BMW has no interest in recovering vehicle

[BKorbust]

Grrrr why did I not buy a BMW..

[forgotten]

Adventura, I still have the vehicle but I got hit with a surprise I didn't think about. I owed $700 in property taxes for 2009 and will owe another $600 in property taxes on it for 2010.
It was very difficult to cough up the $700 in my Chapter 13, the 2009 property taxes which could have been included in my bankruptcy but I didn't think about it. Not every state has property tax on vehicles, so it obviously may not apply to you.

I'm leaving the car I own parking in the garage and driving the heck out of the BMW. I might as well put the miles on that car instead, since i'm already on the hook for the taxes.

Edit: I am however going to drive it to a dealer, take the plates off and return them to the DMV before Dec 31st so I wont owe for 2011 also.

[Adventura]

I am planning to surrender my BMW as part of my Chap 7 that is on track to be filed in the next week or so. And after reading through this thread, I am wondering what is going to happen if/when the debt is discharged, but BMW won't (maybe) come get the car. I plan to not pay after the debt is discharged (fingers crossed it all goes according to plan) so they will not be getting any money, but they still may not come get the car OR relinquish the title. I will be left with essentially an expensive flowerpot that I do not own--but is still my responsibility according to the California DMV--sitting out on the street. If it is towed or whatever, I am still liable for costs/damages. This seems to me to be a ridiculous situation, since I am assuming that the DMW will not allow me to release liability just into space. Too bad, since I would love to drive back to the crooked BMW dealer from which I bought it and leave it there with the keys and the release of liability.

Obviously, I am a little confused by this whole thing. I mean, I will have the responsibility for the car--but not the ownership, so not really the car itself.

Unless of course, BMW does come and get it as they are supposed to in a surrender situation. After dealing with them for a few years, I am not holding my breath on that one.

[Bell30656]

Using that case could force them to take action... that action being pick up the vehicle. Since in Georgia I don't need the title to drive it and keep it plated right now, I think I'll let this sleeping dog lie. Besides my lawyer likes to charge $$$ for filing anything.

Initially I wanted this big thing out of my driveway but it comes in handy sometimes. We take it for a ride every once in a while. It's not like I plan to sell it.

[justbroke]

Justbroke, my attorney says that unless they try and collect the loan it isn't a violation of the discharge. It is their vehicle technically and they can offer too sell it to me. Separate transaction not related to the loan that was discharged.

There is an 11th Circuit case specifically on point and I'll try to find it (again). It was specifically where the creditor refused to release the title, unless the person PAID the creditor. While the creditor didn't try to "collect" the loan, they nonetheless were enforcing a debt by refusing to come and get the property or surrendering the title.

It is true that just not giving you the title is one thing. The other is that they "conditioned" the release of the title with "paying" the underlying debt, after their refusal to repossess the collateral. That's akin to blackmail. There's is a subtle difference but it's distinguishable. There's a difference between not giving someone the title, and holding the title hostage, saying you'll neither come to repossess the vehicle nor release the title.

There is one strategy where if they refuse to release the lien (title) and wont' come and get the collateral, that your attorney re-open the case and file a Motion to Redeem. In the Redemption Motion you offer something stupid like $100. You serve this on negative notice (or judicial notice) and hope they don't respond. Then you just redeem it and have a court order forcing (compelling them) to quiet the title.

Here's the Case... In Re Pratt, Pratt v GMAC. This went all the way to the 1st Circuit Court of appeal. And although this was in Massachusetts, the ruling also talked about State non-bankruptcy law remedies, but found that GMAC's refusal to come get the car because it wasn't worth it, made their statement that they'll only release the lien if the debtor "paid in full", to be coercive.

While Pratt isn't controlling (precedence) in the 11th Circuit, it is certainly

Pratt v. GMAC, 462 F.3d 14 (1st Circuit 2007). Finding that 'Given the clarity of the present record as to both the "notice" and "general intent" elements, therefore, we conclude that the Pratts adduced sufficient evidence that GMAC's violation of the discharge injunction was "willful." '

Decision: http://www.meb.uscourts.gov/Judges/p...dv_04-2007.pdf

[Bell30656]

My attorney has informed me that in my state they can legally keep the title. His suggestion was that I make them an offer for the title. They are unable to collect the loan as it was discharged by the CH7 but the lien still applies to the vehicle.

Ford has told me that I can take the vehicle to an address on the other side of Atlanta (at my expense) where they will take possession of it but that they have no interest in picking it up.

When I told my attorney about this he was full of suggestions about how I could have it towed as abandoned, etc. There is something in Georgia called a bonded title, etc., etc. However, if they don't want the thing then I'm happy to keep driving it whenever I need it and keep the plates current.

