I've never falsified the sale price of a vehicle to reduce the sales taxes and registration fees. When a motorcycle I bought used got stolen, my insurance company used the DMV records to establish what I paid for the bike. It was $2400. If I had reported the sales price as, say, $500, That would have been the purchase price according to the DMV. Sometimes, honesty does pay off.
Good point. One caveat though: If you buy something and improve it afterwards, keep a record. Vehicles can go up in value. I'd hate to be stuck with a lower value than what a vehicle is now worth, simply because it was worth less when I bought it. (My current vehicle is worth a bit more now than when I bought it because it was in need of some repairs at the time, and it was discounted accordingly.)
In my state we don't report the sales price because we don't have sales tax, But I have seen people dispute the price the insurance company wanted to pay using current vehicles on the market that are comparable. For example I sold a car to someone I knew for like 3000. He Then totaled the car And insurance wanted to pay like 2500, He found a similar one for sale for 4500 and was able to get paid 4500. I say this because I think a lot of people think the insurance company gets to decide what they pay you when in reality it's open to some negotiation
I bought an old pick up and it was stolen several months later. The thief was caught. In the trial his lawyer asked me what i gave for the truck. It would have been bad if I had put the wrong amount.
@@blakel4595 A friend's truck was totaled. It was the other driver's fault. His truck was very rare and the insurance company couldn't find one like it for sale, so they declared it to have no value.
Steve - this has been one of the most enjoyable videos you've made. Yeah, it's very "lawyer-eee"...but it shows your thought process and exposes your brain. I think anyone in-tune (or curious) with the attorney mindset, along with the challenges of finding + connecting all the dots (which are ambiguous and multivariate) would appreciate you allowing us to see / hear how this kinda thing is done in real life. Well done.
Brilliant! When the question of which portion of the lien the $500 was collateralized…that was the “Solomon’s moment” for the appeals court I LOVE this case
Don't worry about the length Steve. It's like watching a long movie. If it's good it's worth the long time. Your story was worth it. The listener doesn't even notice the time passing.
As a layperson to the law these trial practice stories are always so interesting. Reinforces my belief that representing yourself is court is mostly a bad idea.
I think most people representing themselves is because they can't afford a lawyer to begin with. The risk of loss is less than what it would cost to pay a lawyer. Remember, court appointed attorney only applies when you are defending yourself in a criminal case. Any other time, you have to pay the lawyer.
Some cities and states in the country require attorneys to take on “pro bono” cases where they don’t charge clients who can’t afford it. Cities like NYC also have free legal services for clients in landlord court.
Steve, I was involved in a bait and switch scam over the purchase of a 1967 Ford Mustang (fastback) about a dozen years ago. I was the buyer and the seller had posted a public ad. I reached out to him, met with him to inspect the car, and we spent about a week haggling over the price. He refused to budge on his asking, and I eventually had to decide whether I was going to let the car "get away from me" over a grand. I decided to pull the trigger on the purchase, and when I did, I did it verbally over the phone on a recorded line. I didn't expect any trouble from him, but I wanted to make sure I had some enforceable evidence of a contract if he decided to renege. So I call him and agree to his full asking price; he accepts and we arrange to exchange two days later. The night before I'm supposed to pick it up, he calls me up to tell me he will not execute the transfer because he has found an engine (the car was a project) and that is taking up the value substantially. I didn't announce at all to him that I had the recording, because I knew that was the nuclear option. I tried to appeal to his sense of honor and try to get him to uphold his end of our verbal contract, but he flatly refused and said "sue me." That's when I told him that I had recorded the contract, he blustered about that being an illegal wiretap to which I recited ORC§2933.52(B)(4) which stated that it was perfectly legal and that I had caught him trying to bait and switch me...I picked the car up the next day and handed him cash in the amount that we had agreed to. ...it was pretty fun.
Note for everybody that the laws pertaining to the legality of recording phone calls vary state to state. If both parties are physically located in a "single party state" at the time of the phone call, then one of the parties to the call can record without requiring consent from the other party. If any of the parties is in a two party state, then both parties must consent to the recording regardless of which party does the recording. In my case, I knew exactly where the other party was physically located at the time I made the call and I made sure to ask him "are you at home in " and he verbally answered yes. So, if he were to have found some unscrupulous attorney willing to get him to pretend he was in a two party state at the time of the recording in order to poison pill me, I had his own admission to the contrary already recorded. At least that's how my thought process worked in my own circumstances. The critical thing is not to assume that my circumstances automatically would apply to your phone call.
