Closed Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    tttcomrader is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1

    Making payments to a car not under my name

    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!
  2. #2
    Antigone* is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    In honor of JetX ~ Somnambulist University
    Posts
    21,220
    Quote Originally Posted by tttcomrader View Post
    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.
  3. #3
    ecmst12 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    35,576
    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.
  4. #4
    Kiawah is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,086
    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.
  5. #5
    Antigone* is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    In honor of JetX ~ Somnambulist University
    Posts
    21,220
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiawah View Post
    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
  6. #6
    Kiawah is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,086
    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 by Kiawah; 01-04-2011 at 02:00 PM.
  7. #7
    Antigone* is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    In honor of JetX ~ Somnambulist University
    Posts
    21,220
    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.
  8. #8
    Willlyjo Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Antigone*of*Greece View Post
    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 m martin; 01-05-2011 at 01:16 PM.
  9. #9
    Antigone* is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    In honor of JetX ~ Somnambulist University
    Posts
    21,220
    [QUOTE=Willlyjo;2721889]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! [QUOTE]

    willy, Tigi does not answer to you and you are certainly not worth my time.
    Last edited by m martin; 01-05-2011 at 01:17 PM.
  10. #10
    George1776 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by Willlyjo View Post
    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 m martin; 01-05-2011 at 01:17 PM.
  11. #11
    latigo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,743
    Quote Originally Posted by Antigone*of*Greece View Post
    Legally the vehicle belongs to the lienholder. Stop making the payments and they will come and recover their vehicle. Problem solved.
    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.
  12. #12
    Antigone* is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    In honor of JetX ~ Somnambulist University
    Posts
    21,220
    Quote Originally Posted by latigo View Post
    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.
  13. #13
    sandyclaus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Ho Ho Ho, Wouldn't YOU like to know ;)?
    Posts
    7,817
    Pardonez moi..

    But...

    What the heck does this thread have to do with Auto Accidents and Vehicle Claims????

Similar Threads

  1. Making little payments
    By emmyjean29 in forum Debt Collections
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-26-2010, 01:41 PM
  2. Ex-wife,not making the payments
    By topdawg88 in forum Other Real Estate Law Questions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-26-2008, 09:22 PM
  3. Ex-husband not making car payments
    By techchick in forum Debt Collections
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-19-2005, 12:34 PM
  4. Making payments
    By unabomber in forum Banking & Credit Cards
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-18-2001, 09:36 AM
  5. making payments
    By poison in forum Small Claims Courts
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-17-2000, 05:29 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

© 1995-2012 Advice Company, All Rights Reserved

FreeAdvice® has been providing millions of consumers with outstanding advice, free, since 1995. While not a substitute for personal advice from a licensed professional, it is available AS IS, subject to our Disclaimer and Terms & Conditions Of Use.