Check out some similar questions!

deone_logan · Nov 19, 2007, 12:20 PM

I made an agreement to purchase a car verbally without having any set payment schedule or exact dollar amount the vehicle would be purchased for. I have made several cash payments and also verbally agreed to compensate for payment of the car by paying the insurance on the seller's other vehicle. Now the seller wants to take the car back because they can no longer afford to pay for the vehicle they currently have. I have had the vehicle for about a year total and have put money into repairs and upkeep of the vehicle. Do I have any legal ground to contest the seller's demand to return the vehicle when we only have a verbal agreement?

ChihuahuaMomma · Nov 19, 2007, 12:23 PM

Is the car now registered in your name?

Verbal agreements are BAD! And if the verbal agreement was his suggestion, then that's really suspicious.

ScottGem · Nov 19, 2007, 01:47 PM

Why would you leave yourself open to such shenanigans with only a verbal agreement. The key issue here is whether the title was transferred or not. If it was, they can't do a thing. If the title is still in their name you have a court battle ahead of you.

ChihuahuaMomma · Nov 19, 2007, 03:46 PM

Yes, that's why I asked if the title as switched this name or not, because if its still in the other person's name. All they have to do is report the car stolen and you can be in a lot of trouble, since there is no written agreement. It WILL look like you stole the car.

froggy7 · Nov 19, 2007, 06:52 PM

How in the world does someone buy a car without establishing how much they are going to pay for it?? How do you know when you are through paying?

Fr_Chuck · Nov 19, 2007, 07:33 PM

I doubt it, a contract would have to have a firm agreement, I will buy this car for 10,000, I will pay 100 a month and so on.

It sounds more like you were "renting" the car by paying the upkeep of it.

I doubt that without 1. proof of the agreement 2. having spectific agreement as to amount, the contract is not inforcable.

JudyKayTee · Nov 20, 2007, 07:22 AM

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

I doubt it, a contract would have to have a firm agreement, I will buy this car for 10,000, I will pay 100 a month and so on.

It sounds more like you were "renting" the car by paying the upkeep of it.

I doubt that without 1. proof of the agreement 2. having spectific agreement as to amount, the contract is not inforcable.

Absolutely - and a valid contract requires a meeting of the minds. Without a set dollar amount there was no meeting of the minds and, therefore, no contract.

ChihuahuaMomma · Nov 20, 2007, 02:07 PM

I think the main variable here is whether your name is on the title of the vehicle. Whether you actually this vehicle or not. Because like I had previously stated, if the "seller's" name is still on the vehicle. It's as simple as them calling it in stolen...

JudyKayTee · Nov 20, 2007, 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by ChihuahuaMomma

I think the main variable here is whether or not your name is on the title of the vehicle. Whether you actually this vehicle or not. Because like I had previously stated, if the "seller's" name is still on the vehicle. It's as simple as them calling it in stolen....

I don't think it's all that simple - just my opinion. If the car is reported stolen and the Police find out it was NOT stolen and there was this loose purchase agreement the "seller" is in trouble.

Title is important, of course, but I think it comes down to no agreement to purchase because there were no clear contract terms. As someone said, it appears you were renting the car and that can get the "seller" into BIG trouble with his/her insurance company.

ChihuahuaMomma · Nov 20, 2007, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

I don't think it's all that simple - just my opinion. If the car is reported stolen and the Police find out it was NOT stolen and there was this loose purchase agreement the "seller" is in trouble.

Title is important, of course, but I think it comes down to no agreement to purchase because there were no clear contract terms. As someone said, it appears you were renting the car and that can get the "seller" into BIG trouble with his/her insurance company.

I agree, but if the "buyer/renter" is refusing to give back a car that he does not own, then he is essentially stealing it. I've seen friends in this similar situation before and this is the reason that I myself am very careful with contracts and such. And as far as the car insurance thing goes, yeah, they can get into huge trouble.