The "lienholder" is the owner actually.
Legal idiot....
Having a lien on an item does NOT make the lienholder the owner!!
If what you are saying was true.... a plumber who claims to be unpaid and files a mechanics lien on a property... becomes the owner??
Of maybe the mortgage company, that loans on a property is the real owner??
Your stupidity is incredible.... and dangerous to anyone who, in their own ignorance, believes your crap.
lienor
n. a person who holds a lien on another's property or funds.
lien
n. any official claim or charge against property or funds for payment of a debt or an amount owed for services rendered. A lien is usually a formal document signed by the party to whom money is owed and sometimes by the debtor who agrees to the amount due. A lien carries with it the right to sell property, if necessary, to obtain the money. There are numerous types of liens including: a mechanic's lien against the real property upon which a workman, contractor or supplier has provided work or materials, an attorney's lien for fees to be paid from funds recovered by his/her efforts, a medical lien for medical bills to be paid from funds recovered for an injury, a landlord's lien against a tenant's property for unpaid rent or damages, a tax lien to enforce the government's claim of unpaid taxes, or the security agreement (UCC-1) authorized by the Uniform Commercial Code. Most liens are enforceable in the order in which they were recorded or filed (in the case of security agreements), except tax liens, which have priority over the private citizen's claim.
you see, the car is the colleteral for the loan. They own and hold the title until the car is paid for. The borrower is just allowed to drive it while making payments. The lienholder may have the car repo'd if payments stop. That doesn't mean that ANYONE a debtor owes money to can just repo the car for their use and debt relief...only the actual owner of the title (lienholder).
Go back to cooking those fries at McDonalds.... or at least finish high school.
Show me with factual evidence in writing where it says that a car may be taken and sold by someone other than who is listed on the title?
Come by my office anytime you like.... and I will show you about 100 case files.
Now, you provide ANYTHING to support your crap-filled post.
By the way...you are wrong again concerning spouses. In non-community property states, the spouse if not listed on the judgment may protect their assets from being taken.
And even more ignorance...
If a spouse is not named on the judgment (in non-communal state) there is no right to seize.... therefore no need for the spouse to claim an exemption.. so your "may protect" is
110% WRONG!!
Do the forum a favor and leave. Your legal ignorance on a legal advice forum is a hazard to those pursuing legally ACCURATE information.
Any property that is jointly held may be protected...not double exemption, but total exemption.
Again... not true. Some states allow a double exemption for jointly owned property, some states prohibit ANY seizure of jointly held property... some allow the non-named spouse to claim only his/her exemption percentage of ownership.
Example, jointly held bank account where the seized funds are found (by motion for exemption hearing by non-named spouse) to have been 60% deposited by named debtor and 40% by non-named spouse, it is not uncommon for the court to return the exempt spouse' funds.
