My fiancé’s grandmother is taking his car?

[Clipztr]

My fiancé didn’t have good credit when he was 20 so his grandpa co-signed on a Jeep for him, however the Jeep then went into his grandfathers name but my fiancé has been making payments on it (signing money orders and sending them to the bank) well a year or so ago my fiancé’s grandmother got power of attorney for my fiancé’s grandfather because his mind is starting to go. She went behind our backs and got the Jeep switched over to her name and is trying to keep it. Is there anything we can do? Weve put 8000 dollars into it. This never would have happened if my fiancé’s grandfathers health hadn’t started to go.

 

[CdwJava]

What state is this happening in? Laws vary by state, so it is important to know this information.

If the vehicle is in grandmother's name and she refuses to return it or to return any payments for it, your fiance can take her to court (likely Small Claims, but the dollar amount varies by state) and ask for the money. Whether he might prevail could be a crap shoot. If there is a written contract or agreement, he may have an easy go of it. Proof of consistent payments can help as well. But, if his payments to his grandfather were spotty, too low, etc., then he may find it more difficult to convince a court he deserves all the money back.

So, he should consider asking for the car or some repayment of his investment. If his request is denied, he is free to try filing a civil suit.

 

[Clipztr]

It’s in Michigan, and the payments weren’t spotty, we never payed his grandfather directly we sent them into the bank and I’m sure the bank has proof of that. She is refusing to give it back but I’d hate to take a family member to court.

 

[CdwJava]

He sent the payments to the bank ... anything to indicate that the payments were for the car, and not for something else? Putting money into the bank via money order is not proof of paying towards a car. It probably helps, and may well be a contributing factor in any court action, but it's not a smoking gun.

When he asked grandmother about the car, what did she say? WHY is she keeping the car from him if he had been making payments? Certainly she has some sort of reason and is not simply being capricious and mean.

Ultimately, absent his grandmother voluntarily turning over the car or money, the only way to force her to turn over some or all of the money he has paid is to sue her.

 

[Clipztr]

We lent her the car several months ago because she needed it, we asked for it back today because my mother needs it (she was in a bad accident and her car is totaled.) she said no because it’s in the process of having the title switched over to her name so it isn’t legal to drive and that she needs it for going to the store. When we said it’s our car she laughed and said it never was, that it was in grandpas name.

The payments to the bank had the account number for the Loan on it (we are almost done paying off the car but she took over the payments for the last 3 months while she was using it)

 

[Clipztr]

It seems to me she’s abusing the power of attorney for her benefit, she basically used it to take the car out of his name and put it In hers, is that even legal, I feel like that has to be an abuse of power.

 

[CdwJava]

Technically, she is kinda correct in that the car appears to have been in someone else's name all along. And if SHE has been making the payments, that may serve to strengthen her claim to the car.

If she does not relent and return the car, your fiance will have to consider a lawsuit if he wants to pry the car from her.

And it's not likely any legal "abuse" of the PoA since the situation would STILL be that your fiance does not have title to the car.

 

[Clipztr]

Yeah I know it just seems very unethicle, she made payments for 3 months while she was borrowing it from us, we made payments for 4 years.

 

[CdwJava]

It may be shady, but as long as the car is not in your fiance's name, he is the one that will have to pursue legal action to try and get some measure of compensation.

 

[justalayman]

If you can prove your claims you have a case for Arguing the car belongs to boyfriend . It appears it was held in a constructive trust (not a formal trust but in a situation that acts like a trust would) where grandpa held title while boyfriend made payments.

As cdwjava posted, unless grandma willingly relinquishes the title, suing her is the only way to get it.


The biggest problems I see are:

Why didn’t boyfriend continue to pay for the car while grandma had it? Thst suggests boyfriend may have relinquished his claim to the car.

And


You’ve said nothing about grandpas position on the matter.

 

[stealth2]

I would like to point out to OP that "we" did not lend her the car, nor is it "our" car.

GPa's position may be moot if there's a PoA. I'd bet it changes on the day, the time of day even, and who he's speaking with.

 

[CdwJava]

The biggest problems I see are:

Why didn’t boyfriend continue to pay for the car while grandma had it? Thst suggests boyfriend may have relinquished his claim to the car.

Yep. That one may well be a problem.


Clipztr, Another problem might be the award sought. It appears that MI has a $6,000 limit in Small Claims. Whether it is worth engaging an attorney to assist with this matter is a question your fiance will have to ask himself. He might choose only to seek $6,000, or, he might go for the whole enchilada and risk losing whatever his retainer might be for the civil suit ... which could very well exceed $10,000 (maybe more, maybe less - I'm not sure on the retainer requested for such cases in MI).

 

[Zigner]

Why would there be any entitlement for any of the money back? The guy was, in essence, renting the car from his grandfather. The guy then handed over the car to grandma who is now making the payments. The guy had full use of the car during the time he was paying for it. Once he no longer had use of the car, he no longer paid for it.

 

[justalayman]

Why would there be any entitlement for any of the money back? The guy was, in essence, renting the car from his grandfather. The guy then handed over the car to grandma who is now making the payments. The guy had full use of the car during the time he was paying for it. Once he no longer had use of the car, he no longer paid for it.

Unjust enrichment if he recieved nothing back. While you can argue he was effectively renting the car, the grandmother enjoys the full benefit of op paying for the car with the belief he would be given the title when it was paid off.

 

[Zigner]

Unjust enrichment if he recieved nothing back. While you can argue he was effectively renting the car, the grandmother enjoys the full benefit of op paying for the car with the belief he would be given the title when it was paid off.

Absent a written agreement, what proof do we have that this was ever the agreement?

ETA: Not to mention the fact that the grandfather was contractually prevented from assigning a security interest of that type anyway...