caused by lapse of time or by acceleration, such entire obligation shall thereafter draw straight interest at the rate of 8% per annum until paid: or, at the option of the holder hereof, the holder may collect and receive and undersigned jointly and severally promise to pay late charges calculated the rate of 5