• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Making payments to a car not under my name

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

tttcomrader

Junior Member
Hi, guys, I'm new to the forum. I'm currently living in NC and due to my lack of credits while I need a car, I have my friend took out a auto loan under her name while I make the payments two years ago.

I put in the down payments plus all of the monthly payments for all these times (and all other fees), but the car remain under her name. Recently she stated that she is moving and would like to get rid of the loan.

Can she legally come and take the car? I understand it is under her name, but I have proof that I made every single payments, how would this be likely settled in court?

Thank you!
 


Antigone*

Senior Member
Hi, guys, I'm new to the forum. I'm currently living in NC and due to my lack of credits while I need a car, I have my friend took out a auto loan under her name while I make the payments two years ago.

I put in the down payments plus all of the monthly payments for all these times (and all other fees), but the car remain under her name. Recently she stated that she is moving and would like to get rid of the loan.

Can she legally come and take the car? I understand it is under her name, but I have proof that I made every single payments, how would this be likely settled in court?

Thank you!
Legally the vehicle belongs to the lienholder. Stop making the payments and they will come and recover their vehicle. Problem solved.:cool:
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
It's her car. Now, if she allows you to refinance the loan in your name and transfer the title and registration to you, then you can do that. But other then that, you've been borrowing (or perhaps renting) her car, so you have no ownership rights and she can take it back at any time.
 

Kiawah

Senior Member
Very risky to do what you did, and you are seeing one of the problems that can come up.

Your best bet is going to be to get her to sign the title over to you, as you hand her the cash for the remaining amount you owe her. Do this quickly before your relationship sours, and other bigger problems could happen.
 

Antigone*

Senior Member
Very risky to do what you did, and you are seeing one of the problems that can come up.

Your best bet is going to be to get her to sign the title over to you, as you hand her the cash for the remaining amount you owe her. Do this quickly before your relationship sours, and other bigger problems could happen.
"She" doesn't have the title, Kiawah, the lienholder does. The loan is in her name and he is making the payments.

The term for this is straw purchase;)
 

Kiawah

Senior Member
I put in the down payments plus all of the monthly payments for all these times (and all other fees), but the car remain under her name. Recently she stated that she is moving and would like to get rid of the loan.

Can she legally come and take the car? I understand it is under her name, but I have proof that I made every single payments, how would this be likely settled in court?
Sounded like to me, that the 'she', is the title holder, and effectively the lienholder. No idea whether the OP is a he or a she.
 
Last edited:

Antigone*

Senior Member
When all is said and done, this OP will not be able to look to the courts for recovery in any fashion since he has unclean hands. They both defrauded the bank with this straw purchase and now he'll have to live with the results of the fraud he commited.
 
W

Willlyjo

Guest
When all is said and done, this OP will not be able to look to the courts for recovery in any fashion since he has unclean hands. They both defrauded the bank with this straw purchase and now he'll have to live with the results of the fraud he commited.
Show me a law that says they committed fraud! The Op has no credit so he got a friend to purchase the car on credit! The friend is obligated to make sure the payments were made because if they weren't, she would be the one getting the letters from the bank.

Since the Op made every payment according to the contract for or on the friend's behalf, what is the problem and where is the fraud? The problem of course is that the friend is going to move and wants to end the loan on the car. Based on what the Op says, it seems like since he made all payments thus far, maybe the friend would allow him to keep making payments until the car is totally purchased and then sign the title over to him when the lien holder sends it to her after the final payment!

Sure if the friend wants to wrongfully just take the car and continue to make payments thus gaining a pretty good deal, she could do this. But that would be wrong! Legally speaking she could do this. On the other hand, maybe she doesn't want to make these extra payments. It would be stupid to just let the car get repossessed.

It does seem she is trying to get the Op to come up with the money to pay off the car and be done with the contract she has with the bank or lienholder. This might not be easy since it appears the Op doesn't have the money to pay it off.

Therefore, she has one of two choices. 1. Let the Op continue to make the payments on time as he has which will make her credit look good or 2. make the payments herself and keep the car.

If she keeps the car herself, the Op may have a case against her because the friend agreed to purchase the car and let him make payments so he could have possession of the car. Athough the Op doesn't say it in his post, I'm sure his friend agreed to let him own the car once payments were complete (correct me if I'm wrong). If the friend wants to take possession of the car despite what appears to be an implied contract supported by documentation the Op says he has, the friend could be liable for damages to the Op.

Now if you can supply some kind of proof, Antigone, that they committed some type of fraud, then everything I said in my post is moot!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Antigone*

Senior Member
Show me a law that says they committed fraud! The Op has no credit so he got a friend to purchase the car on credit! The friend is obligated to make sure the payments were made because if they weren't, she would be the one getting the letters from the bank.

Since the Op made every payment according to the contract for or on the friend's behalf, what is the problem and where is the fraud? The problem of course is that the friend is going to move and wants to end the loan on the car. Based on what the Op says, it seems like since he made all payments thus far, maybe the friend would allow him to keep making payments until the car is totally purchased and then sign the title over to him when the lien holder sends it to her after the final payment!

