I bought my truck from a shady dealer

You suggesting he paint it? :-)

Sayy, aren't you in the mood for a different color truck?:B

I'll apply a true story to this scenario - but with motorcycle.

A friend bought a Harley relatively cheap from a dealer-trade in that needed lots of work. He bought all the parts - rebuilt engine and tranny, and bearings, and wheels, and lights - well, you get the message.

Cops stopped him once for something, ran the title, found a minor discrepancy, so made him bring the bike in ... He did, and the cop-shop inspection revealed stolen cases -- and according to a law, no one can buy cases alone (not sure exactly how that works) but cops took the bike as stolen even tho he had (what he thought) was legal title and reg...

Fast forward -- he brings all the receipts for parts he bought - and a photo of his welding outfit for the frame and other repairs he did. Cops dismantled the bike, gave him everything but the engine cases with the fake serial # ...

SO, there he was, parts for almost a complete bike, but no engine cases and no legal way to buy then new ... could buy an OLD one, and use those, I suppose. He took all his receipts, title, reg etc into a court hearing.

Magistrate gave him a document that allowed him to buy new cases from Harley.

So, in fact, his receipts and title proved he owned it legally, sorta, but at least he got to keep everything but the stolen cases with serial # on them.

Very weird trip for him, and he was truly a victim here because registry gave him a legal title and registered his bike before all this happened.

I would drive it out to a gravel pit and torch it, to paranoid to sell it. ??

Pooter wrote:
For those who say selling the truck could be illegal, just how long is does the OP have to own this truck before he can sell it? On day? one month, one year ? never?
I think the new f250's, with 6 speed's are the cats-meow, that's where I would be going....

If the truck is legally his, he can sell it whenever he wants. If the detective did not impound the truck or tell him not to sell it, then he can sell it. Sounds like OP is in the clear, if he likes the truck he should keep it and rack up some miles pulling his camper!

majorgator wrote:
Nope, still apples and oranges. Business law, and the enforcement thereof, is diferent than what would apply to consumers. Let's say that the same dealership also sold tires. I go there and buy a brand new set of tires for my truck for $1100, then 6 months later read an article in the paper that the dealership was in trouble for not paying his distributors. Does this mean that the police will come and impound the tires on my truck? No, it means that the distributor will file suit and criminal charges against the dealership. If any financial recourse is available to the distributor(s), the courts will appoint such. If not, the distributor is essentially screwed and can write off a business loss. They will not look for all the purchasers of tires, repo them, resell them, etc.

You are talking about accepted practice of business and bankruptcy proceedings... quite different from this situation. I'll play along anyways though...
Instead of tires (which aren't worth the cost of repossessing) it is a very expensive piece of jewelry. Someone stole it from you in a burglary and pawned it. I bought it from the pawnshop, not knowing it was stolen and paid $500 for it and received a receipt. This is a rare piece of jewelry that has been handed down in your family for generations. It has financial and emotional value.

Are you saying that you wouldn't have the right to reclaim that piece of jewelry if you could prove that it was rightfully yours? The pawnshop would reimburse your family for the expense of the piece of jewelry and I could keep it?

I know for a FACT that isn't the case, because I have arrested people and had them successfully prosecuted for those crimes. The pawned property is recovered, if possible, and turned over to the rightful owner. If the pawnshop still has it, they are out the money. If they sold it, I try to track down the person that bought it and recover it from them. The person who unknowing bought a stolen item isn't charged (so long as they reasonably didn't know it was stolen), but they don't get to keep the stolen item.

Same thing here. IF... and I say if because we don't know... IF the truck was indeed stolen and the title application was forged, the police could impound the vehicle and the OP would be out the money that he has invested. Sure, he could try to sue the dealership... but if the dealership doesn't have the money to pay restitution, the OP is screwed. Hopefully his insurance would cover his financial loss, but I have no idea.

I'm not going to argue with you anymore. I've made my point. Based upon what the OP said, he has no reason to believe the truck is stolen or title was forged. He contacted the police and has cooperated with the investigation. Based upon what he said, he has no criminal liability. If someone was wrong with the sale and title application though, the rightful owner could legally get his vehicle back. Hopefully, that is not the case for the OP.

spoon059 wrote:

mooky stinks wrote:
Like was said earlier in this thread. "Barroom barristers" lol

Yea... cause you didn't spout legal advice did you? At least I speak with someone who has authority in my home state to investigate criminal acts and make a determination of arrest. What is your legal background?

How do you know I'm talking about you? BTW is he/she a lawyer? I'm betting not! lol have a nice life

For those who say selling the truck could be illegal, just how long is does the OP have to own this truck before he can sell it? On day? one month, one year ? never?
I think the new f250's, with 6 speed's are the cats-meow, that's where I would be going....

spoon059 wrote:


I'm not sure you read what you quoted. You gave a scenario exactly like mine... except that your scenario has the dealership and my scenario is a private person. In terms of the law... it doesn't matter if the truck was stolen by a person or a corporation... theft is theft.

Even though you are trying to disagree with my point... we are saying the EXACT SAME THING. The OP has no criminal liability for a theft, if a theft did occur.

Nope, still apples and oranges. Business law, and the enforcement thereof, is diferent than what would apply to consumers. Let's say that the same dealership also sold tires. I go there and buy a brand new set of tires for my truck for $1100, then 6 months later read an article in the paper that the dealership was in trouble for not paying his distributors. Does this mean that the police will come and impound the tires on my truck? No, it means that the distributor will file suit and criminal charges against the dealership. If any financial recourse is available to the distributor(s), the courts will appoint such. If not, the distributor is essentially screwed and can write off a business loss. They will not look for all the purchasers of tires, repo them, resell them, etc.

GMandJM wrote:
I've wondered how that works out. If an insurance company paid out a claim when the car was stolen, wouldn't the ins co own the car and get it when it's recovered?

That's a good question. If we are talking about a 1982 Toyota Celica, I doubt the owner would want it back. It its a 1931 Bugatti, the owner may be given the opportunity to purchase it back at the price the insurance company paid out.