Repo

It is not going to help at all. The best you can do is try to make the payment and put up with the 30 day lates....try to avoid repo whether voluntary or not. If you have no choice do a voluntary repo and when they sell the car they must show you a bill of sale, because you will be responsible for the difference of what you owe and the amount the vehicle is sold for at auction.......hope this helps.

 

if the car goes repo you will be responsible for its resale (at wholesale cost, an auction) depreciation. Expect to get way less than the actual value. They will tack on fees to sell the car, collection fees, etc etc. A car that is worth $12000 will get 3-4000 in fee's tacked on to it.

Might be time to consider chap 7 if your scores are so low, they will most definitely not plummet any farther.

 

Try to sell it yourself, pay what you get in one lump sum.

There will be a problem with what is left, and the buyer will NOT have clear title.

 

The best thing I can tell you is that you do not want a repo at any price.

It will put a hickey on your credit report you don't even want to hear about and it is one of the most difficult to get rid of although it can be gotten rid of with a bit of luck.

Try to work it out for lower payments, try to get it refinanced, do whatever it takes, but don't get hit with a repo if you can help it.

Whoever made the comments about the vehicle getting sold at auction is absolutely correct.
I've seen them sold by the thousands at auction and the results are never pretty. I used to work at a very large car auction and when I say that I've seen thousands of vehicles sold, that isn't an exaggeration at all because they run a thousand a day through there and I've seen them sell 5,000 in one single day. Most of them are repos one way or another. True repos, lease returns, whatever.

 

They NEVER sell at what they are "WORTH"...

Then they tack on the FEES...

 

George:
To some extent and depending on the age, mileage and condition of the vehicle, that is not true. Here is why. All the auctions are attended by dealers and all the dealers have their little "blue books" so they know the approximate value of the vehicle once it is in their inventory and ready for sale. There are always dealers hungry for good inventory and money is no object with those people when it comes to buying cars. They will pay what the vehicle is worth and that's the end of it. The auctioneer too knows what the vehicle is worth and in order to get the greatest commission possible, he will not go much below blue book value unless the owner says he wants it sold at any higest price bid.

The real rub comes in because of all the additional fees tacked on and that can run into a thousand or more depending on costs. The dealer or bank could not care less how much they tack on.

 

Staces5:
I cannot disagree with the above statement more (from what I can decipher), with all due respect to the author. You neednâ??t worry about such fees being passed to you as a consumer, because UCC standards prevent such acts concerning repossession. If the lender is careless about liquidation amounts, it could open itself up to a major litigation threat. In asset recovery, a key to cutting losses entails (to some extent) threat prevention.

Nonetheless, as GEORGE suggested, an at auction sale will never fetch what you think the vehicle is worth. Yet if you could tell us in what state youâ??re located, Iâ??ll look up relative deficiency guidelines. This may help you determine whatâ??s best for your situation: repo or retaining.

As far as allowing a different (lower) payment string than what youâ??ve agreed to by contract? I wouldnâ??t bet the farm on it, because for one thing your account is too new to rate and youâ??re already in jeopardy. Smaller payments on the deficiency balance (the difference between what you owe and what the vehicle is liquidated for), is more probable than lowering current payments.

Please indicate who the lender is and Iâ??ll give you a better idea of how far you can push things. As long as youâ??re prepared to go down (accept the repo) may as well take it to the brink, because youâ??ve truly got nothing to lose.

 

Anthony:

If I am wrong, which I admit that I may very well be, how is it then that if they cannot tack on just about any amount imaginable to the average person, that a person can pay say $15,000 (arbitrary amount mentioned) and lose it, have it sold at auction for say $12 to $13,000 and end up oweing more than the original $15,000?

I must hasten to admit that I have no personal experience in this type of situation except that I do have a pretty fair idea of what a given car will likely sell for at the auction where I worked fo ra while this yaar and I talked to more than a few of the original owners of the repoed vehicles and had some tell me that such was the way they ended up. Some of the vehicles whose frormer owners I spoke with personally, I was able to tell them exactly what their vehicle sold for because I heard the final bid myself right out of the auctioneer's mouth. I made it a point to speak with the original owners as much as possible due to various papers and documents left in the vehicles. Lots of them had current addresses and phone numbers and I did contact them and did speak to them about their credit problems. Many are now my current customers.

