3 ms·

I would argue that before it is successfully repossessed, the old person is still the owner. They'd also be the one liable if something goes wrong. So we have d

I would argue that before it is successfully repossessed, the old person is still the owner. They'd also be the one liable if something goes wrong. So we have disconnected the liabilities of ownership from the advantages of ownership. In the past, this type of disconnect has led to companies exploiting it for profit.

themitigating 5y ago
If you financed the car the bank owns it. It's not an opinion.
- fxtentacle 5y ago
  Depends on your specific contract if you're borrowing it from the bank until it's paid off or if the car is collateral but otherwise fully yours.
knorker 5y ago
I would not argue against it being yours before reposession. But whose car is it after a legal repossession has started? I would argue that once the repossession clause in the contract has been activated (criteria has been met and bank decides to exercise the right) then from that decision forwards the bank is now the owner. Possession is not 9/10 of the law if a contract says control reverts to bank under a condition that's clearly been violated. This is not a game where if just hide for X time then contracts expire. It's not a game of tag, where "it doesn't count" until a reposession has been completed "fairly". You don't need to give someone a fair chance to avoid the consequences in a contract.
shadowgovt 5y ago
> So we have disconnected the liabilities of ownership from the advantages of ownership. In the past, this type of disconnect has led to companies exploiting it for profit. You are 100% right, but that is the circumstance with loans to purchase cars independent of whether the car is autonomous. Banks do make a ton of money on the interest from car loans and they are, indeed, not liable for service or maintenance of the vehicle. When repossession occurs, the person in possession of the car is not the owner anymore. That's why the repo man is allowed, legally, to take the car. They are transporting it to the rightful owner's place of choice.
PeterisP 5y ago
Possession is separate from ownership, those are well-defined concepts with very distinct meaning, and repossession (as the name hints) is explicitly about possession, not ownership. The moment of successful repossession does not change ownership. It may be that the ownership has already changed (and was a reason for repossession), it may be that it's "just" a collateral and the ownership will either never change and the car will be returned when the payments are made, or that the ownership will change some time after repossession after it's settled that the car will not be returned and the repossessed car is sold as collateral when liquidating the debt.

themitigating 5y ago

If you financed the car the bank owns it. It's not an opinion.

fxtentacle 5y ago
Depends on your specific contract if you're borrowing it from the bank until it's paid off or if the car is collateral but otherwise fully yours.

knorker 5y ago

I would not argue against it being yours before reposession. But whose car is it after a legal repossession has started? I would argue that once the repossession clause in the contract has been activated (criteria has been met and bank decides to exercise the right) then from that decision forwards the bank is now the owner. Possession is not 9/10 of the law if a contract says control reverts to bank under a condition that's clearly been violated. This is not a game where if just hide for X time then contracts expire. It's not a game of tag, where "it doesn't count" until a reposession has been completed "fairly". You don't need to give someone a fair chance to avoid the consequences in a contract.

shadowgovt 5y ago

> So we have disconnected the liabilities of ownership from the advantages of ownership. In the past, this type of disconnect has led to companies exploiting it for profit. You are 100% right, but that is the circumstance with loans to purchase cars independent of whether the car is autonomous. Banks do make a ton of money on the interest from car loans and they are, indeed, not liable for service or maintenance of the vehicle. When repossession occurs, the person in possession of the car is not the owner anymore. That's why the repo man is allowed, legally, to take the car. They are transporting it to the rightful owner's place of choice.

PeterisP 5y ago

Possession is separate from ownership, those are well-defined concepts with very distinct meaning, and repossession (as the name hints) is explicitly about possession, not ownership. The moment of successful repossession does not change ownership. It may be that the ownership has already changed (and was a reason for repossession), it may be that it's "just" a collateral and the ownership will either never change and the car will be returned when the payments are made, or that the ownership will change some time after repossession after it's settled that the car will not be returned and the repossessed car is sold as collateral when liquidating the debt.