Motorcycle that I bought has a Lien

[ungoloth]

A few years ago my mom gifted me her 2006 F150.
Unfortunately the truck was involved in a total loss collision years later.
The insurance company informed me they cannot pay out unless the lien is cleared. My mom and I were shocked!
It turns out Elliot Lake Ford sold my mom a used truck with a lien.

All it took in this instance was to call the company holding the lien and explain the situation.
it turns out they were not even aware of the lien as the company changed hands.
A letter was sent from the lien folks to myself and insurance co. Claiming they have no further interest in the truck and consider the lien cleared.
I was then paid out asap. An eye opener.

 

[OntFF]

It's like never hearing of a registered nurse getting charged for not providing aid to an injured person on the road (which by law you have to, you have to provide first-aid). All I have to do is walk away and nobody will ever know.

Not to derail the thread, but there's no duty to provide first aid under Canadian law... The good Samaritan act protects those that do provide first aid (within certain contexts) but beyond a duty to summon help ("I called for help, but no one heard me....") - that's all that's required legally.

There's no legal duty for medical professionals to act or provide aid; the moral dilemma is a little more of a grey area.

 

[nobbie48]

Not to derail the thread, but there's no duty to provide first aid under Canadian law... The good Samaritan act protects those that do provide first aid (within certain contexts) but beyond a duty to summon help ("I called for help, but no one heard me....") - that's all that's required legally.

There's no legal duty for medical professionals to act or provide aid; the moral dilemma is a little more of a grey area.

On a ride many years ago there was a single bike crash resulting in a minor concussion. A medic passing by stopped to help. A first responder I know mentioned that many won't because if anything goes wrong they would be held to a higher standard than an untrained person.

A USA thing but the actor Jan Michael Vincent was in a crash and tried suing the paramedics because he suffered permanent disabilities. On duty the legal bills would be paid by the employer. Off duty could be questionable.

 

[Lightcycle]

On a ride many years ago there was a single bike crash resulting in a minor concussion. A medic passing by stopped to help. A first responder I know mentioned that many won't because if anything goes wrong they would be held to a higher standard than an untrained person.

A USA thing but the actor Jan Michael Vincent was in a crash and tried suing the paramedics because he suffered permanent disabilities. On duty the legal bills would be paid by the employer. Off duty could be questionable.

In Canada, the Good Samaritan Law applies equally to non-medical professionals and medical professionals equally. They suffer no additional repercussions if they render aid voluntarily and things go sideways.

The only difference on a provincial level is Quebec, which legally requires a medical professionals to render aid in a life-threatening situation. But they are still protected under Good Samaritan laws.

 

[OntFF]

On a ride many years ago there was a single bike crash resulting in a minor concussion. A medic passing by stopped to help. A first responder I know mentioned that many won't because if anything goes wrong they would be held to a higher standard than an untrained person.

A USA thing but the actor Jan Michael Vincent was in a crash and tried suing the paramedics because he suffered permanent disabilities. On duty the legal bills would be paid by the employer. Off duty could be questionable.

As a former medical first responder, and first aid instructor - if I could drive one point home with my students... if someone comes up and identifies themselves as a Doctor at an incident - be sure they're an MD... Odds are better than average they aren't.

When a "medical professional" officially assumes care for a patient, they are then legally obligated to maintain that care until relieved by a "higher medical authority". So an MD assuming care of a patient at a car wreck, for instance, cannot be relieved by firefighters or EMTs and is technically responsible until the patient is in care of another Doctor at the hospital.

The other issues medical professionals have is with the good samaritan laws - yes, they are protected if they operate within their scope and practice; but being trained to place a trach in the controlled environment of a hospital is a lot different then pulling out a swiss army knife and a pen-tube on the side of a highway and popping a hole in someone's throat. That difference offers plenty of room for lawyers to do their law-talking thing...

I have been named in lawsuits several times, from car accidents to fires, to try and shift a portion of liability (and the resulting monetary responsibility) from one insurer to another...

 

[nobbie48]

As a former medical first responder, and first aid instructor - if I could drive one point home with my students... if someone comes up and identifies themselves as a Doctor at an incident - be sure they're an MD... Odds are better than average they aren't.

When a "medical professional" officially assumes care for a patient, they are then legally obligated to maintain that care until relieved by a "higher medical authority". So an MD assuming care of a patient at a car wreck, for instance, cannot be relieved by firefighters or EMTs and is technically responsible until the patient is in care of another Doctor at the hospital.

The other issues medical professionals have is with the good samaritan laws - yes, they are protected if they operate within their scope and practice; but being trained to place a trach in the controlled environment of a hospital is a lot different then pulling out a swiss army knife and a pen-tube on the side of a highway and popping a hole in someone's throat. That difference offers plenty of room for lawyers to do their law-talking thing...

