Do lenders have the right?

[azgrandpa]

Arizona

I've been reading this forum, faithfully, for almost a year and one-half; but I still find the reaffirmation question confusing. I understand the technical difference between the two. And I understand that it is typically not in the filers best interest to reaffirm a loan and, also, that some Trustees won't allow it.

So, right when I think I have a pretty good understanding of this reaffirmation question; along comes a poster that did not reaffirm his auto loan and I, believe he said he had been late a couple times, but the lender didn't repo the auto. So, he gets down to his last payment and the lender chooses to repo, (after he had practically paid the loan in full)!

If one does not reaffirm an auto loan, but makes every payment on time; does the lender have the legal right to repo the vehicle, even if all the payments have been made, (except the final one)?

*******************************************************************************
AttorneyOney: Thanks for joining these forums! It's so refreshing to have someone respond to us "Trailer Trash" with a respectful attitude!! Best of Luck to you Sir, in all that you do!

 

[AttorneyOney]

Treating this like a law school exam question, I'd argue that the lender is estopped (an equitable concept) to repo after accepting even one payment after failing to object to a missed payment. I can't imagine a court letting it stand. I would also think a TV consumer reporter would think it newsworthy.

 

[Ladynred]

AzGrandpa, if you're referring to the person I think you are, the problem seems to be that when he made the late payments, the bank assessed late fees. Even though this person has since paid the loan balance off, in full, the bank wants to repo because, in their eyes, the loan is NOT paid off because that late fee is UNpaid.

I guess my question on this scenario is can they collect this 'late fee' that was assessed on a discharged debt ????

 

[azgrandpa]

Thank you, LadynRed. I seemed to have missed that LITTLE detail in the original post!

But your question about assessed fees on a discharged debt is interesting! Possibly, it is implied, (reaffirmation), if the debtor continues to make the payment per the original agreement, (payment amount, payment due date, etc.). I assume there is plenty of case law on this question; I just haven't learned how to research them, yet!

However, it seems to me that NOT reaffiming a debt opens the door to creditor abuse because they are allowing you to keep possession of the collateral for the defaulted loan, at their descretion, (ie., as long as you keep the payments current)! And at anytime after the discharge, for no particular reason; they could decide to exercise their right to the collateral!

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

If anyone wants to take this matter up privately with "azgrandpa", his real name is Walter Collins, and can be reached at azgrandpa@earthlink.net
or by snail mail at 3143 E. Greenlee Road, Tucson, AZ 85716-1225.