Timothy Allen commissioned a custom motorcycle from Indy Route 66 Cycles, Inc., based inIndiana. Indy built it and issued a “Certificate of Origin.” Later, federal law enforcement officersarrested Allen on drug charges and seized the Indy-made cycle from the garage of Allen’s sisterTena. The government alleged that the cycle was subject to forfeiture as the proceeds of drugtrafficking. Indy filed a claim in a federal district court against the government. Indy argued that itowned the cycle, as evidenced by the “Certificate of Origin,” which the company still possessed.Indy claimed to have been keeping the cycle in storage. The government asserted that the cycle hadbeen delivered to Allen and filed a motion to strike.The court granted the motion to strike. Under UCC 2–401(2)], “title passes to the buyer at thetime and place at which the seller completes his performance with reference to the physical deliveryof the goods.” Testimony by Indy’s former vice president Vince Ballard was “inconclusive.” Ballardimplied that Indy delivered the cycle to Allen and asserted that Indy kept it in storage. But the cyclewas found in Tena Allen’s garage. This “strongly indicates that claimant delivered it to Allen. As in many cases, there may have been unstated reasons for the court’s decision against Indy in thiscase. When asked whether Indy inquired into the occupations of its customers, the seller said no,because if it did, it would likely lose half of them. In response to queries about the price of Allen’scustom cycle, Indy gave different answers at different times. The seller was also not clear on howmuch the buyer still owed on the price. When asked how long the cycle had been in storage, Indyprovided a date that fell after the cycle had been seized by law enforcement officers.
Should the passage of title be tied so closely to the possession of the goods? Discuss.