I don't know if OK laws may differ from other places if at all. When I was 16 my dad got a car for me for a "birthday present". And then made me start paying him back for it...every penny including interest on the loan he took out for it. After interest it added up to almost over $10,000. I've paid on it for 3 years and still "owe" $7,000. He recently got married and his wife took out a personal loan to pay off my car loan so he could buy a house. He also signed the title over to me (notarized) and I received the lien release. I recently discovered he has been doing something that is beyond forgiving, and I no longer want anything to do with him. Do I legally have to continue paying him back for my car even though I never signed anything saying I would and he already signed it over to me?
-
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.
ODD situation. Debt said to owe to FAMILY member.
- Thread starter round5
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
Proserpina
Senior Member
If you no longer want anything to do with him, perhaps the logical answer would be to return the car and move on with your life.
The issue with that is 1. It is the only vehicle my household has with 3 adults, due to 2 of them being laid off. I am the only one currently working a full time job. And 2. I don't have the funds to buy another vehicle, especially since I am getting married in 3 months and now am paying for it when he had made the agreement with me to pay that as well And 3. He told me he would pay on my phone bill until the contract was up and broke that agreement when I confronted him about his wrongdoing, I'm not asking for opinions on what is logical. I'm asking for facts on if I LEGALLY have to pay him for my car.
LdiJ
Senior Member
I do not think that is good advice since he has already paid 10k towards the car. It wasn't really a gift.
LdiJ
Senior Member
Legally, your father would have a hard time proving that you ever agreed to go into debt with him. However, the person getting screwed over on this is going to be his wife, not him. Does she deserve to get screwed over in this deal?
For what it is worth:
Aside from the question of whether the car was gifted to you (which appears somewhat evident - donative intent on the part of your father and delivery of the subject of the gift) there is the subject of your capacity as a minor to enter into a contract and your ability to disaffirm the agreement to pay for the vehicle.
In as much as the vehicle could not be considered a necessity, then under Oklahoma law you would have the right to disaffirm the agreement either before you attained the age of eighteen, or within one year afterwards. (See: Oklahoma Statute Title 15 Section 19)
What is not made clear is whether or not you affirmed the agreement upon reaching the age of majority. Continuing to make the payments upon reaching legal age could be seen as such an affirmation. But I agree that it is a bit of knotty legal problem.
And if that isn't enough to confuse the issue, consider this aspect.
Assuming that there was a valid gift of the car ("a birthday present") and assuming that a minor can legal own personal property, and that the agreement to pay dad followed the act of gifting - that is, it was not a conditional gift - was there adequate consideration to support the agreement to reimburse dad?
Example: Farmer Brown gives farmer Smith a mule. Brown having second thoughts tells Smith he needs to pay a $100 for the mule. Smith agrees but fails to pay the money. Brown sues Smith for the $100 and loses because he had asked Smith to pay him for a mule that Smith already owned.
Last edited:
justalayman
Senior Member
Kid is 19 so right to deny the contract has expired. Additionally when one dissaffirms a contract they must return the item involved if possible. The kid doesn't get the item and deny the debt both.
Beyond that, we don't know the agreement at the time of the gift. Maybe the birthday gift was securing the loan for the vehicle rather than the vehicle itself. The actions of the op appear to show the op willingly engaged into a contract with the father such that the op does make the payments on the loan. The step mother refinancing the debt does not alleviate the op of paying for the car but simply shows a transfer of rights of the creditor from the father to the step mother.
The delivery of the title, including the release of the lien, changes nothing. A lien on a vehicle does not establish it as collateral for a loan but merely is a mechanism to prevent the transfer of ownership without approval by he lien holder. The contract establishes the vehicle as collateral.
What can happen will be controlled by whatever agreement op and his father had way back when the car was originally purchased.
Beyond that, we don't know the agreement at the time of the gift. Maybe the birthday gift was securing the loan for the vehicle rather than the vehicle itself. The actions of the op appear to show the op willingly engaged into a contract with the father such that the op does make the payments on the loan. The step mother refinancing the debt does not alleviate the op of paying for the car but simply shows a transfer of rights of the creditor from the father to the step mother.
The delivery of the title, including the release of the lien, changes nothing. A lien on a vehicle does not establish it as collateral for a loan but merely is a mechanism to prevent the transfer of ownership without approval by he lien holder. The contract establishes the vehicle as collateral.
What can happen will be controlled by whatever agreement op and his father had way back when the car was originally purchased.
Oklahoma Statute §15-19. Disaffirmance of minor's contract.
In all cases other than those specified herein, (necessities) the contract of a minor may be disaffirmed by the minor himself, either before his majority or within one (1) year's time afterward . . . .
We differ of course, and I always respect yours. But it is my onion that if the car was indeed gifted, he does not need to return it. Further, that he could also timely disaffirm the subsequent agreement or successfully defend an action upon it for failure of consideration. One needn't pay for something they already own.
