liens

[TemporaryKubotaOwnerMark]

This is the second stupid post regarding the same thing, another keyboard cowboy just looking for trouble, get a life.

I'm guessing you're a Democrat. Says stupid things, gets offended when the stupidity is pointed out.

 

[TomSeller]

I just wonder how many times the repo man has been to your house. Probably more than once to have left you with such a bad taste.
.

Another unwarranted insult. At this rate the thread will get shut down. Too bad, it is (was?) providing valuable information.

 

[John Fitzgerald]

JD wants 25k if I want to keep it. I can buy a new one set up same way for 32k. 0 percent for 5 years. Kind of leaning that way.

I wonder if Deere got the tractor back yet?

 

[two_bit_score]

Another unwarranted insult. At this rate the thread will get shut down. Too bad, it is (was?) providing valuable information.

Not intended as an insult in any way. If you are complaining about that statement then shame on you, it will be your fault the thread gets shut down.

Scotty has made some outlandish and ridiculous statements that contributed no useful information but seem to be lame attempts to advance a "me first- take no responsibility for his own actions" world view that is basically repulsive.

Otherwise, the thread is full of useful information and considerate opinions from all sides.



.

 

[Steppenwolfe]

Doesn't seem like that would be adequate either. What if he paid off the first note and the used the tractor for collateral at a later date? I'm beginning to wonder if the current system provides means for a buyer to protect themselves. It shouldn't be this hard for an honest buyer to verify there are no outstanding Liens!

This is a great point. 32 years ago I bought my first Kubota loader / back hoe for cash. Around 16 k I believe. A year later, I used it as collateral on a bank loan for some other equipment. No one on the planet could have possibly known the bank had a lien on that tractor. Buyer be ware...

 

[Steppenwolfe]

The finance company took responsibility and tracked down the dead beat who sold it to the OP and then located the tractor which was in possession of the OP. I would say that is taking responsibility for protecting their own property.


All of your posts on this subject sound like sour grapes toward the finance company for simply wanting their legally owned property back.

I just wonder how many times the repo man has been to your house. Probably more than once to have left you with such a bad taste.


.

Here we go... totally uncalled for.

 

[TheMan419]

So you're saying if they didn't file a UCC-1 or if there was an error in the filing they would have no claim?

Yes. That is what the law says. You have to take the appropriate action to perfect your lien. If you do not do that a bonafide purchaser for value takes clear title. Deer would still have a claim against the person who signed the financing agreement, however they would not have a valid perfected lien against the tractor. OP would then be in the clear.

That is the whole purpose of having a defined procedure on how to perfect your lien. You follow it, there is a paper trail in the public record that can be searched. That way a buyer can determine if they are getting good title or clouded title, and act accordingly.

If you, as the finance company, do not follow that procedure you do not have a valid lien. You can still repo it if the original purchaser still has the tractor in his possession. If he sold it you cannot repo it. You can just sue him for the monetary damages.

EDIT: For example for $5.00 you can get a copy of a UCC lien here Secretary of State - Business Services Division in Indiana. Just searched and the lien on my tractor came up. So don't buy my tractor unless you want to deal with CNH Capital on a repo

 

[TheMan419]

The only way to avoid this disaster is asking the seller to give you a copy of the machine note paid in full and then calling to make sure it's free and clear. If the seller says he paid cash for it then he should have that paperwork as well. Otherwise I wouldn't buy it period.

No you could also search the UCC book at the Secretary Of State's office to see if their is a lien.

 

[TheMan419]

This is a great point. 32 years ago I bought my first Kubota loader / back hoe for cash. Around 16 k I believe. A year later, I used it as collateral on a bank loan for some other equipment. No one on the planet could have possibly known the bank had a lien on that tractor. Buyer be ware...

Yes they could have. The bank has to file a UCC-1 to perfect their lien. Yes even the second bank has to do that. The UCC-1 book can be searched and the lien found. That is actually its purpose.

 

[rScotty]

The finance company took responsibility and tracked down the dead beat who sold it to the OP and then located the tractor which was in possession of the OP. I would say that is taking responsibility for protecting their own property.


All of your posts on this subject sound like sour grapes toward the finance company for simply wanting their legally owned property back.

I just wonder how many times the repo man has been to your house. Probably more than once to have left you with such a bad taste.
.