NH use to be single party. The changes it. No clue what the concern was. I agree you shouldn't be allowed to randomly record people secretly but for conversations you are part of I don't see the issue.
I love doing that to cops in court. They even tried to put up no parking signs after I parked once. Then claimed they couldn't contact me, I played a recording of him calling me at my office over another ticket.
So let me get this straight the guy tried to literally steal the car for 500 bucks. Went to court had won the case. Thought he was Scott free. Went to appeals court lost the case. While using his money after he already upgraded the car repainted the car probably spent thousands of dollars on this car. Guy probably tried to flip the car. Steve managed to get a tro on the owner. Which probably equates to more than the $2,400 that he owed. He wind up owning a car that literally he wound up paying nearly eight grand. Probably more than what the car was worth. Steve I'm just glad you guys stood your ground. Awesome story.
No he tried to steal it for the $1100 he already made in payments, after claiming to the State that he only paid $500 to avoid the taxes due on the remaining $3000 of the agreed opon $3500 selling price.
problem was @stevelehto payment and filing fees likely totaled more than the $2400 was owed. I might be wrong but Steve didn't mention any order to repay court fees and attorney fees thus wasn't granted.
@@davidmtwigg What if the title showed the PROPER amount of $3500? Would the buyer have to pay the tax on the FULL amount up front or apportioned with each payment made?
I guess the takeaway is when someone tell you, ‘I’d like to buy your car, but I don’t have the money’ you say, ‘sucks for you, I think I’ll sell it to someone with money.’
I bought a Dodge for $1, When I went to the court house to get the title and tags, they refused to issue them to me claiming $1 can't be the price. I pointed out the car was free, but you have to pay something to make a binding contract. Ended up going to a satellite office and got it done there.
I've had guys want to list the sale price at $500 (both selling and buying). I've always said "no thanks, let's put the actual purchase price on there". I also do a little "Bill of Sale" I found online to go with the pink-slip paperwork. Probably not the most rock-solid legal document but I figure it's 1000x better than a he-said, she-said verbal contract.
Well. The ideal scenario is you as the seller already have the money in hand, then you put a lower amount for tax purposes which is illegal of course but almost no one gets caught and it saves people money.
@@gwentarinokripperinolkjdsf683 I have had a potential buyer walk away because I wouldn't falsify the application for title. No, I'm not risking an M2 and a record to save the buyer like 60 bucks in taxes! I refused to lie, he refused to biy it unless I did. Ended up selling to someone else.
@@_DMAC sometimes we are talking 500$ sales tax. That the seller paid to put it in their name already. Don’t let the government tax the same car multiple times. That’s robbery.
Steve, small town judges are the same all over the USA, as are the antics that take place in these suits. I looked at the map and noticed that Port Huron abuts Canada, and there is a bridge right there connecting it to Canada. What could you have done if the Corvette had been physically moved to Canada?
The ins & outs of the laws is like calculus. I didn't take calculus in school. But this was a great in depth dive of the case that I understood all aspects of the law you used. Thanks for expanding my brain a little. (not being sarcastic at all, really!)
Gee Steve, the Lincoln lawyer could have done all that in his backseat 😂 Even lawyering is more fun in fiction! I was pleasantly surprised to see you had fans in the live chat I was in last night at The Real News Network. You're reaching well outside the automotive audience .
The fact you can get something worth $2400 adjudicated in court on appeals, but I cannot get a court to hear a wrongful termination case(s) is disgusting. There is no rule of law anymore.
Not an attorney but listened to every word. I have been on Union by law committee in the past trying to align local rules with international rules and I was a stickler on the wording, punctuation and what was the intent when the rules were adopted so I followed you like glue. So much work and you have to have a good grasp on the written laws and ability to get a judge to comprehend in a short time your intent. I appreciate this video, it shows us the amount of work involved. 1989 was a while ago but I can;t help but feel that the bill was more then the recovered amount ?
I saw the buddy/buddy system work in the Denton, TX courthouse. The judge was friends from high school.. they used to are cars illegally and the defendant now owned a strip bar, an adult video store, and a brother all in one strip mall. They shot the shot for 30 minutes. However, the judge ruled according to the law but in a most friendly manner. The lesson is that a good lawyer knows the law. A great lawyer knows the judge!
You are an incredibly good friend to have as a lawyer. My friend is suing a shop whose owner died after paying him for over 10k for work not done. I hope he gets what the estate has not paid him. He did get the car back. It is a 65 Mustang with around 650 HP. It is a roller but when done it will be worth around 100K.