Justbroke, my attorney says that unless they try and collect the loan it isn't a violation of the discharge. It is their vehicle technically and they can offer too sell it to me. Separate transaction not related to the loan that was discharged.

[justbroke]

This may actually be actionable. Not releasing the title, refusing to come and get the vehicle, and then saying "just pay us some money", could be a willful violation of the automatic stay. I think it was GMAC or FMC that was burned for this before, and so you should pursue this. Especially since you asked them to quiet the title or take the vehicle.

I would talk to an attorney who will take a stay violation on contingency. You actually have a solid case! I hope you kept all correspondence.

[tigergem]

If they don't want it, I'll come get it...

lol I was thinking the same thing.

[kvangild]

I just wanted to post an update, I personally find amusing.

I have just had a hard time believing that its okay for me to keep this vehicle... 13 months of missed payment, I surrendered the lease, and have been confirmed... I called my attorney and asked if I should just drop it off to them because I didn't want any issues to come up as a result of me keeping it.

I was told that technically i'm not allowed to! I have a court order restraining me from abandoning or releasing any property to creditors. If they don't take it by force (as they can because the automatic stay was terminated when the plan was confirmed) then I just need to keep it.

Oh well... guess its mine till the end of the year... just weird to me.

Edit: Another interesting fact. They have continued to send a bill every month. After I filed it stopped adding a late fee, but i'm up to a $9000 past due balance now. No phone calls, no collection letters, just one simple statement each month.

Free ride in a beemer, can't beat it! Congrats.......

[forgotten]

I just wanted to post an update, I personally find amusing.

I have just had a hard time believing that its okay for me to keep this vehicle... 13 months of missed payment, I surrendered the lease, and have been confirmed... I called my attorney and asked if I should just drop it off to them because I didn't want any issues to come up as a result of me keeping it.

I was told that technically i'm not allowed to! I have a court order restraining me from abandoning or releasing any property to creditors. If they don't take it by force (as they can because the automatic stay was terminated when the plan was confirmed) then I just need to keep it.

Oh well... guess its mine till the end of the year... just weird to me.

Edit: Another interesting fact. They have continued to send a bill every month. After I filed it stopped adding a late fee, but i'm up to a $9000 past due balance now. No phone calls, no collection letters, just one simple statement each month.

[NHC]

Well, I just keep sitting around waiting then....I don't really drive it much...work and home...and I don't leave anything in it...heck, the car is 'dealership' clean....LOL...if they repo it even at work, that's fine...it's only a 30 minute light rail ride.....

[Bell30656]

[NHC]

Hmmm....ya'll got me wondering now. I got to looking at the value of my 03 Explorer Sport in comparison to what I owe...and I'm pretty upside down in the vehicle....so I figured "screw it....I'll hold onto it until they come for it -(it's all clean and insured) and at that point I'll just get some beater off Craigslist"...the BK should be discharged by 02/18...and the car is included in the Ch. 7. I haven't heard a single peep out of them so far....(It's Wachovia Dealer Services)....

[catleg]

It's all about price discovery for housing and discovering what level "clears" the market.
Unfortunately for the banksters it's possible that the price level which "clears" the market results in their destruction. (loss of all their capital)
So they extend and pretend and hope things get back to the way they were.
As long as the government supports them, they can get away with it.
The body that sets the rules for accounting is complicit otherwise it would not be possible.
Likewise congress, the regulators (FDIC, Fed, etc), the ratings agencies, are all caught up in the scam. Some due to corruption, some due to lack of any better idea.
When people talk about the "lost decade" in Japan that's what's shaping up here, in my opinion.
If not for the US dollar being the world's reserve currency we'd be in big trouble.
We're actually better off than a lot of other countries, like Iceland, where the people have rebelled against paying off the banksters' debts.

[BCA2009]

Maybe BMW's accounting is kind of shady and they aren't prepared to take the loss. (What loss? I don't know. My imagination only goes so far.)

This probably not a good place to ask this question, but since it's broufgt up here maybe one of you could explain it to me.

I've read several times on this board about "shadow inventory". From the posts I've read it seams like if banks donk take possession of property that they some how don't have to recognize a loss.

I admit I am not up on all of the accounting rules for banking, but I thought that once a loan became non-performing (no payments made for several months), that the bank had to accrue it as a liablility. So why would it matter whether they had the title to it or not? Maybe they only write off a portion of it when it becomes non-performing and they have to write off the remaining balance when when they take title? But I still would think they would have to recognize the full loss when it was foreclosed rather when the title changed.

Do any of you guys know how the concept of shadow inventory works?