You can NEVER negate risk on any transaction, under any circumstance. Just ask mortgage lenders. Plenty of triple A rated loans folded in 2008-2012.

THERE IS NO LIEN! AV8R has seen the title. It very clearly states on it if there is a lien on the vehicle.

The only problem here is that the seller did not register the vehicle in his name, for whatever reason... and so does not have a clear title.

There is no mess... seller bought the vehicle and never registered it. He has the title and most likely (though not required) a bill of sale. As long as the VIN on the title matches the VIN on the vehicle... there is no mess, or funny business afoot.

There is no reason to consider any of those circumstances. When you buy a new car and then wreck it... you don't go back to the dealership and try to negotiate getting your money back or repairs. If you buy a used car at a car dealership stickered "as is no warranty" and you then make repairs you eat those costs, the dealership isn't going to reimburse you or refund you. Dealerships use contracts for a reason as well... because they stand up in court.

BTW, in both of those cases (new or used car purchase at a dealer) you aren't going to get the title immediately. You are still going to have to wait for it to come in the mail, trusting that the dealership will register for you, but you still drive off with the vehicle. This is the same process I describe, except with an individual vs. a dealership.

I don't know... I'm extremely confused as well at the considering of the described method of purchase being somehow extremely risky or out of the ordinary... it's not as quick as buying a car with a clear title... but that's about it.

AV8R... sorry this discussion has gone sideways, I was trying to give you advice that might help you secure the vehicle without worry of it being sold out from under you, having the seller wreck it while waiting for the title, or some other unforeseen occurrence that would keep you from getting the X5. The method I describe is nothing new or out of the ordinary. I offered it as a suggestion because it fit the situation you were asking about. Glad the better half looks like she will enjoy the vehicle! It looks to be solid from the pics and your descriptions of it.

I believe you're thinking of a buyers remorse law. Colorado does have such a law but it is not applicable to private party sales. It is also not applicable on transactions conducted at the business. It applies to transactions that occur at the buyers residence. I believe it was put into effect because people felt pressured to buy goods / services from door to door salesmen which they really did not wish to purchase.

Then this whole scenario is irrelevant. Returning the car has nothing to do with the contract method since the car is sold as is and is final. Retuning the vehicle is up soley to the sellers discretion (and highly unlikely). Not to mention I dont see how it would be more messy since the title never changed hands in the first place.

Perhaps I misunderstood your statement but the inference I drew from it was having a solid, contract would negate the risk. If that was not the case then why are you challenging my comments about remaining risk?

Again: My comments are in a general sense (as that's what your advice was).

Having said that merely because the title doesn't show a lien doesn't mean there's not a lien. Are you of the mindset that if someone hands you a check there are always funds available to pay the check?

That we're aware of. On the surface everything looks on the up and up. That doesn't mean it is.

You're confusing two different situations. My example wasn't if you buy a car and wreck it do you have the right to expect the dealer to pay for it. My example was if you buy a vehicle, wreck it, and then have to unwind the deal because of an unrelated issue who covers the repair. Completely different scenarios.

No, you're not. But typically a dealership operates under stricter set of requirements than a private seller and has more resources to work through an issue. For all but the smallest / shadiest dealers they'll have the resources to work through an issue. Furthermore the funds in question typically belong to the business and are not the dealership employees personal assets.

Contrast this to a private party sale...$11K is a lot of money for many people. An amount that can cause problems between normally friendly people when things go wrong.


Who characterized it as extremely risky?

Why are you apologizing? You're not his mother and you're not the representative for everyone on this forum. So stop pretending you owe him anything.

Having said that the difference with this transaction and the majority of other vehicle purchase transactions is there are three parties involved: The original seller (the seller for which the vehicle is currently titled), the new seller (the individual who has the title but for which the title is not in their name), and the OP (as the buyer). The vast majority of vehicle sales only have two parties: The seller (who has a clear title in their name) and the buyer.

The increased risk comes not from the current seller and OP but an incomplete transaction between the original seller and the current seller. Currently the DMV is issuing a title to the current seller. So things are looking positive. That doesn't mean things can't take a turn for the worse.

Let me ask you this: Do you think the DMV was wrong to advise the buyer not to provide full payment for the vehicle prior to the seller receiving the title in his name?

It's relevant in the sense that someone is relying on the terms of the contract to protect the buyer in the event the vehicle has to be returned. In reality, just as you said, the contract, as described by the individual recommending it, doesn't address these situations. It assumes the transaction would be unwound under the same conditions as when it was entered into.

However, as these examples illustrate, that may not be the case. A buyer could invest money into a vehicle which may have to be returned to the seller. According to the contract the seller receives the vehicle back and the buyer his purchase money. All nice and tidy...no harm, no foul. Except what about the money the seller invested? Is the seller OK with returning a vehicle back to the seller after having just invested $1,000 (made up for purposes of illustration)? Or will the buyer expect to be compensated for that money? After all he invested money into a vehicle he believed to be his. Will the seller be willing to compensate the buyer for that investment? After all the seller will now receive the benefit of the investment? Or will the seller argue he didn't have any part of the decision of the buyer to invest the money and therefore shouldn't be obligated to compensate the buyer for the buyers sole decision?

These are risks in almost every vehicle transaction for which a clean title has not yet been issued to the buyer. What makes this situation riskier than others is a new title hasn't been issued to the current seller. The OP has no insight into the transaction between the current seller and the seller prior to that. Therefore the OP is not in a position to evaluate a transaction that doesn't involve him but ultimately could negatively affect him.

You continue to buy/sell vehicles any way you see fit. I was giving him advice to his situation, on a TX sale, which I have experience with (15 vehicles now).

I apologized because he asked for advice, it was given, and now he has a page and a half of back and forth. You may not care about respect towards others, but I certainly do. This is not my thread... so I apologized. If you would like to start a new thread so we can continue to go back and forth... great.

My opinion
 

Hey guys,
Let's ratchet this down a notch.
I appreciate everyone's opinion.
I WILL NOT buy this X5 until the seller has HIS name in the title.
I WILL NOT put any deposit money down.

As per Texas law, if you purchase a vehicle without a VALID CLEAR title,
You are purchasing very expensive (and in this case) very beautiful yard art.

Yes, there are ways to get the X5 other than my requirements.
I'm opting for the safe approach.

Way too many variables involved between (as stated earlier) 3 parties involved.

If this deal goes through, great!
If it doesn't, it wasn't meant to be.

Unless one of you is a licensed attorney for the country of Texas this is a dick dance.

Guys the title is clean, the only issue is that the seller doesn't have a title in HIS name yet. He claims that he transferred it to his name, so now just wait until he gets the title, verify that it's in his name, and then buy it it's as simple as that. Why is this so complicated lol.

You are somewhat correct.
A CLEAN title in the state of Texas is a title of the OWNER of the car.
In my case the title is in a DIFFERENT name than the OWNER.

Therefore, the seller, (also needs to be the OWNER) does NOT have a CLEAN title.

My seller is trying to sell a vehicle that the state recognizes it to be a different
OWNER.

Where I live its verboten to sell a motor vehicle if you don't own it.
A bill of sale means nothing here.