to avoid Transamerica’s lien. The Bankruptcy Court decided in favor of the Debtors on the ground that the remaining security interest was not purchase money. The Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel reversed, holding that a security interest existed in the goods to the extent of the remaining indebtedness attributable to the purchase price. The Ninth Circuit reviewed the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s interpretation of § 522(f) de novo as a question of law and reversed. Id. at 799. The Court decided that the transaction delineated above did not meet the definition of a purchase money security interest as contained in U.C.C. § 9-107(b). Although Transamerica gave purchase money value when it initially loan , Inc. (In re Hipps), 89 B.R. 264, 18 B.C.D. 57 (Bankr.N.D.1988) (<HOLDING>); Smiley v. Feldman Furniture Co. (In re
holding that under colorado law refinancing of a purchase money loan whereby an old note and security agreement were canceled and replaced by a new note and security agreement did not automatically extinguish the creditors pmsi in the debtors furniture the parties did not intend the new note to extinguish the original debt and security interest in that identical collateral remained almost no new money was advanced and the document specifically stated an intent to continue the pmsi holding that under georgia law a creditors refinancing of a promissory note destroyed the purchase money nature of the creditors security interest in a wall unit which served as collateral holding that in georgia pursuant to  9107 of the ucc refinancing of a promissory note transforms the obligation thereby destroying purchase money nature of the security interest therefore the creditor lost its purchase money security interest pmsi in a television set when the loans were consolidated and lien was avoidable id 89 br 264 18 bcd 58 holding that a purchase money security in jewelry was not lost when the perfected purchase money security interest was consolidated with a subsequent retail installment contract holding courts must look to the law of the state in which the security interest was created to determine if creditor retains a purchase money security interest despite refinancing