Ford Motor Credit Corporation (FMCC) hired Traciers & Associates (Traciers) to repossess a white 2002 Ford Expedition owned by Marissa Chapa, who was in default on the associated promissory note. Traciers assigned the job to its field manager, Paul Chambers, and gave him an address where the vehicle could be found. Ford, Traciers, and Chambers were unaware that the address was that of Marissa’s brother, Carlos Chapa. Coincidentally, Carlos and his wife, Maria Chapa, also had purchased a white Ford Expedition financed by Ford. Their vehicle, however, was a 2003 model, and the Chapas were not in default. Chambers ultimately repossessed the wrong vehicle. At the time of the repossession, Carlos and Maria Chapa’s 2 children were in the vehicle. Chambers was unaware of their presence at the time of the he took possession of the vehicle. When Maria emerged from the house, the Expedition, with her children, was gone. Maria began screaming, telephoned 911, and called her husband at work to tell him the children were gone. In the meantime, Chambers discovered the 2 Chapa children. After he persuaded one of the boys to unlock the vehicle, Chambers drove the Expedition back to the Chapas’ house. He returned the keys to Maria, who was outside her house, crying. By the time emergency personnel and Carlos Chapa arrived, the children were back home, and Chambers had left the scene. Acting individually and on behalf of their children, Carlos and Maria Chapa sued Traciers, Chambers, and Ford. The defendants settled the children’s claims but contested the individual claims of Carlos and Maria. The trial court granted summary judgment on the parents’ claims in favor of Traciers, Chambers, and FMCC, and Carlos and Maria appealed. Was the mistaken repossession of the wrong vehicle a breach of the peace? How would you decide the parents’ claim for emotional distress on appeal?