********UPDATE********** 4-1-2008 9:50Am PCST I wish I could say Aprils fool, but not the case. So this is what we have so far today... On 3-21-08 A Las Vegas Judge ORDERED the Las Vegas Police Dept to take and file a Stolen Vehicle report listing the Victim as the leasing Company. In the report it claims the date of loss as 12-22-2007. I should have a copy of the report today from the LVPD. It is Public record and I shall post it. This confirms that at the time of the transaction and up till 3-21-2008 no one involved KNEW the car had been reported Stolen or that the Title had any type of issue with it. In order to keep this acurate and factual, I will only post from Goverment Docuements we obtain for Public release..that way ther is no he said she said...on advise of my Lawyer and Josh's we will not discuss any further discussions on-going between Josh, his lawyer, me and mine and insurance company..sorry for that.
If I remember right, I paid about $50 to Autocheck for title insurance way back when I bought my car...seems like cheap piece of mind today.
This whole sitation is a joke. Worst of all it is true because Roy Cat does comfirm the story. The way I look at this now is that: 1. all along someone wanted a free lambo ride on credit cards ( I cannot imagine the combined monthly payment of over $100K even at 0%). This fits right in with the current credit mess (by the way good excuse to sue all the card companies too for loaning irresponsibly - just food for thoughts..) 2. The car get driven 3K miles with no registration (?) and no paid taxes to sweeten the deal. 3. Some cops shows up to bag the car. Then someone gets this idea to make a mess out of that bizzarre story to buy a used Murcie. 4. Not having any money to buy the Murcie, best deal is to a) feed a fire against the car sellers to get hard cash (sort of laundring borrowed money on CC) b) may get the Gallardo back in the same time and sell it for the rest. Who knows? Some people seems to be full of resources when they live it up day to day. Way to go. I would have never thought of this to get both a fre 3K mile lambo ride AND trade up to a Murcie... I am wondering what the next story is going to be... I recall a dealership in the south when I travelled who has that jar full of gray stuff with the words "Ashes of problem customers". I wonder if Roy Cats will have one like that next month...
You'd have to explain how having a paper title, title insurance, and a registered car wouldn't do any good. (oh yeah, the kid didn't register his car, did he?!)
Hey and where did my Kentucky Fried he will always be OWNED and No Lamborghini will ever make it better post go?
Plus AUTOCHECK and CARFAX insurance buybacks, (read the fine print) are ONLY good if you can show that this information was with a DMV or a Goverment agency at the time of the purchase and CarFax and Autocheck FAILED to pick it up in their search....nice buy back policy, but EXREMELY hard to collect from...so in this case...since IT WAS not with a DMV or agency...they buy back policy does not come into effect...
Police departments *are* state government agencies. And I could go read my AutoCheck policy again, but I seem to remember it being valid against all unreported liens, among other potential title dings.
I'm still waiting for the "expat" post. You know, where someone admits that they are about to move overseas for the next decade, so a bankruptcy in the U.S. won't matter to them.
So Its safe to say that Josh's "getting pulled over in January by an ****** cop" story is a bunch of bull then!?
I wonder what kind of evidence the leasing company could have presented to the Las Vegas judge to convince him that the car was actually STOLEN (as in, criminally taken from their possession) rather than simply the result of their own paperwork error (sending out a clear title on the car).
"Plus AUTOCHECK and CARFAX insurance buybacks, (read the fine print) are ONLY good if you can show that this information was with a DMV or a Goverment agency at the time of the purchase..." Purchased Dec 07... Reported Stolen 3/08...
No, on that point I have to correct you. Here's my TitleGuard policy (excerpt) from AutoCheck, naming your current situation as a specific covered risk. AutoCheck would have paid... Image Unavailable, Please Login
Nope. You're just repeating earlier misinformation. Go to post #1220 in this thread to see my **ACTUAL** AutoCheck "titleguard" insurance policy, which covers the situation for this thread. Ah heck, might as well post it here, too. Notice line #3 that says you are covered even if a lien *isn't* reported to the DMV. Image Unavailable, Please Login
This event seems like justification to NEVER pay cash for a pre-owned Ferrari. Right? Let the bank deal with it?
I disagree with you, read PAR two.. IF the risk was in effct on the Policy date...tricky language, we called them on that and THEIR interpatation, as I said was that this "deffect" for any of the reason was in effect on the DATE of the policy being obtained..I.E. when you purchased the car...I think it could be faught in court...call them yourselfs and you will get the same answer...very very gray language..
That says "for the state your title is registered". They will pay if the lien is registered in Rhode Island, but not Montana where you registered the title... will they cover you for a lien that didn't exist at all at the time of purchase and doesn't show up until 90 days later?
No, the "date" in question is the date that you purchase the title insurance policy, and when they are talking about registered, they are saying that you are covered even if a lien *isn't* registered with your state by the date you purchase the insurance policy.
