Check out some similar questions!

ex82nd_airborne · Feb 17, 2006, 08:42 AM

A friend wrote a check for $30K against their AMEX account. They deposited it into my personal bank account. I then withdrew funds in the form of a cashier's check to purchase a vehicle. All records for this vehicle are in my name only. Four months after purchasing the vehicle, my friend wrote up a simple contract for repayment. I was to pay $400/month at 2% interest until/if they sold their home (which would then cancel the loan per their words) or until she cancelled it voluntarily. We both signed this agreement; however, it was not notarized. Three weeks after this signing, she notified me in writing that she is cancelling the repayment agreement and considered the loan resolved. She indicated, also in writing, that she would not be changing her mind. She stated that I can, or not, pay her back if I wanted to. Our relationship is now over. I had been paying her $300/month, not because the agreement was still being adhered to, but because I thought it was the right thing to do. She is now wanting to revert back to the original agreement we signed and I refused. She claims to be consulting an attorney. Would anybody know how to interpret the legalities of the agreement to repay? What actions can/should I take? I am even thinking of transferring ownership of the vehicle just so she cannot try to take it back.

excon · Feb 17, 2006, 08:58 AM

Hello airborne:

It's a personal loan, so the car is not in jeopardy. However, it is a debt and can be proven to be a debt. Irrespective of the agreement (or lack of an agreement), you made payments. That indicates BOTH of you thought it was a loan. Claiming now that it was a gift won't wash.

Besides, you owe it to her. I always thought the 82nd Airborne dudes were honorable. I didn't know any of them lived off women.

excon

RickJ · Feb 17, 2006, 09:11 AM

I disagree. I think language of what she wrote (in saying it's considered "resolved") would be significant evidence if it went to court.

On the other hand, if it were me I'd keep making the $300 payments that you had been.

I'll hope one of our users who is an attorney will shed some further light on it.

excon · Feb 17, 2006, 09:25 AM

Hello again:

I think rickj could be right. However he made payments subsequent to that agreement which I think will supersede that agreement. Assuming that he takes the position you recommend, I wouldn't also recommend that he continue to make payments.

excon

RickJ · Feb 17, 2006, 09:33 AM

Right. Bottom line; it's not cut and dried and may very well take a judge or referee to decide.

On principle, I'd keep making the $300 payments and just see what happens... or if you're real worried, show an attorney
1. the original agreement,
2. your payment history, and
3. the second letter you got saying it's resolved.

Explain that she now wants to go back to the original, and ask him what he thinks about your legal position in the matter if she were to sue.

ex82nd_airborne · Feb 17, 2006, 09:41 AM

Thanks for the input from both of you. I had been paying and would like to continue to pay. I just do not want to be coerced into a different repayment schedule at the drop of a hat. Yes, I can see where my making payments may be interpreted as acknowledgement of the loan; however, I can also see her "cancellation" of the loan as being potentially enforceable. Unfortunately, were she not playing the role of a "woman scorned," then all this would not be taking place. She has, in writing, admitted to being manipulative in an effort to keep us together. I did not go for that game and this is where I am now. Making payments is fine. I am just trying to avoid immediate repayment of the loan in full.

RickJ · Feb 17, 2006, 09:44 AM

I would not be surprised to learn that her attorney tells her she doesn't have a good case. I would not worry about it at all.

If you get a court notice that you're being sued, though, get an attorney immediately.

Fr_Chuck · Feb 17, 2006, 08:23 PM

I would agree that she does not have a good case, now of course if the attorney has a sign where he gets 1/3 or 1/2 of what he collects, he may try to sue you for the heck of it, since he has nothing to lose.

Being right or even having a good case does not mean much to a lot of attorneys, people win "bad" cases every day.

If you did not list her as a lien holder on the auto, it is not at risk.

Since you have a letter in writing saying she was ending the loan and you did not have to pay anymore, basically that should have ended the loan.

Now here is the only "little" problem, you keep paying her, since you keep paying after she said you did not have to, it shows that you did not accept her notice to end for some reason, or there was some verbal non written agreement not known that keep you paying.
Often paying when you don't have to or should not, gets you into some future liabity. Doing the right thing is not always the legal thing.

At this point, legally you should not have a reason to pay, if she is really getting an attorney, you can expect a letter from him demanding payment. You can answer it or merely ingore it. And wait to see if they sue, you can't stop them from sueing only have to defend yourself if they do.

talaniman · Feb 18, 2006, 02:48 PM

If you have an agreement in writing it can only be changed with a written agreement signed by the parties involved, if you have none the original applies,If she cancels the debt with her signature you have a very strong case!