Crooked dealer headed for jail

[earlvillestu]

Clicky

[toedtoes]

WTP-GC wrote:
The title and loan process are tied together. They have to be. You don't get the title until you satisfy the debt. The lender holds the title until that time. So who has the title??????

In this case, the dealership still has the title as they never submitted it to the motor vehicle department with the change in ownership. If the dealership had done things right, the title change would have been submitted and either the buyer would have received the title showing the bank as the lien holder or the bank would have received the title (if any states still do it that way). However, if the dealership never submits the title change, then the buyer nor the bank ever get the title for the RV.

But none of that changes the fact that the buyer is still responsible for paying back the loan. The bank isn't going to tell the buyer "Oh, you didn't get the title, no problem, we'll just eat the loan". It then is the buyer's responsibility to deal with the dealership to try and get the title - and if they can't, then the only recourse is take it to civil court or file a complaint for fraud and let the criminal court handle it. In this case, it went to criminal court.

[toedtoes]

mt1729 wrote:
They are tied together. You have to have proof what you are buying does in fact exist or the bank won't make the loan. The paper work goes to the bank to have a lien added to it & then is sent off to be titled. After the title work is done & you receive it, you will see where a lien holder has been added to the title. Of course if you go through a loan shark they don't care about a title. They just break your legs if you miss a payment:).

Except that the bank doesn't require you to prove the item exists until AFTER they give you the money. At that time, you owe the money back regardless of whether the item exists or not.

You go into the bank and apply for a loan for an RV. They approve the loan, you go to the dealership and buy the RV with the money from the loan, and THEN the title is changed over. If the dealership never files the paperwork to change the title over, that doesn't void the loan. You still owe that money back to the bank. And if you can't get the dealership to refund the money or provide the title, you are stuck owing money for something for which you don't have proof of ownership. That's a scam and it's not the victim's fault.

[mt1729]

They are tied together. You have to have proof what you are buying does in fact exist or the bank won't make the loan. The paper work goes to the bank to have a lien added to it & then is sent off to be titled. After the title work is done & you receive it, you will see where a lien holder has been added to the title. Of course if you go through a loan shark they don't care about a title. They just break your legs if you miss a payment:).

[toedtoes]

And the loan company does nothing to get that title. Getting the vehicle properly titled is done by the dealer and the loan company doesn't care if you have possession of the RV or not or have a title - you borrowed X amount of dollars, you pay it back.

[fj12ryder]

WTP-GC wrote:
The title and loan process are tied together. They have to be. You don't get the title until you satisfy the debt. The lender holds the title until that time. So who has the title??????

Here in Missouri it used to be that the lending company held the title until the loan was paid, then you got the title. Now you get the title with the name of the lien holder, if there is one, on it. You can't transfer the title until the lien is taken care of.

[WTP-GC]

The title and loan process are tied together. They have to be. You don't get the title until you satisfy the debt. The lender holds the title until that time. So who has the title??????

[winnietrey]

delete

[Bobbo]

WTP-GC wrote:
Since when is the loan process separate from the title process? When have you ever bought a house, auto, etc. with a loan where the title wasn't part of the process?

The title process has ALWAYS been separate from the loan process. You go to the car dealer, RV dealer, home mortgage closing, whatever and you sign the papers agreeing to buy the item. You sign the papers agreeing to the loan. THEN the signed paperwork is sent off to the county or state for a title to be issued. If the people handling the paperwork never send it off, the buyer never gets the title, but still has the loan.

Both times that I have bought an RV, I bought it in another state. I live in Tennessee and bought the RV's in Mississippi. The dealer handed me the paperwork, and I took the paperwork to the county register in my home county for a title to be issued. If the dealer told me he would send off the paperwork and send me the title, but never did, I would have no title.

[toedtoes]

WTP-GC wrote:

toedtoes wrote:

What would you have them do at that point? The loan process is separate from title process. If they stop paying on their loans, they are in default and their credit rating is ruined. The bank isn't going to care that they don't have the titles, all they care about is getting the money back on the loans.