Informative and professionally presented as always! This video was fun to listen to, what an amazingly technical bit of legal juggling for this case, thanks for the breakdown on all the things you had to do to get it done!
That was fun.....not something usually said about rarely discussed, technical laws. That's probably because you are fun. I've enjoyed watching your videos.
I’m not. After decades of observing and studying the so-called “legal system,” I would have been shocked, not surprised, but shocked, if there wasn’t corruption involved.
Not likely, the only type I remember where you recover your costs are copyright and lemon law. There may be a couple others but I doubt this is one of them.
@@LADETROIT $2400 in the late 80s early 90s was more than it is now of course, but still can't have covered costs... Probably why there were so few similar cases.
How is it possible that all that work (attorney's fees) did not greatly exceed the value of the car? And...how is it that the tax fraud was not a problem? And...an agreement can be two documents, signed, etc.? Sure, OK, two documents that support the same thing. But the two documents do not agree on the matter at hand? Very twisted...like a "Capone" walking into court on a matter with two sets of books. The title is filed with the state, an official document, with the sales price on it. Asking the government (the court) to ignore its own documents? Wow. And then it is overlooked that tax fraud was committed? Wow. The practice and application of law is certainly fascinating. No wonder our courts are so congested with unnecessarily convoluted matters.
If anyone asks why lawyers charge so much, or why shouldn't they just represent themselves, they should definitely watch this video. Eye opening to see how much really goes on in the background that you don't see on TV.
Great information and it was not to long, you didn't drag the information out at all. Sometimes it seems to take a long time to lay out the information, but when there is a lot of information then it will take as long as it takes. Thanks for another great video...
That judge in Wisconsin is lucky he was fast and lucky I wasn't one of the techs or nurses in that case. I would have told the judge exactly where to shove his restraining order or injunction because it was their livelihood and they did absolutely nothing wrong nor illegal. The judge had zero business granting it. The difficulty most people would face in that decision would only serve to make the decision to defy the judge easier for me and make me all the more indignant. The system is irreparably broken.
In that case, the TRO was issued on a Friday and the court held a hearing on Monday where it ruled in favor of the medical staff. Friday was the date that the medical staff had all indicated would be their last day anyway and they were supposed to start work at the new facility that Monday. They started Tuesday instead, and the hospital that lost them as employees even agreed to make up the missing day of wages. So it worked out. In other words, the judge got the request for an injunction against their leaving and simply told them not to start work at the new employer until the issue could be resolved, which happened promptly.
The issue with any TRO is that one side is alleging "irreparable harm". It is not about deciding right or wrong, per se. They were alleging they had a valid case, and that irreparable harm could be caused, i.e., people might die, so as a judge, granting it may have seemed the safer course, until a hearing could be convened. As soon as the facts were presented, the case was tossed, from the best of my recollection. Yes, it was a totally scummy move, and I hope the people in charge have been fired, but the judge was between a rock and a hard place.
@@TheRealScooterGuy that's nice they were paid for Monday and were just prohibited from working that Monday... but there are three problems. First, they didn't know it would just be Monday. Second, they didn't know they'd get paid for Monday; they likely wouldn't have if it didn't become a national spectacle and they needed to do PR damage control. Third, and most importantly, the judge didn't have the authority. Yes, they have the authority to grant TROs, but if and only if actual, illegitimate harm could be done. Anyone with even a third grade education could easily see that it was impossible for the nurses/techs to do harm and that the TRO was purely malicious, i.e., that the old hospital was deliberately harming the nurses/techs. It's shameful the judge let himself become complicit. If I were one of the subjects, I would have had no problem popping the judge on his way to court in the morning, then head to work myself, confident knowing that nobody was going to try to hold me in contempt. It boggles the mind. Do any judges these days have any concept of justice or honor? Do they have a clue and just couldn't care less because people don't hold them accountable like they should?
@@bobschuon5908 the judge was not between a rock and a hard place in any way. Unless the hospital perjured themselves substantially, it was obvious that if anyone died it was the hospital's fault. Let's assume the hospital lied substantially to the judge. It still doesn't matter. The judge knew very well he couldn't force the nurses/techs to continue to work at the old hospital. He only prohibited their working at the new one. The judge was wrong and knew it. If someone ran him up the flag pole by his neck to see who saluted his bloated corpse, they'd be absolutely justified.
@@bobschuon5908 PS - I know it sounds extreme, killing the judge, but what alternatives are there? The nice thing about a dead judge is that he can't have you held in contempt and it's actual justice vs merely getting kicked off the bench or having the decision reversed or something. If someone demands justice and there's no reasonable legal way to achieve it, it forces illegal means.
