Expert?

[latigo]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? (Don't matter)

The following question was recently directed to the expert lawyers contributing at justanswer.com/legal:

“Ex boyfriend cosigned on car but never paid a dime for it. Two months after we broke up he stole the car from my place of employment. I found the car and now have it hidden but I am afraid to drive it. . . . . The police told me there was not crime. What can I do so he can't keep stealing my car?"

To which one of the site's registered “legal experts" interestingly replied as follows:

“If his name is on the title to the car, then he did not violate any criminal law.

However, that does not mean that if you are paying the note he can keep taking it or keep car from you. If he refuses to return the car to you, then you are going to have to file suit against him for return of the vehicle.”
_________________________

My question: Is the attorney's advice that she file suit to recover/replevin the car legally sound?

How can he reconcile the statement that in taking the car the ex boyfriend committed no crime with the advice that she sue him for possession?

 

[BigMouthWino]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? (Don't matter)

The following question was recently directed to the expert lawyers contributing at justanswer.com/legal:

“Ex boyfriend cosigned on car but never paid a dime for it. Two months after we broke up he stole the car from my place of employment. I found the car and now have it hidden but I am afraid to drive it. . . . . The police told me there was not crime. What can I do so he can't keep stealing my car?"

To which one of the site's registered “legal experts" interestingly replied as follows:

“If his name is on the title to the car, then he did not violate any criminal law.

However, that does not mean that if you are paying the note he can keep taking it or keep car from you. If he refuses to return the car to you, then you are going to have to file suit against him for return of the vehicle.”
_________________________

My question: Is the attorney's advice that she file suit to recover/replevin the car legally sound?

How can he reconcile the statement that in taking the car the ex boyfriend committed no crime with the advice that she sue him for possession?

I would disagree that the jurisdiction doesn't matter, but if she is the only one on the title and the note is current the only situation I can imagine the police refusing to lend assistance would be if she told them she gave him the car and he refused to give it back. Depending on her personality some cops might refuse even if she gave him the keys.

Better advice (in most jurisdictions) would be to work her way up in the police department until she found assistance in filing her stolen vehicle report.

 

[CdwJava]

Who is on the title?

Who is the registered owner?

The vehicle is not going to be stolen if the party in possession was either given the car, or has a lawful right to possess the car (which may be the presumption if their name is on the title or registration). The police are going to be reluctant to get involved if it seems civil, and can NOT enter the vehicle as stolen into SVS (NCIC) under circumstances where there is not clear larceny.

 

[justalayman]

My question: Is the attorney's advice that she file suit to recover/replevin the car legally sound?

How can he reconcile the statement that in taking the car the ex boyfriend committed no crime with the advice that she sue him for possession?

My take on it, although don't judge me too harshly as I am, after all, justalayman.

obviously if his name is on the title he cannot "steal" his own car.

a certificate of title shows presumptive/legal title. It does not necessarily represent equitable title. Her claim to demand the return of the vehicle would be based on equitable title since she has paid for the vehicle. This scenario would have to presume there was an agreement she would retain possession of he vehicle when it was purchased as well otherwise even the presumptive title claim could be invalidated.

Given that a court can rule based on equity over simple claim based on a certificate of title, girl gets the car.

 

[Sloop John D]

Given that a court can rule based on equity over simple claim based on a certificate of title, girl gets the car.

You could also argue that if they are both owners of the vehicle, she has rights to possession that are at least equal to his, so if he's taking the car from her and not letting her use it, she can file an action to gain possession.

 

[justalayman]

You could also argue that if they are both owners of the vehicle, she has rights to possession that are at least equal to his, so if he's taking the car from her and not letting her use it, she can file an action to gain possession.

but for a court to order him to return the vehicle, her rights would have to be superior to his. Otherwise the court would simply refuse to order a change or possession as his rights would equal hers and therefore the court would have no right to demand it be returned to her.