Since when is the loan process separate from the title process? When have you ever bought a house, auto, etc. with a loan where the title wasn't part of the process? The title is the legal respresentation that what you're buying does in fact exist. These types of purchaes are secured loans, whereby the purchased item is the collateral. The only way this scenario is plausible is if the buyers used some other form of collateral (like personal cash or property) or if they simply took out a personal loan based on credit or income...and if that's the case, then they are partly to blame for their foolishness.

This isn't too unlike the housing bubble that burst several years ago. Did the homebuyers with $60K a year jobs bear any of the blame for buying $400K houses, or was this only the bank's fault.

I'd tell the lending agency to show me the title and then I'll make payments. Otherwise bug off. Credit isn't ruined forever, and if these people were all elderly (as the article states), then good credit does them little good in the long run anyway.

The title is NOT part of the loan. It is a separate process handled AFTER the loan is signed. When did you last buy a house or vehicle and receive the title in your name before you signed for the loan?

Many of those homebuyers with $60K a year jobs didn't understand anything about buying a house. They were told by real estate agents, loan officers, etc., that they could afford to buy the house if they signed on the dotted line. So, no those homebuyers were not at fault. Yes they were ignorant or stupid or whatever, but that doesn't excuse the real estate agents and loan officers from selling them a defective product (as in a bad loan that they KNEW was bad and that they KNEW the homebuyer couldn't pay back).

It's funny how folks think that a businessman who INTENTIONALLY screws people out of their money shouldn't be held responsible, but people who are too naive or ignorant to understand deserve to be cheated. Bet when someone screws you, you'll see it differently. But, of course, you're too clever to get screwed. Of course, most people who have been screwed used to believe they were too clever to get screwed...

[WTP-GC]

toedtoes wrote:

What would you have them do at that point? The loan process is separate from title process. If they stop paying on their loans, they are in default and their credit rating is ruined. The bank isn't going to care that they don't have the titles, all they care about is getting the money back on the loans.

Since when is the loan process separate from the title process? When have you ever bought a house, auto, etc. with a loan where the title wasn't part of the process? The title is the legal respresentation that what you're buying does in fact exist. These types of purchaes are secured loans, whereby the purchased item is the collateral. The only way this scenario is plausible is if the buyers used some other form of collateral (like personal cash or property) or if they simply took out a personal loan based on credit or income...and if that's the case, then they are partly to blame for their foolishness.

This isn't too unlike the housing bubble that burst several years ago. Did the homebuyers with $60K a year jobs bear any of the blame for buying $400K houses, or was this only the bank's fault.

I'd tell the lending agency to show me the title and then I'll make payments. Otherwise bug off. Credit isn't ruined forever, and if these people were all elderly (as the article states), then good credit does them little good in the long run anyway.

[toedtoes]

I agree Wa8yxm. Not everyone is as savvy about matters of finances, law, business, medicine, etc. They don't understand the intricacies and processes of it. They depend on "experts" to help them through the process. That dependence should NEVER be an excuse for said "experts" to cheat the person.

And, as long as the contract stated that the RV seller would handle the title, pay the owner upon the sale of the RV, etc., that RV seller is contractually required to do just that - not doing that is a breach of contract, regardless of whether the victim saw it coming or not.

[wa8yxm]

I see a lot of BLAME THE VICTIM posts in this thread and I'd like to comment on that.

You have something to buy or sell you go to a dealer.. now if you are selling the dealer accepts "Consignment" type sales (NOTE.. As a Seller you generally do better with Consignment since YOU still own the RIG so YOU take the risk it won't sell, where as if you do a "Buy and sell" type dealer not only does he take the risk of it not selling.. He has to pay property tax as well.)

The dealer is, in theory, both licensed, audited and inspected, by the state so you have the word of the State licensing authority he is honest.

(But then I worked for the State police so I know people don't always follow the law).

