Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "Does the Lender Ever Pay the Borrower After a Repo?" video.

But really, possible proper, or improper, repossessions aside, you're probably better off just paying cash whenever possible. Just keep making car payments to yourself after you've paid off the previous loan, and set that aside for when you need a new car. It's far less expensive in the long run and you're not paying interest on an expensive depreciating asset.
5
It's never a bad idea to demand proof of things like that. Really the first thing to do after calling an attorney when you get fishy loan collections is to demand proof of you personally owing that money to them specifically in a given amount. If they can't do that, it's rather unlikely that they'd be able to actually get any court orders to recoup the money. This is the same sort of thing. Personally, I pay my bills, but that doesn't mean that you can't have bills coming to the wrong address and only hear about it after it's already in collections. Or, get a notice that something is being erroneously sent to collections. That's happened to me twice and in neither case was I required to pay once i got in touch with the person that would be able to provide the proof of the debt and me owing it to them.
4
I'd wager that there usually wouldn't be much of a surplus as cars depreciate quickly once they're off the lot.
4
@David_K_pi Those folks are going to be fewer and further between as time goes by because even the homeless often have a phone that's capable of online bill pay. The bigger issue, for them, is that it can be hard to get a bank account if you haven't got a fixed address. Personally, I pay the current bills with the previous month's money and the only things that I don't pay off as soon as I've got a bill are things like insurance where they just take the agreed upon money out of my account on a given day. And for that, I like to just have a specific account with the money waiting for the transfer.
2
That would be an expensive lawsuit and probably a felony on top of that. This is why it's a good idea to keep copies of your payments and paperwork because repossessing a car that is fully up to date on owed money is theft and a quick report to the police along with the documents would likely make short work of it.
2
Cars are depreciating assets and the most expensive depreciating assets that most people will buy on credit. Really, the best thing to do is to figure out what the payments would be and buy the cheapest car that's safe to drive. Just make car payments to yourself and when you've got the money buy something a bit nicer with cash. People don't realize just how much money they spend on car loan interest. It's also not bad to buy a car that's a few years old, but still in good shape.
2
Doubtful, the statute of limitations likely expired years ago. I'm not a lawyer, but usually the clock starts ticking either when something is done, or when you reasonably should have found out about it. The thing to do is to always request, preferably in writing, a copy of the relevant paperwork to back the numbers. In most cases, that will be enough to get opportunists to do the right thing, but a failure to provide it is a good indication that getting an attorney to ask nicely might be in order.
2
@Jorge-kn8oj That's why I've got mixed feelings about the statute of limitations. One the one hand, it means that things won't be brought to trial with evidence that's decades old, missing or lacks the usual witnesses to testify to their reliability. But, it can also mean that if somebody doesn't know to ask the right questions when something potentially fishy is going on, that the clock will start ticking anyways and can lead to massive losses for the injured party that can't be remedied at all.
2
There's potential issues in doing that. There's an inherent conflict of interest if it goes back onto their own lot as they have a lot of influence over what the price is that they get. If done honestly, with appropriate paperwork it's not so bad, but it raises a ton of questions about whether it was a legitimate price that they got for it.
2
That's not surprising. Vehicles depreciate quickly, especially early on, and dealers can't pay market rates for cars that they're trying to flip. Well, they do, by definition, just effectively wholesale market rates.
2
No, you pay interest on the loan because that's how the bank makes money. The alternative would be a system where you just pay an additional sum of money to cover the interest and then penalties whenever you might fail to pay enough or on time. The main issue with that is that it's a bad deal for both the bank and the borrower, as there's no incentive to pay it off earlier than the contract indicates. Which means that the bank can't get the money to loan to somebody else until the end, and the borrower can't cut costs by paying more than the minimum, as they're on the hook for the same amount either way. The interest itself will include some allowance for losses if the reposession doesn't quite cover the amount remaining, but if the money that isn't recovered is mostly interest, or it's less than their allowance for essentially defaulted loans covers it, they probably won't bother. Small claims court is cheaper than regular court, but it's still not free.
1
You got lucky that you did that before the used car prices really started to shoot up, otherwise you would have been out the car and had no reasonable option for getting another one. I hope that in the future you'll consider setting aside the car payment money in your own account after you've paid the loan so that you can pay cash the next time.
1
This is probably more humane. They don't have to sue without knowing how much money would be involved in the suit. Plus, in most cases by the time they have sold the vehicle, it's likely to be a matter of small claim's court rather than big boy court. So, there's no defense attorney needed. You can simply come in with your documents and they'll bring their documents and you can learn how to defend yourself in small claims court for these sorts of simple actions relatively quickly as it's designed to not have attorneys involved. The biggest risk is that the other side will simply be better known by the judge.
1
If that's the case, that's screwed up. The bank is should only get the amount of money that they are owed on the loan, any surplus after that would be the property of the owner of the car, especially since appreciation is largely the result of the owner's actions, not the lender's.
1