Anyway, I'm going to forget this problem and work on one more vexing; my off and on golf game. Which incidentally is like being in love with a beautiful woman that wretches at the very site of you.
See ya, justy.
justalayman
Senior Member
He said he got the car for his 16th birthday and three years have since passed. That makes him 19. I haven't checked the age of majority but did presume it is 18. I could be wrong.
Plus there has been nothing said regarding any agreement at the time of the original procurement of the car. Maybe dad plunked down a healthy deposit and that was the actual gift.
Transferring the vehicle does not invalidate any existing indebtedness. If so i guess I never had to pay off all those car loans I used to purchase vehicles. After all, the cars were put in my name from day one actuslly.
What it comes down to is yes, was the car actually gifted to the op. The fact op was required to and actuslly did make payments to the father is supportive of an argument the car free and clear was in fact not the gift.
And as much as I love onions, i cannot for the life of me figure out what they have to do with any of this.
But to golf; can't think of anything to say about it that robin Williams didn't say better
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pcnFbCCgTo4
Last edited:
Response to all past replies
1. The day I turned 19 was actually the day I decided to disown my father and no longer pay on the vehicle. 2. I never contacted, agreed, or was OK with paying on a $10,000 car. 3. I was told by him I am to pay every penny of the vehicle, his intent was to never have come out on it even by a penny. 4. I was 2 months from turning 16 when the car was put on me, it showed up in the driveway on day, I never agreed to even him aquiring the specific vehicle for me. 5. On the title itself, is stated it was gifted to me, although Ive been paying on it. 6. I've only continued paying on it because he was the title holder until recently, so if he were to decide to confiscate the car before signing it to me, I would have no proof it had anything to do with me, and I would have no vehicle to get myself to and from work to support myself. And last but not least 7. I'm actually a female...
1. The day I turned 19 was actually the day I decided to disown my father and no longer pay on the vehicle. 2. I never contacted, agreed, or was OK with paying on a $10,000 car. 3. I was told by him I am to pay every penny of the vehicle, his intent was to never have come out on it even by a penny. 4. I was 2 months from turning 16 when the car was put on me, it showed up in the driveway on day, I never agreed to even him aquiring the specific vehicle for me. 5. On the title itself, is stated it was gifted to me, although Ive been paying on it. 6. I've only continued paying on it because he was the title holder until recently, so if he were to decide to confiscate the car before signing it to me, I would have no proof it had anything to do with me, and I would have no vehicle to get myself to and from work to support myself. And last but not least 7. I'm actually a female...
not2cleverRed
Obvious Observer
Just for clarification: you paid $3,000 out of $7,000.
justalayman
Senior Member
why would you ever pay on it if you had not agreed to it?
yet you made payments for 3 years.
.then you could have simply said thanks but no thanks. You didn't. You paid on the car for 3 years.
your payment record shows otherwise. Of course you had the option of saying, thanks dad but no thanks.
From whom? So far it would appear the loan was in your fathers name and I don't know a bank that would not have required the car to be in his name as well, but regardless, your payment history shows there was some agreement you pay the loan.
you could have relinquished the car to dad. You never had to set one foot in it, yet you did and you made about 36 payments on it. Now you are throwing a hissy fit and want the car and don't want to pay it off. Good luck with that. Step mom is going to win. No idea what your gender has to do with anything. I use he as a generic pronoun.
Proserpina
Senior Member
Ah. So this boils down to you being mad about something which doesn't involve you at all.
Thanks for clarifying.
LdiJ
Senior Member
In one respect I find this thread very interesting.
Generally most people on this forum tell posters that they have no choice but to do exactly what their parents tell them to do when they are minors.
Yet, in this thread several people are dissing the OP because he did not refuse the gift from his father and refuse to make the payments on said gift, when he was a minor.
And Pro...if my dad had been boffing one of my best friends, and started it when my best friend was a minor, I would have been totally devastated and would have disowned my father as well.
Generally most people on this forum tell posters that they have no choice but to do exactly what their parents tell them to do when they are minors.
Yet, in this thread several people are dissing the OP because he did not refuse the gift from his father and refuse to make the payments on said gift, when he was a minor.
And Pro...if my dad had been boffing one of my best friends, and started it when my best friend was a minor, I would have been totally devastated and would have disowned my father as well.
justalayman
Senior Member
well let's go beyond a kid doing what they are told. Op clearly stated they continued to pay even after they turned 18 because they wanted to keep the car. That shows there was some belief there was an obligation to pay for the car. Otherwise all she had to do was say; nope, not paying it. At that point she could have argued kid v. Adult for her position but she ratified whatever agreement in place by continuing to make payments. Now she's pissed and thinks that her emotional issues somehow control her legal issues.
But as paying because you are a minor: where have you ever seen a parent buy a car for their kid and force them to accept it and pay for it? I have never seen such a situstion. It's always; if you don't pay for it I keep it or I sell it or whatever.
Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!
Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">