So, I'd like to know where I am going wrong in the statement I made that you just quoted.
As I said, I am more than willing to admit that I might very well be wrong, but I would appreciate it if you would explain just a bit more why I am wrong.

Now then, let's not get "another one" going. I just want to see if I can learn something from you since you seem to have answers that I don't. That's very understandable.

I am well aware that if the finance company is not careful about what they tack on and end up charging the customer they could be in deep trouble. But I doubt that they worry much about that for the simple reason that they are well aware that most debtors would not have the knowledge or presence of mind to go after them for overcharging. In fact, most of the debtors won't ever contact them or pay them or anything else. They just duck their heads and run for it for the most part. I am sure you are well aware of that.

Teach me something here, Anthony.

 

Hmmmmâ?¦ Well I tried that in a recent thread, Bill, and got â??the fingerâ? (literally) for my trouble. And besides, folks are paying YOU to know this stuffâ?¦ Far be it from me to diminish theyâ??re moneyâ??s worth.

 

Get some nice rich friend/relative to buy it, pay it off in full, then resell it to you at $200/month till you get back on your feet.

 

Stac5,
well I have a voluntary repo on my credit...not by my choice..but it is there....... the dealer sent us a bill over$3500..... so if you repo it...expect a bill....
Cinder

 

Where do you live? Maybe it will get stolen...

 

With all due respect to their author, high falutin legal theories are not the practical answers to practical problems most people are looking for.

All they do is make their author appear to be some kind of great guru with all the answers right at their fingertips. Does a lot for the author's ego but not much for the person needing help.

The practical answer is what is needed and the practical answer is that it don't make much difference what they can or cannot add on to what you already owed them but what is the best thing to do about the problem.

The practical answer is that no matter what, once the vehicle is repossessed, the debtor is going to be in an awfully tight situation. Most people nationwide who don't have access to forums such as this just ignore the problem after the repossession and hope it goes away. Quite often it does in 7 years. And quite often they get sued for the deficiency balance, get their wages garnished or other property attached to satisfy the judgements.

So the practical answer is not what they can or cannot tack on and try to make you pay nor what the law does or does not say. The practical answer is what I stated in the first place which is that no matter what the final outcome, getting the vehicle repossessed is just about the last thing you ever want to do because of the resulting problems and the legal difficulties stemming from it that are more difficult to deal with than most other types of debt. Sell the truck if you can, but keep it and pay for it if there is any way possible to do so and nothing else remains.

Getting it repossessed is just about the last thing you want to happen, to say the least.

So take the practical advice that deals with the problem in the most efficient way possible for you and forget about all the legal mumbo jumbo. Leave that to the gurus who love to spout it off for their own personal aggrandizement and hope and pray that you never need their advice or services. If you let it come to the point where you have to listen to all that crap, you are likely to come out the little end of the horn for sure.

 

Bill,

Why do you find it necessary to criticize? Why not just post your advice, without putting others down? These are the kinds of comments that get the pi$$in' contest going again.

The guy who wins is the one who refuses to participate, IMHO.

breeze

 

And the vast majority of those who read this forum are paying you exactly the the same amounts for your legal mumbo jumbo as they are paying me. I get lots of emails telling me how much they enjoy these discussions between you and I. None of them are laughing with you, they are laughing at you.

At least some good comes out of your posts even if you don't give practical answers to practical problems.

 

A â??Practicalâ? Solutionâ?¦

Staces5:
Hay that is great news; I hope you sell the truck! But just in case the potential buyer doesnâ??t come through, what follows is information to deal more effectively with the problemâ?¦

Foremost, because youâ??re in South Carolina (where nothin could be finerâ?¦ Beautiful state!) Americredit is stuck using only one of two options, the finer details of which Iâ??ll not discuss (for reasons better left unsaid â?? which have nothing to do with you). The lender could either repo (including accept voluntary surrender) or litigate (sue you) for a deficiency balance. But it cannot do both providing some limitations are met.

