• 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.

Hindering a lien holder

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

justalayman

Senior Member
They are not asking the OP to provide information. They are demanding that the OP repo the car for them, when they know that there is a restraining order against the husband for domestic violence.
Please read what the heck I wrote. Your mischaracterization of what I wrote appears to be the entire reason you are arguing here.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Please read what the heck I wrote. Your mischaracterization of what I wrote appears to be the entire reason you are arguing here.
I am not mischaracterizing anything. Your entire argument is that refusing to divulge the location of the car could be "hindering a lienholder". I don't think that anybody would argue with you about that.

However that was not want the original post was about. The original post was about the creditor trying to insist that the OP repo the car for them, when the OP has no idea where the car is, and in a scenario where no sane person would recommend that the OP do that even if the OP did know. Certainly the police would tell the OP NOT to try to do it.

So really, I was trying to hint to you that you had gotten off topic.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
I am not mischaracterizing anything. Your entire argument is that refusing to divulge the location of the car could be "hindering a lienholder". I don't think that anybody would argue with you about that.

However that was not want the original post was about. The original post was about the creditor trying to insist that the OP repo the car for them, when the OP has no idea where the car is, and in a scenario where no sane person would recommend that the OP do that even if the OP did know. Certainly the police would tell the OP NOT to try to do it.

So really, I was trying to hint to you that you had gotten off topic.
I hadn’t gotten off topic. I was spot on. I was providing information concerning the statute in play.

The original post was about a threat to have the op arrested if they didn’t act as the lender demanded. Obviously depending on what the creditor demanded could make a difference between it being in violation of the law or not. In the specific situation the refusal to comply with the demand to retrieve the car would not be violating the law. I simply went further with it and let the op know that if she is complicit in the concealment (fails to provide the location if she knows) that would be a violation of the law

How you got to where you are I have no idea. I was being thorough. You were being...well... you were being typical you.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
I hadn’t gotten off topic. I was spot on. I was providing information concerning the statute in play.

The original post was about a threat to have the op arrested if they didn’t act as the lender demanded. Obviously depending on what the creditor demanded could make a difference between it being in violation of the law or not. In the specific situation the refusal to comply with the demand to retrieve the car would not be violating the law. I simply went further with it and let the op know that if she is complicit in the concealment (fails to provide the location if she knows) that would be a violation of the law

How you got to where you are I have no idea. I was being thorough. You were being...well... you were being typical you.
Its certainly typical for you to attack anyone that disagrees with you. Its just not necessary to attack people who disagree with you.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Its certainly typical for you to attack anyone that disagrees with you. Its just not necessary to attack people who disagree with you.
Im not attacking anybody. I’m trying to explain what you seem to want to ignore yet blame me for an incorrect statement. That’s you attacking, not me. There was no reason for you to call me out on what I said especially since you apparently didn’t read what I wrote. When I corrected you, you changed your position of attack.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Im not attacking anybody. I’m trying to explain what you seem to want to ignore yet blame me for an incorrect statement. That’s you attacking, not me. There was no reason for you to call me out on what I said especially since you apparently didn’t read what I wrote. When I corrected you, you changed your position of attack.
Ok, you win, I am not playing anymore.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
Top