Jump to content

Conversion Charges


cavazos007
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ok guys I need your help on this. I have a friend that hasn't paid her car note in months, we'll they called and left a message and told her that they need her to surrender the vehicle in 24 hours or they will file a "deaf of conversion charges" never heard of that. And she said they guy said they aren't looking for a payment arrangement, they just want the car. Now she wants to know if she can still call the loan company to make that arrangement, or does she have to surrender the vehicle. She also wants to know if she can file a BK13 to keep them from taking the car?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about that. in Indiana conversion and theft are two different dogs.

And you can file for both its either theft or conversion.

THEFT by definition is, A person shall be guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

CONVERSION by definition is a civil wrong (tort) in which one converts another person's property to his/her own use, which is a fancy way of saying "steals." Conversion includes treating another person's goods as one's own, holding onto such property which accidentally comes into the converter's (taker's) hands, or purposely giving the impression the assets belong to him/her. This gives the true owner the right to sue for his/her own property or the value and loss of use of it, as well as going to law enforcement authorities since conversion usually includes the crime of theft.

I know this will start an argument, but IMHO the vehicle was neither stolen or converted because a vehicle is OWNED by the person paying the loan, the lender only has a lien on that property, IT DOES NOT LEGALLY BELONG TO THEM, the title is not in the banks name nor does the bank pay for insurance, plates or maintenance. I a person defaults on the loan the lender can take it back. but even before it can be sold they lender has to file with the license branch to have the title put in the name of the lender other wise it would be title fraud.

In order for a vehicle to legally belong to a person or business the title has to be in their name.

If they do take the car check your states laws, some states have a right to redemption period which allows the person to pay all the the late payment and late charges and get the vehicle back before it goes to sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In any criminal compliant there are certain elements of the crime that must have been committed for it to be a crime. That is not the case here.

Conversion would imply she sold the car and didn't use the proceeds to pay off the loan - pretty impossible to do if the lien is on the Title. Theft implies a taking opf property without consent - obviously not something she did since the finance company agreed to finance the car.

The collector here has violated the FDCPA prohibition about misrepresenting the nature and character of the debt - by implying (or stating) that a debt is a criminal act or that the consumer has committed a criminal act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. Slander refers to a malicious, false, and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images. Most jurisdictions allow legal actions, civil and/or criminal, to deter various kinds of defamation and retaliate against groundless criticism. Related to defamation is public disclosure of private facts which arises where one person reveals information which is not of public concern, and the release of which would offend a reasonable person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know the point of the collector is to get her attention so saying things like this are aimed to scare the consumer into making irrational decisions. Thats why I *NEVER* answered the phone and *NEVER* paid attention to voice mails. Each case is different.

Ok I understand what you all mean. And this makes alot of sense. I advsd her to start sending in her payments in a form of a money order to see if they cash it. And start from there. Do ya think this is a good idea.

I was thinking maybe this is just a collections tactics to scare her, i told her to stop answer the phone or listening to voicemails. It just makes her panic more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.