seperation from Girlfriend

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Colorado

My ex and i bought a car together. The vehicle is under my name but we traded her car in for a down payment. The pay off amount on her car was 2500, am i held responsible for the 2500?? Since we bought the car for her to drive does she get to keep it until I give her the money?

Thanks.

Is there a loan on it? Who is responsible for the loan?

And WHY would you mingle finances this way is a non committed relationship? Heck, I'm married 15 YEARS, and we still keep certain financial matters segregated.

i am responsible for the loan and the car is titled to me.

Love made me do some dumb things

stb1970 said:

i am responsible for the loan and the car is titled to me.

Love made me do some dumb things

Click to expand...

Legally, the car is yours. Her contribution to the downpayment is her gift to you. You have no obligation to reimburse her, but it would be a nice thing to do.

stb1970 said:

i am responsible for the loan and the car is titled to me.

Love made me do some dumb things

Click to expand...

There are legal issues here, and moral issues here.

Legally, its your car. You can report it stolen if she won't turn it over to you.

Morally, it could be a different matter. If her car, as a trade in, was the down payment and she has made all of the payments since, then morally its her car.

Then, we go back to legal. If she can demonstrate that there was a "contract" between you and she for you to be a secondary finance person for the car and she is living up to the terms of that "contract" then a judge could rule that its her car...or rule that you have to reimburse her for the down payment and any payments she has made since.

Which is all a prime example of why people should NOT do what you have done.

I cosigned for a car for a roommate about 30 years ago (arg that makes me old) I ended up being the primary borrower because the dealership insisted upon it. I was young and had no concept of what I was doing. I do remember the dealer saying that I was "gold" so I had to be first, but I didn't understand what that meant. A couple of year later I got married and moved out, without even thinking about the fact that I had cosigned for that loan.

Luckily my former roommate was a responsible person and paid the payments responsibly, so it didn't effect my credit. I didn't even realize how seriously I was connected to that car until quite a few years later the former roommate got in touch with me because they needed my signature to sell the car.

So...people reading this thread, please understand that cosigning something is a really serious issue....married or not.

He is both responsible for the vehicle and the titled owner, and has a responsibility to his creditor to maintain the vehicle, keep it insured and make the payments. While it can be argued he may owe her reimbursement for the DP, it is entirely unfair to the creditor to hand the vehicle off to anyone else.

LdiJ said:

There are legal issues here, and moral issues here.

Legally, its your car. You can report it stolen if she won't turn it over to you.

Morally, it could be a different matter. If her car, as a trade in, was the down payment and she has made all of the payments since, then morally its her car.

Then, we go back to legal. If she can demonstrate that there was a "contract" between you and she for you to be a secondary finance person for the car and she is living up to the terms of that "contract" then a judge could rule that its her car...or rule that you have to reimburse her for the down payment and any payments she has made since.

Click to expand...

Or he could argue that he provided her with transportation and the payments she made were for the transportation. It could go round and round - which is why the name on the title and the loan is likely to be the determining factor.

mistoffolees said:

Or he could argue that he provided her with transportation and the payments she made were for the transportation. It could go round and round - which is why the name on the title and the loan is likely to be the determining factor.

Click to expand...

It all depends on whether or not she can convince the judge that there was a "contract". It would not be a family law matter at all.

The down payment issue also seriously bothers me. Its a huge danged deal for anyone low or middle income to come up with a down payment for a car loan. The fact that she made the down payment, via trading in her car, is a fairly strong indication of a "contract".

It could also be argued she meant it as a gift because she did not also choose to be on title. Stupid maybe, but neither should be entering such financial deals jointly with a mere girlfriend/boyfriend.

You have no idea. Maybe he'd been providing her free housing or some other consideration, and it could be argued that this was her contribution toward all the housing, utilities and living support he'd been taking care off. You cannot simply claim that she's entitled to the car without knowing all.

Additionally, we all know that trade in values don't necessarily reflect what the car is worth, but are a tool to get the buyer to pony up for a more expensive car. The trade in value would vary depending on what HE happened to buy. The trade in could be way more than what she'd have gotten on the open market if the dealer used that part of the deal to cajol him into buying a new car.

It certainly would NOT be responsible to hand over a car titled in his name alone, on which he ALONE is responsible for the payments. We don't even know she CAN cover the payments and insurance. Frankly, he has a duty to his creditor to maintain control over their collateral.

nextwife said:

It could also be argued she meant it as a gift because she did not also choose to be on title. Stupid maybe, but neither should be entering such financial deals jointly with a mere girlfriend/boyfriend.

