[ Post New Message | Post Reply to this One | Send Private Email to Lee | Help ]

Response to money order judgement.

from Lee (repossession@bigfoot.com)
In reply to Charles below...

You are right but you are describing the lender's perfect scenario, where all legal action always works in the lender's favour and where the victims always have enough assets or income to cover the costs that the lender incurs during any action it takes.

In reality, lenders do not usually have the luxury of being sure that the repossessee will not bring up a valid argument against the lender (at which point, the lender may start to have to pay costs). If those costs are subtracted from the total winnings the lender eventually obtains, they may leave the lender's final profit from the action too small for the action to have been worthwhile. Indeed, going to court against a fighter is so expensive that the lender may well end up making a loss.

Then you have to factor in the income/asset problem. Most repossessees do not have much income or assets. So whatever the lender wins in court and whatever costs are run up, the only sources of cash to pay it is what the repossessee has and, after that, what the lender has. In other words, the lender will pick up the rest of the bill themselves.

So in the end, the whole process of suing may actually *cost* the lender more than it earns them - even if they are 100% right. Which is why they threaten so much and are so careful to assess your economic situation before they decide to sue (read the rest of the site for a more detailed explanation of this).

Put briefly, borrowers and repossessees think this is about which laws are valid. But lenders it is about whether or not the economics are valid. That is why you should always fight if you have any doubts about what happened to you.

Lee

(posted 8618 days ago)

[ Previous | Next ]