A smooth talking "used RV salesman" can .. Well.. I've seen smoe real smooth ones in my day.. Only one ever got me only about 50 bucks worth,,, but many have tried.

[toedtoes]

fulltimedaniel wrote:

winnietrey wrote:

fulltimedaniel wrote:
My sympathy for the victims ends where their gullibility, stupidity and credulousness begins.

If even ONE of them had done the simple straight forward due diligence this kind of transaction deserves probably none of this would have happened.

I am sorry but I think the so-called "victims" are mostly victims of self inflicted harm.

The sentence is just as crazy. 7 years in jail. No way to pay back the money. And the court does have the ability to force him to pay. But the real way to get him to pay is bring a CIVIL case against him and take his house and car, 401k, insurance holdings etc. It can be done with the right lawyer.

I would not agree. One line from the story jumped out at me. "they had established a relationship with him and trusted him". Which is why he was able to keep it up for so long.

FTD you were in business a long time, as I have been. A lot of the stuff we know, we forgot even where and how we learned it. We just sort of know it inherently.

I would guess many of these folks have little if any business experience.
Red Flags that they ignored, we would be all over in a heartbeat. But remember that is because we have been there done that.

You and me, we get a BS excuse ( which we know from experience) we are all over it. Relationship or not Other folks not so much.

And even you, and I or any person, with lengthy experience, we are not invulnerable. If the shark is big enough, and clever enough, both of us still can be eaten.

I agree with much of what you say and you make some good points. But the idea that you can suspend your good judgement in a business transaction just because you know and "trust" someone is just naive on their part. That is why in my list of things I included "credulousness"

I think the point you stop being a victim is when you are paying on two RV's at the same time and have paperwork on neither.

I think the cult of victimhood has been stretched a bit too far in this case.

What would you have them do at that point? The loan process is separate from title process. If they stop paying on their loans, they are in default and their credit rating is ruined. The bank isn't going to care that they don't have the titles, all they care about is getting the money back on the loans. The victim can't do that, because without the titles, they can't sell the RVs. They are caught between a rock and a hard place. The only way to get the banks off their backs is to 1)sell the RVs and pay off the loans; 2) file bankruptcy; 3) find enough money to pay off the loans elsewhere; 4) stop paying and go into default. If they don't have enough money to buy the RVs without a loan, then they don't have money to pay off the loans without the RVs.

[fulltimedaniel]

winnietrey wrote:

fulltimedaniel wrote:
My sympathy for the victims ends where their gullibility, stupidity and credulousness begins.

If even ONE of them had done the simple straight forward due diligence this kind of transaction deserves probably none of this would have happened.

I am sorry but I think the so-called "victims" are mostly victims of self inflicted harm.

The sentence is just as crazy. 7 years in jail. No way to pay back the money. And the court does have the ability to force him to pay. But the real way to get him to pay is bring a CIVIL case against him and take his house and car, 401k, insurance holdings etc. It can be done with the right lawyer.

I would not agree. One line from the story jumped out at me. "they had established a relationship with him and trusted him". Which is why he was able to keep it up for so long.

FTD you were in business a long time, as I have been. A lot of the stuff we know, we forgot even where and how we learned it. We just sort of know it inherently.

I would guess many of these folks have little if any business experience.
Red Flags that they ignored, we would be all over in a heartbeat. But remember that is because we have been there done that.

You and me, we get a BS excuse ( which we know from experience) we are all over it. Relationship or not Other folks not so much.

And even you, and I or any person, with lengthy experience, we are not invulnerable. If the shark is big enough, and clever enough, both of us still can be eaten.

I agree with much of what you say and you make some good points. But the idea that you can suspend your good judgement in a business transaction just because you know and "trust" someone is just naive on their part. That is why in my list of things I included "credulousness"

I think the point you stop being a victim is when you are paying on two RV's at the same time and have paperwork on neither.

I think the cult of victimhood has been stretched a bit too far in this case.