I honestly don't know how often he has been to my house. A Repo Man might be a frequent visitor or might not. I don't inquire of everyone who calls, and I'm not sure that I would know a repo man from a meter reader unless unless he was wearing a lapel pin, hat, or some sort of overt identification. So you might be right. Probably not; but maybe.

I've very old, very conservative, and raised in the rural South. From your comments I can tell that is a lifestyle and upbringing that is quite strange to you, and perhaps your ignorance of rural values is the source of your rudeness. We are old-fashioned country folk who have taken exactly one loan ever, and we wouldn't have taken that except that it was at 0% and we had already saved the money in the bank to pay it off.

We are connected enough to know that our way of doing things is is not a popular way to be these days, but it is how we were raised. If we can't pay for it we simply do without....or more commonly we find an worn-out but otherwise nice example of whatever it is and fix it to work like new again.

My concern for the problem of the "Original Poster" in this thread is for what I see as his unfair treatment under existing financial laws. And not just for him alone - he is just an example - but his experience raises a concern for our whole system of ownership, buying, and selling. I happen to think that freely conducted barter and trade between neighbors is one of the backbones of our society.
rScotty

 

[Teachu2]

I honestly don't know how often he has been to my house. A Repo Man might be a frequent visitor or might not. I don't inquire of everyone who calls, and I'm not sure that I would know a repo man from a meter reader unless unless he was wearing a lapel pin, hat, or some sort of overt identification. So you might be right. Probably not; but maybe.

I've very old, very conservative, and raised in the rural South. From your comments I can tell that is a lifestyle and upbringing that is quite strange to you, and perhaps your ignorance of rural values is the source of your rudeness. We are old-fashioned country folk who have taken exactly one loan ever, and we wouldn't have taken that except that it was at 0% and we had already saved the money in the bank to pay it off.

We are connected enough to know that our way of doing things is is not a popular way to be these days, but it is how we were raised. If we can't pay for it we simply do without....or more commonly we find an worn-out but otherwise nice example of whatever it is and fix it to work like new again.

My concern for the problem of the "Original Poster" in this thread is for what I see as his unfair treatment under existing financial laws. And not just for him alone - he is just an example - but his experience raises a concern for our whole system of ownership, buying, and selling. I happen to think that freely conducted barter and trade between neighbors is one of the backbones of our society.
rScotty

Well said!

 

[CincyFlyer]

I honestly don't know how often he has been to my house. A Repo Man might be a frequent visitor or might not. I don't inquire of everyone who calls, and I'm not sure that I would know a repo man from a meter reader unless unless he was wearing a lapel pin, hat, or some sort of overt identification. So you might be right. Probably not; but maybe.

I've very old, very conservative, and raised in the rural South. From your comments I can tell that is a lifestyle and upbringing that is quite strange to you, and perhaps your ignorance of rural values is the source of your rudeness. We are old-fashioned country folk who have taken exactly one loan ever, and we wouldn't have taken that except that it was at 0% and we had already saved the money in the bank to pay it off.

We are connected enough to know that our way of doing things is is not a popular way to be these days, but it is how we were raised. If we can't pay for it we simply do without....or more commonly we find an worn-out but otherwise nice example of whatever it is and fix it to work like new again.

My concern for the problem of the "Original Poster" in this thread is for what I see as his unfair treatment under existing financial laws. And not just for him alone - he is just an example - but his experience raises a concern for our whole system of ownership, buying, and selling. I happen to think that freely conducted barter and trade between neighbors is one of the backbones of our society.
rScotty

If you believe that it's unfair for someone to receive stolen property and then not be able to keep it, then so be it. I disagree.

Wll

 

[two_bit_score]

I honestly don't know how often he has been to my house. A Repo Man might be a frequent visitor or might not. I don't inquire of everyone who calls, and I'm not sure that I would know a repo man from a meter reader unless unless he was wearing a lapel pin, hat, or some sort of overt identification. So you might be right. Probably not; but maybe.

I've very old, very conservative, and raised in the rural South. From your comments I can tell that is a lifestyle and upbringing that is quite strange to you, and perhaps your ignorance of rural values is the source of your rudeness. We are old-fashioned country folk who have taken exactly one loan ever, and we wouldn't have taken that except that it was at 0% and we had already saved the money in the bank to pay it off.

We are connected enough to know that our way of doing things is is not a popular way to be these days, but it is how we were raised. If we can't pay for it we simply do without....or more commonly we find an worn-out but otherwise nice example of whatever it is and fix it to work like new again.