If the collateral (your truck) is sold at auction for less than $4,000, the lender CANNOT sue for a deficiency balance because youâ??re not liable for it. If the truck is liquidated for more than this amount, then you would be responsible for some remaining balance. I believe that sum is less four grand, however, South Carolina changes its deficiency parameters every even year, and I havenâ??t reviewed 2000 guidelines yet.

Hereâ??s the part that gets interestingâ?¦

Many lenders choose to litigate for recovery of the outstanding balance, but if they do that the lender CANNOT both recover the outstanding balance AND the vehicle. South Carolina imposes a one-action rule, meaning; the lender can sue for one or the other not both (recovery of collateral and outstanding balance). Given your particular situation, this provides some leverage to deal more effectively with the problem.

What I suggest you do, if the purchase prospect doesnâ??t buy the truck, is find a local attorney who specializes in consumer law. Since youâ??re on the verge of repo anyway, consider taking all or a portion of the payment amount and devoting it to the lawyer. The reason being is that your situation offers some good leverage, ones an attorney is best to handle.

In the meantime, DONâ??T surrender (do a voluntary repo of) the truck until youâ??ve spoken to a lawyer! Once you turn the vehicle in the jig is up, your leverage is gone! A good lawyer will know what Iâ??m driving at here, because you still have possession of negative collateral. Take my word for it, talking to an attorney about this shouldnâ??t run over $150 bucks and could save you thousands!

 

Breeze:

Your comment is well taken. And with your permission I will make a couple of my own in a probably vain hope that this unfortunate situation can be resolved in a manner more befitting adults than that of the past.

Breeze, as everyone is well aware, there is probably not one human being either lurking or posting on this forum so mentally incapacitated as to be incapable of deciding for themselves whose advice they will follow based upon what the poster(s) have said. Continual (personal) references to what another poster has said is rude and totally uncalled for, most especially when it escalates to the point of being a non-stop harrangue and almost every post that is made by one is pounced upon by the other as a means of furthering the warfare.

Even though one may envision one's self to be the SAVIOUR of the board and by dint of vigorous crusades save all the great unwashed from falling into the clutches of another less educated or wise than he, the means utilized (continually trashing the perceived offender) does not justify the result which is, for all practical purposes trashing the forum.

Many subscribers who have been around these parts for long can remember other past situations that are parallel to this one. Those have all gone away hopefully never to return again.
The reason they have gone away in most cases is that the other party had the common good sense and decency to send me an email and get the issue resolved in a friendly manner and in a private forum rather than to continue to trash the public one. And we always reach the agreement that never again will we attack each other in public but at any time that a difference of opinion arises, the one who disputes will email the other with an explanation of why they disagree and a brief exchange of pleasant emails usually occurs. They post what they want to post secure in the knowledge that I would never attack them in public under any circumstances even though they post a dissenting opinion to mine.

Now then, let us examine this particular thread for evidence of malfeasance.
I posted an opinion in response to another party, GEORGE replied with his opinion and I posted another back to George. There were no harsh words or snide comments exchanged. We simply made our points and that's that. It is not really important that we disagreed, what is important is that neither of us slammed the other simply because we disagreed.

Then the next pop out of the box is

Now then, Breeze, I must ask you if you think that was called for? Could you honestly think that such was anything more than a deliberate swipe intended to raise the hackles of it's intended victim and arouse ire and public opinion against him?

I've offered an easy means to put an end to this nonsense, now and for all time to come.
All he has to do is to stop his personal slams and attacks, state his opinions without them and let the chips fall where they may. He will find that I will honor that and although I may disagree with something he says, I will not use personal slams in doing so.

THAT I WILL GUARANTEE!

On top of that, should he wish to make further issue of any given matter, then let him take it up in private email with me. He will find me responsive to his emails so long as he also maintains at least some modicum of respect in them. I am not a vindictive person and I do not hold any grudges no matter what has transpired in the past, no matter how hard the personal feelings may have been.

But I also have no intention of putting up with his continual personal slams and attacks.
Would you?