You have no idea. Maybe he'd been providing her free housing or some other consideration, and it could be argued that this was her contribution toward all the housing, utilities and living support he'd been taking care off. You cannot simply claim that she's entitled to the car without knowing all.

Additionally, we all know that trade in values don't necessarily reflect what the car is worth, but are a tool to get the buyer to pony up for a more expensive car. The trade in value would vary depending on what HE happened to buy. The trade in could be way more than what she'd have gotten on the open market if the dealer used that part of the deal to cajol him into buying a new car.

It certainly would NOT be responsible to hand over a car titled in his name alone, on which he ALONE is responsible for the payments. We don't even know she CAN cover the payments and insurance. Frankly, he has a duty to his creditor to maintain control over their collateral.

Click to expand...

I am not claiming that she IS entitled to the car. I am simply stating that I don't think its a slam dunk for him legally, and I think he may have a moral obligation to return her down payment to her if she has been covering all the expenses herself.

LdiJ said:

I am not claiming that she IS entitled to the car. I am simply stating that I don't think its a slam dunk for him legally, and I think he may have a moral obligation to return her down payment to her if she has been covering all the expenses herself.

Click to expand...

And what if the trade-in was a typical dealer inflated price to get him to pay more for a new car (which he still needs to pay for? What if the car was never worth the trade in and that value was only assigned because of how much car HE chose to buy?

WE all know that if I trade in my car toward a 5k older used car, the amount the dealer gives in trade will be entirely different than if I trade in toward a 32k SUV (for example). The trade in may in no way reflect what she really could have gotten for the car. While he likely should pay her back the car value, I'm not sure that the dollars stated in trade-in reliably reflect what she actually gave up.

nextwife said:

And what if the trade-in was a typical dealer inflated price to get him to pay more for a new car (which he still needs to pay for? What if the car was never worth the trade in and that value was only assigned because of how much car HE chose to buy?

WE all know that if I trade in my car toward a 5k older used car, the amount the dealer gives in trade will be entirely different than if I trade in toward a 32k SUV (for example). The trade in may in no way reflect what she really could have gotten for the car. While he likely should pay her back the car value, I'm not sure that the dollars stated in trade-in reliably reflect what she actually gave up.

Click to expand...

I don't know when you bought a new car last, but that hasn't been my experience in the last 3 cars I purchased. I negotiate the price first, and once that is firmly established THEN we talk trade in and financing.

I also blue book my potential trade in before I start shopping, and have gotten that almost right on the nose, every time.

LdiJ said:

It all depends on whether or not she can convince the judge that there was a "contract". It would not be a family law matter at all.

The down payment issue also seriously bothers me. Its a huge danged deal for anyone low or middle income to come up with a down payment for a car loan. The fact that she made the down payment, via trading in her car, is a fairly strong indication of a "contract".

Click to expand...

WRONG. It could have been a gift.

LdiJ said:

I don't know when you bought a new car last, but that hasn't been my experience in the last 3 cars I purchased. I negotiate the price first, and once that is firmly established THEN we talk trade in and financing.

I also blue book my potential trade in before I start shopping, and have gotten that almost right on the nose, every time.

Click to expand...

We are informed buyers, but a great many shoppers buy based on the payment, not on what they are really paying. (Personally, I buy very modestly priced used cars for cash, usually from Craigs list or a local driveway with a car for sale, so I don't deal with trade ins. I last had a car payment in 1992.)

But I KNOW that inflating the trade is a tool dealers use to talk the buyer into springing for the higher priced car. C'mon, you can't have first heard that from me?

nextwife said:

We are informed buyers, but a great many shoppers buy based on the payment, not on what they are really paying. (Personally, I buy very modestly priced used cars for cash, usually from Craigs list or a local driveway with a car for sale, so I don't deal with trade ins. I last had a car payment in 1992.)

But I KNOW that inflating the trade is a tool dealers use to talk the buyer into springing for the higher priced car. C'mon, you can't have first heard that from me?

Click to expand...

I had one dealer do it when I was about 25...but not quite the way that you are describing. I had in mind what price I wanted to pay for the car, and the dealer wouldn't come down that low, but then inflated my trade in to make my net price the price I wanted.

That was the last time however that I ever started talking trade in before I had a firm price settled. The last time I purchased a car (a newer used one) the dealer tried to talk payments with me instead of price, and had inflated the price with a bunch of unnecessary and unwanted add ons. I nipped that one in the bud quite quickly.