Not after the thousands of dollars the modified car was now worth, the primary reason he refused to hand over the vehicle. He wanted to flip it, sell it, and pay off the agreement then.
Years ago I foolishly agreed to co-sign for a car loan. The other party did not keep up with payments, let the insurance coverage go. I as one whose name was on the title got stuck paying an overnight parking fine since they were able to locate me. I paid the loan off to remove my name from the title. When that was done the other party was ready to get a loan on the new title before we had left the DMV. What I didn't know then was I could have put my name on the title as only as the lien holder and not as the owner. Live and learn.
Massachusetts changed this a few years ago and bases sales tax off book value. This essentially eliminated the good old days of saying you paid $500 for a vehicle and paying less sales tax.
Very cool. You win the Internet for the Day. So interesting, thanks for the mega share. You explained exactly how one becomes an expert, gets confidence- by working the whole deal from end to end. All through this I was wondering how much dollars in 2022 terms you made from this - there may have been more to the $$ with the original owner - sentiment, etc. to pay a hefty lawyer fee.
Thank you for this video. I now know better the ins and outs of this type of transaction. Basically, have the correct sale price on all documents. As you have said previously, the seller needs to correctly and completely fill out all the info on the transfer of title. I make the assumption that not only should the sales agreement list the total price and the down payment but also specify the terms of payment along with the maximum time until full payment is made.
Was just about to ask the same question. Wouldn't be worthwhile except some degree of satisfaction that they scumbag who stopped payment didn't get away with it.
@@_DMAC Steve mentioned where he went to court to fight a parking ticket. Cost him a lot more than the cost of the ticket, but he fought it on principle. He WAS NOT going to pay money he did not owe! (Of course he won)
For the record: I like your 10-20 minute videos. I also liked this one at 30 minutes. I also regularly watch 45-1 hour long videos. So if you ever want to do a deep dive documentary on a legal topic I would watch that too.
"Mr. No Tie" was counting on a negative cost/benefit ratio to get away with this old boy deal. Since judges get indigestion when reversed on appeal, No Tie has has just found out that one "Aw Sh*t cancels a thousand atta boys. He gambled on the cost benefit ratio being controlling, it wasn't .
It was a perfect explanation of the situation. Video might have been longer than you normally do but I thought for everything you had to do, it could have been longer and still interesting.
Was the TRO extinguished when the circuit court ruled against your client? What stops the buyer from selling the car before an appeal? Loved the video. And I can't make out Ben on a mobile device.
I second this question. I would assume Steve would have stated that he intended to appeal and asked it to stay active, but not sure if that's how it would work.
1. Yes 2. Nothing, so you quickly appeal and hope you are granted another TRO and/or injunction. The buyer selling the car isn't the end of the world, you can still enforce the original loan agreement. You just lack the collateral to grab, and you lack the ability to tie his hands about selling it. So, you lose leverage and control, but realistically, it doesn't sound like the buyer wanted to sell the car. It sounds like he wanted to keep it forever without making any more payments. And if he kept it, with the loan secured or not, just owning it would show a court that he has enough assets to pay a court judgment on the loan. The way of collecting from him just wouldn't be repossession of the car and auctioning it.
In South Australia the registration papers specifically state that registration *_is not_* proof of ownership and in other sections state they *_cannot_* be used to put a lien on a vehicle.
When I was very young (in scotland uk) for many issues a document simply had to be a record with a stated intent and not fraudulant to be held valid... At one of the cattle markets a farmer wrote a cheque (which in those days did not have to be pre printed cheques as indicated above) on the side of a cow... The said notice of payment was kept clean and presented at the bank next business day for processing...
Hey, I enjoyed every second of your story and video. I hate crooks. I feel like the purchaser of that car makes a habit of scamming people and screwing people over. Great job. One time he lost.
He bought the car for $3,500.00 and paid the guy $1,100.00 and owes $2,400.00 to the plaintiff. Plaintiff hires a lawyer dog, i.e. Steve Lehto, to sue the purchaser for repossession of the vehicle. A two-year endeavor. "A lot of work, for not a lot of result".... How much did it cost the plaintiff in time, court costs, lawyer dog fees, etc. to sue the defendant? A hell of a lot more than $2,400.00 dollars, that's for sure. At $200 an hour, $2,400.00 is only 12 hours of lawyer work.... 2 years the case lasted?
