Who in the world really actually pays for balances due on repo's.
Can they actually take you to court and demand that you pay 15g's even though they could have gotten that for the car when they sold it? Just a Q.
2007-10-12 07:03:49 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance ➔ Credit
I am well aware that I signed a contract but what my Q is, Is why would a person pay for something they dont have anymore?
2007-10-12 07:05:35 · update #1
Yes they can take you to court and get a judgment, then you have no choice, they can attach bank accounts, garnish wages (if your State allows it) and file liens on any other property you may own like cars, boats, land and homes.
All of this will show on your credit for 7-years making it very hard to get any other types of loans without making massive down payments, paying huge fees and State maximum interest rates.
You will be responsible for the balance due after they sell the car at auction plus all fees for the repossession, towing, storage, interest, reconditioning and lawyers.
2007-10-12 07:10:11 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Because the debt is still out there and growing.
When you sign a contract and then default, the other party is entitled to get the benefit of their bargain in court: the full price of the car, as agreed in the contract.
When the car is repo'd and sold at auction, that amount reduces your outstanding debt...but it doesn't give the seller the benefit of his bargain with you. He is entitled to enforce that, and you either pay it or he gets a judgment against you which he can enforce through wage garnishment, property liens, or other fun...OR you can go bankrupt.
2007-10-12 07:09:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your premise "they could have gotten that for the car when they sold it" is false. The value of a car is often less than what is owned, and it is not always possible to seal repos for what they are really worth. Then can sue you for the amount by which the debt exceeds the amount that they are able to obtain by selling the car, and for the costs of the lawsuit and of the repo'ing and of the selling.
2007-10-12 07:35:50 · answer #3 · answered by StephenWeinstein 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, a lot of people think like you.
You were irresponsible and didn't pay as agreed. Now why should the loan company eat that loss? They did exactly what they agreed to do.
Let's put it this way. You do a job for me -- you put together a presentation notebook. Through my own fault, I lose the presentation notebook. I don't have the notebook and didn't get to use it, why should I pay you?
Does that make it a little clearer?
2007-10-12 07:25:14 · answer #4 · answered by bdancer222 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because you signed a contract..
because they won't loan you more money, because you're a bad credit risk..
Why did you buy something you couldn't pay for?
When you saw that you couldn't afford it , why didn't you sell it before they repo'd ?
2007-10-12 07:17:01 · answer #5 · answered by Sophie B 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know that it's unresponsible so much as it's irresponsible.
2007-10-12 07:11:24 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