Sure if the friend wants to wrongfully just take the car and continue to make payments thus gaining a pretty good deal, she could do this. But that would be wrong! Legally speaking she could do this. On the other hand, maybe she doesn't want to make these extra payments. It would be stupid to just let the car get repossessed.

It does seem she is trying to get the Op to come up with the money to pay off the car and be done with the contract she has with the bank or lienholder. This might not be easy since it appears the Op doesn't have the money to pay it off.

Therefore, she has one of two choices. 1. Let the Op continue to make the payments on time as he has which will make her credit look good or 2. make the payments herself and keep the car.

If she keeps the car herself, the Op may have a case against her because the friend agreed to purchase the car and let him make payments so he could have possession of the car. Athough the Op doesn't say it in his post, I'm sure his friend agreed to let him own the car once payments were complete (correct me if I'm wrong). If the friend wants to take possession of the car despite what appears to be a implied contract supported by documentation the Op says he has, the friend could be liable for damages to the Op.

Now if you can supply some kind of proof, Antigone, that they committed some type of fraud, then everything I said in my post is moot!
willy, Tigi does not answer to you and you are certainly not worth my time. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Show me a law that says they committed fraud! The Op has no credit so he got a friend to purchase the car on credit! The friend is obligated to make sure the payments were made because if they weren't, she would be the one getting the letters from the bank.

Since the Op made every payment according to the contract for or on the friend's behalf, what is the problem and where is the fraud? The problem of course is that the friend is going to move and wants to end the loan on the car. Based on what the Op says, it seems like since he made all payments thus far, maybe the friend would allow him to keep making payments until the car is totally purchased and then sign the title over to him when the lien holder sends it to her after the final payment!

Sure if the friend wants to wrongfully just take the car and continue to make payments thus gaining a pretty good deal, she could do this. But that would be wrong! Legally speaking she could do this. On the other hand, maybe she doesn't want to make these extra payments. It would be stupid to just let the car get repossessed.

It does seem she is trying to get the Op to come up with the money to pay off the car and be done with the contract she has with the bank or lienholder. This might not be easy since it appears the Op doesn't have the money to pay it off.

Therefore, she has one of two choices. 1. Let the Op continue to make the payments on time as he has which will make her credit look good or 2. make the payments herself and keep the car.

If she keeps the car herself, the Op may have a case against her because the friend agreed to purchase the car and let him make payments so he could have possession of the car. Athough the Op doesn't say it in his post, I'm sure his friend agreed to let him own the car once payments were complete (correct me if I'm wrong). If the friend wants to take possession of the car despite what appears to be an implied contract supported by documentation the Op says he has, the friend could be liable for damages to the Op.

Now if you can supply some kind of proof, Antigone, that they committed some type of fraud, then everything I said in my post is moot!
Willy's correct
 
Last edited by a moderator:

latigo

Senior Member
Legally the vehicle belongs to the lienholder. Stop making the payments and they will come and recover their vehicle. Problem solved.:cool:
With all due respect, Plato by the very definition of the word “lien” the vehicle does not “belong” to the lien holder! It is collateral pledged to secure a loan.

Thus it is not the lender’s vehicle to “recover”.

Furthermore, it will never become the property of the lien holder unless after exercising its post default remedies with respect to the collateral and issues itself a “transfer statement” and submits it to DMV with a request for issuance of a certificate of title in accordance with North Carolina’s Uniform Commercial Code. *
___________

And this business of yours of the OP supposedly being implicated in defrauding the lender with this so-called “straw purchase” is equally off of the mark.


[*] North Carolina General Statutes § 25-9-619 Transfer of record or legal title.
 

Antigone*

Senior Member
With all due respect, Plato by the very definition of the word “lien” the vehicle does not “belong” to the lien holder! It is collateral pledged to secure a loan.

Thus it is not the lender’s vehicle to “recover”.

Furthermore, it will never become the property of the lien holder unless after exercising its post default remedies with respect to the collateral and issues itself a “transfer statement” and submits it to DMV with a request for issuance of a certificate of title in accordance with North Carolina’s Uniform Commercial Code. *
___________

And this business of yours of the OP supposedly being implicated in defrauding the lender with this so-called “straw purchase” is equally off of the mark.


[*] North Carolina General Statutes § 25-9-619 Transfer of record or legal title.

This is a straw purchase. The OP and his cohort decided they would defraud the lender. The vehicle was financed by a financial institution with the understanding that the person buying and paying for the vehicle was the cohort The lender decided to take the risk and lend their money for this purchase using the cohort's information and credit history. The pricing for the loan was based on risk assessed to this cohort.

Had the bank known that the OP was going to be the owner of this vehicle, they may not have taken this risk but because of the fraud these two (and possibly three if the dealer was involved) committed, the financial institution funded a loan using pricing and a risk assessment that was false and obviously way too low.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top