In CA, every car I bought or sold came not only with a title, but also a bill of sale, which states person A has bought vehicle G from person B for $X, and the document is signed and dated by both parties. If the entire price hasn't been paid yet, the Bill of Sale will say how much has been paid and what the remaining payments will be. One guy I sold my 97 Jeep Wrangler to [which I've regretted every day since, but it was 2007 and gas was $5 per gallon and the jeep got 12-16mpg, and my part time job at the time (I was in school so I couldn't work full-time) didn't even pay for the gas it took to get there in the jeep], kept bugging me because I needed $4k to pay off the lien and get the title, and he had paid me $8k for the jeep. So I made 2 copies of the Bill of Sale that explained all of that and told him I would have the title in a week. He didn't want to pay me without getting the jeep, but I couldn't get the title without the money. He was Chinese I think, and barely spoke English and didn't understand any of this. He thought I was trying to pull some kind of scam on him. He had the car, and had paid me $8k for it, and had the bill of sale, but called me every day for the week and a half or so it took to get the title....sometimes multiple times a day. I loved that freaking jeep, those straight 6 4.0L engines were indestructible, and since it had a standard transmission, that was bulletproof too. It only ever had 2 problems: the thermostat was broken when I bought it, but I didn't know because it was stuck open and I lived in Southern California. I did think it was odd that the water temp guage was always below the halfway mark, and inconsistent, but there were no dummy lights and everything worked fine until I moved to upstate NY and wintertime hit...in -20°F the heat guage was pegged at low and my heater didn't work, so I realized the thermostat was broken and fixed it in ice age weather. The other problem was when my friends and I drove up into the San Gabriel mountains above Pasadena one new years when it was raining and romped around in 4WD, trying to get up muddy hills that were way too vertical, and in the process so much pressure built up in the rear diff that the plug flew out, draining all the lubricant out of my rear differential. I didn't notice until a few weeks later when I was on the freeway and heard a really weird noise coming from the rear of the jeep. I knew it was the rear diff, so I took it to a shop and the guy said "how long have you been driving it like this? 3 weeks? It shouldn't have lasted more than a few days like this!" And when he opened up the diff all the gears popped out like they were spring loaded...they were in a million pieces. So I upgraded the diff and drove the thing for 5 more years, romping through trails and the snow...it never gave me another problem. But back in 07 I thought gas would never go back down, and felt it was impractical to spend $80 dollars to go 200-225 miles. So I got a Civic. And then a year later gas was less than $2 a gallon again.
One of my wife's friends, sold her a car before leaving the country. My wife didn't give the NYS DMV the lien release paper, so the new title still showed the lien holder listed. When we traded the car just gave dealer the title with lien and release paper. No issues.
@@terrancecoard388 It gets easier as your brain gets to know where things should be and spots the little things that are out of place ie Ben, just looking around the set while listening to Steve assists that process
Me too, i’m not going to get into great detail. But it occurred in Saline Michigan about 10 years ago. There was no evidence against me, my argument I just brushed aside, and it felt like the judge was just ruling from the bench impromptu. FYI: I’m not a lawyer But is there a legal remedy for this type of judicial behavior?
@@HAASgoggles I think it's very little recourse. In major cities I think you can ask for a change of venue because of conflict. But in small jurisdictions you just have to deal with the good old boy mentality. Also not a lawyer so don't quote me
@@LADETROIT it was over a me not responding to traffic infraction that I was never notified of, because I was not involves, and did not know about until they took my license away for non payment. they could not provide proof of the ticket on the day of the infraction and any proof that they mailed or contacted me about it, the officer involved also was not present. i thought it was an open and shut case, so I did not seek a lawyer, but they wanted my money. can you seek a change of venue on traffic volilations. and can't a hometown judge deny your request? they were very uppity about bringing anything with a camera in the court room and I believe there were a few other out of towners there too, also getting screwed.
@@HAASgoggles scary story. Imagine what they do to non-whites!! With our court system the ability to appeal to a higher court is always a option, but at what cost? Revamping of the entire system is needed.
@@LADETROIT why do you think Black Lives Matter have so many white supporters? The same reason why MLK had so many white supporters and why his last march was the “Poor peoples march“ The easiest way for evil powerful people to control the masses is through fear, hate, and religion. And what better way to utilize fear and hate to maintain power is the turn the majority masses against a weaker minority.
Why couldn't the plaintiff just hire a tow company to repossess the vehicle like a bank? Am I missing something? Does a bank file an exparte motion to repossess before hiring the tow company?
@@a2cryss Stored in a garage is no problem for a good repoman. You simply wait till a nice day when he is in the garage playing with his toy with the garage door open and distract him to the main part of the house. 30 seconds later the car is gone.