My concern for the problem of the "Original Poster" in this thread is for what I see as his unfair treatment under existing financial laws. And not just for him alone - he is just an example - but his experience raises a concern for our whole system of ownership, buying, and selling. I happen to think that freely conducted barter and trade between neighbors is one of the backbones of our society.
rScotty

You obviously lie easily in your culture.

You don't have much concern for the OP or you would not be encouraging him to hide out the equipment and try to avoid detection.

Keep trying to play the 'dumb ole country boy role' but you're not very good at it.


.

 

[TemporaryKubotaOwnerMark]

My concern for the problem of the "Original Poster" in this thread is for what I see as his unfair treatment under existing financial laws.

His unfair treatment was at the hands of a scoundrel who took advantage of him. Neither the laws nor Deere have treated him unfairly at all.

 

[TimberHole]

Yes. That is what the law says. You have to take the appropriate action to perfect your lien. If you do not do that a bonafide purchaser for value takes clear title. Deer would still have a claim against the person who signed the financing agreement, however they would not have a valid perfected lien against the tractor. OP would then be in the clear.

That is the whole purpose of having a defined procedure on how to perfect your lien. You follow it, there is a paper trail in the public record that can be searched. That way a buyer can determine if they are getting good title or clouded title, and act accordingly.

If you, as the finance company, do not follow that procedure you do not have a valid lien. You can still repo it if the original purchaser still has the tractor in his possession. If he sold it you cannot repo it. You can just sue him for the monetary damages.

EDIT: For example for $5.00 you can get a copy of a UCC lien here Secretary of State - Business Services Division in Indiana. Just searched and the lien on my tractor came up. So don't buy my tractor unless you want to deal with CNH Capital on a repo

Good info. Thanks. When I look into the UCC-1 search it looks like I have to search based upon the name of the person which may have taken the loan. Is this correct? Am I missing something? It doesn't seem like an adequate system if the lien cannot be searched based upon make/model/ and particularly serial number. People often use initials, partial names, etc., even when filling out paperwork at the bank. Can I search that and be sure there isn't a lien on a tractor, regardless of who took out the loan?

Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[TomSeller]

You obviously lie easily in your culture.

You don't have much concern for the OP or you would not be encouraging him to hide out the equipment and try to avoid detection.

Keep trying to play the 'dumb ole country boy role' but you're not very good at it.

.

That is NOT what he was saying. Try reading it again.

 

[two_bit_score]

That is NOT what he was saying. Try reading it again.

Your interpretation differs from mine. I feel mine is more accurate.

.

 

[My Gym]

I have just read the 14 pages of this topic. Were are a country of laws and due process. The laws are there to protect buyers and sellers. A lein holder must file the paperwork and follow very specific rules to protect his interest. If the lein holder has not followed the rules he has voided his interest. If you have a bill of sale and proof of payment, you have acted in good faith. There is an axiom "possession is 9/10th of the law." Do not turn over possesion of item without proper documentation and only to an approved officer of the courts. Require the lein holder to take it to court and get a judgement. With a signed bill of sale and proof of payment and possesion of property and a valid lein holder, a crime has been commited by the seller. If you give up the item to the lein holder without due process, there is no crime and you have given up any right to the equipment. The lein holder will ask for return or demand return of the equipment most often when the lein holder knows he does not have a valid lein. If the lein holder takes with out going through the courts, file a theft report with the local authorities. If you do not you have given up any interest you have in the property.

 

[Rara Avis]

This even happens to equipment dealers...as the following advice article demonstrates...
Protect Your Assets When It Comes to Trades | 2�12-�6-14 | Farm Equipment

 

[TheMan419]

Good info. Thanks. When I look into the UCC-1 search it looks like I have to search based upon the name of the person which may have taken the loan. Is this correct? Am I missing something? It doesn't seem like an adequate system if the lien cannot be searched based upon make/model/ and particularly serial number. People often use initials, partial names, etc., even when filling out paperwork at the bank. Can I search that and be sure there isn't a lien on a tractor, regardless of who took out the loan? Maybe I'm missing something.

Sorry I did not look into it in that much detail. Yes for things w a serial number it would be old if we could search that as well.

Do I think it is a perfect system? No. But at least there is a system. Sadly nothing is going to completely stop a dishonest person from ripping off people.