I’m coming late to this, but Vivian Paige brings our attention to a bill that I couldn’t quite believe, the first time I read it. As Vivian describes it:
Very simply, the change [to the law] would make it easier for the seller of the vehicle to take possession of [a vehicle which you have contracted to purchase, made a downpayment/trade-in on, and have taken possession of, but for which the dealer has not yet made an application for title on your behalf]. Where’s the problem? Well, what about returning the trade in and the downpayment of the purchaser? Shouldn’t those things occur at the same time? This bill doesn’t take that into consideration.
Another concern of consumer protection activists is that it will open the door for the filing of criminal charges – as opposed to civil charges – against buyers who don’t, for whatever reason, turn over the vehicles immediately.This is despite the fact that Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code says that these are civil cases.
It’s a ridiculously bad change to the law (something that Del. John Cosgrove, sponsor of the bill, seems to be fond of attempting), and is up for hearing today. Follow the link from Vivian’s place for information on
Related: Mark Brooks follows the money.