Legal/Ethics Question... (rental, insurance, cost of)

[StarMama]

Opinion wanted... My friend Sarah decided to put a car in her name for her daughter-in-law, Janice. The daughter-in-law paid $3000 down for the car and at the request of Sarah agreed to give her a debit card where only the money for the car note and insurance would be deposited and Sarah would in turn make the monthly payments. One day the car gets repossessed and the daughter-in-law finds out that Sarah didn't use the money to make any payments for the car or the insurance. Sarah doesn't have the money to get the car back and it goes to auction.

So... Sarah agrees to pay all of the money back that was given to her for the monthly car note and insurance. The daughter-in-law also wants her $3000 deposit back b/c she's out of a car. Sarah says "no way" b/c the daughter-in-law did drive the car for several months thus she got use out of the car so she doesn't deserve that deposit back. Is the daughter-in-law entitled to any of that $3000? She drove the car for 5 months. We looked at the rental rate for a month which comes out to more than the $3000 when multiplied by 5(months) but the daughter-in-law says she signed a contract to lease-to-buy the car, not rent one therefore looking at the cost of renting a car month by month is irrelevant.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

[Mr. Klato]

Originally Posted by StarMama

Opinion wanted... My friend Sarah decided to put a car in her name for her daughter-in-law, Janice. The daughter-in-law paid $3000 down for the car and at the request of Sarah agreed to give her a debit card where only the money for the car note and insurance would be deposited and Sarah would in turn make the monthly payments. One day the car gets repossessed and the daughter-in-law finds out that Sarah didn't use the money to make any payments for the car or the insurance. Sarah doesn't have the money to get the car back and it goes to auction.

So... Sarah agrees to pay all of the money back that was given to her for the monthly car note and insurance. The daughter-in-law also wants her $3000 deposit back b/c she's out of a car. Sarah says "no way" b/c the daughter-in-law did drive the car for several months thus she got use out of the car so she doesn't deserve that deposit back. Is the daughter-in-law entitled to any of that $3000? She drove the car for 5 months. We looked at the rental rate for a month which comes out to more than the $3000 when multiplied by 5(months) but the daughter-in-law says she signed a contract to lease-to-buy the car, not rent one therefore looking at the cost of renting a car month by month is irrelevant.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

Was there a written contract between Sarah and Janice? I believe once a property goes over $500 you need a written contract for it to be valid. The contract for the car is under Sarah's name not Janice so Janice will have a hard time proving this in court. Take it to Judge Judy!!!!!!!!

[nyctc7]

Originally Posted by Jrnicolas84

Take it to Judge Judy!!!!!!!!

My thoughts exactly. Or Marilyn Milian. In the meantime there are law message boards out there where you may get some opinions.

[StarMama]

Thanks for the reply. I don't believe there was a written contract but there are a number of witnesses who know what happened. In fact, there was a "meeting" yesterday between the two ladies that included their Aunts, husbands, and cousin. Sarah admitted that she "took" Janice's money in front of everyone and that she will give her that money back. The only dispute at this point is the $3000 deposit.

Nyctc7, I'm going to find a legal forum and ask for opinions there too. Thanks.

[Queen Sherine]

Sarah should pay her all of the money, since she was being irresponsible. An agreement was made and she screwed it up. Janice take her to Judge Judy. Sarah admitted her faults infront of other individuals.