I have been named in lawsuits several times, from car accidents to fires, to try and shift a portion of liability (and the resulting monetary responsibility) from one insurer to another...

A few years ago there was a serious crash right in front of me and I was the first to call 911. As I was checking on the first driver and talking to dispatch someone in the crowd identified themself as some form of medic.

I asked dispatch if they wanted me to turn the situation over to a more knowledgeable person and they said no, reinforcing your thoughts.

Fortunately while both cars would be write offs the drivers were ok.

 

[mimico_polak]

surprised to hear Service Ontario would not let me register the bike in my name until the lean was clear" "bank that had the lien and they wouldn't let me pay off the lien"

So am I. When I bought a bike with a lien all they said is ‘this bike has a lien, you can register it but we don’t recommend it until it’s lien free so you don’t get in a poo show’.

Since I’m the one that paid off the lien, I went ahead with it anyway. No issues.

 

[ToSlow]

Anyone know what happened with the OP if they made out okay with the bike?

 

[nobbie48]

Wouldn't it be a "civil matter"? I know friends who have worked for shady companies and have not gotten paid and have called cop from the company's office and the cops tell them "sue him in court, it's a civil matter, have a nice day".

If I was the OP I would transfer it to my name, plate it and ride it. The lien company seems like they don't care about getting paid. Who in hell (who is owed money) doesn't accept money from a stranger to pay that debt? OP plate it and enjoy it.

As far as riding it with a lien what's the potential loss?

I'm guessing if it gets scooped by a repo tow truck the registered owner (OP) would be responsible for the tow and storage charges. That could involve paying off the lien as well, as a condition of release. At $100 a day things go south fast. OUCH.

It's a dirty trick but if the OP wants to ride it but limit his potential losses, sell the bike to a wino with the provision he lets OP ride it. OP pays all the costs of safety, insurance (OP as prime rider), UVIP etc. Wino gets some liquid compensation. If anything goes wrong they sue a guy named Louie and he lives in a laneway somewhere in the east end. Similarly, having an accident liability claim that exceeds the policy coverage.

IIRC OP can get signed in on the insurance so he gets notified of renewals and doesn't have to ride dirty.

Just hope someone doesn't find the bike was once owned or ridden by Marlin Brando, Steve McQueen, Peter Fonda etc and is now worth a zillion dollars and OP can't touch it. Wino drinks himself to death on $10,000 bottles of Scotch.

It gets interesting if this is taken to silly extremes. The OP can sell off accessories like wheels, motor, body panels and electrics with the supposed intention of replacing them with better stuff when he gets around to it but selling the frame is in essence, selling the bike.

Going stupid silly, if it got bloody minded and OP decided to go fishing, using the frame as an anchor, and before the rode gets tied onto the frame, it falls overboard in 600 feet of water. Who is responsible for the recovery?

What are the terms of the loan? Is there a provision that if payments get behind the rate goes to 29%

Now if it was the evening before garbage day and the OP, not thinking, left the frame out on the front lawn near the garbage cans and a metal scrapper came along and stole it, who does the lien fall on. You could call the police and report the theft if you want to hear them laughing so hard they choked on their donuts.

I'm in a silly mood. I just remembered you can't undrill holes in walnut.

 

[bitzz]

who does the lien fall on.

The lien is, and always will be, on the bike, not the registered owner. The bike is pledged as collateral on a loan. I don't think you really understand what that means. The entity that holds the lien has the right to repossess the bike to sell to recover the loan AND resonable expenses to recover the debt (like Repo and subsequent storage). If OP buys the bike he is not assuming the loan, but the lien holder has prior claim to the bike, the lien holder's rights precedes the new owner's rights

 

[nobbie48]

The lien is, and always will be, on the bike, not the registered owner. The bike is pledged as collateral on a loan. I don't think you really understand what that means. The entity that holds the lien has the right to repossess the bike to sell to recover the loan AND resonable expenses to recover the debt (like Repo and subsequent storage). If OP buys the bike he is not assuming the loan, but the lien holder has prior claim to the bike, the lien holder's rights precedes the new owner's rights

That agrees with most of my suppositions. The lien holder has the right to repo the bike, regadless of the name on the title. The lien holder can sell the bike to cover expenses and if there is any money left over it should go to the registered owner. However if the sale fails to cover the lien and recovery costs does the lien holder go after the original purchaser or the registered owner or is that the lien holder's loss?

The UVIP in hand before buying makes things so simple.

 

[EX500R2001]

That agrees with most of my suppositions. The lien holder has the right to repo the bike, regadless of the name on the title. The lien holder can sell the bike to cover expenses and if there is any money left over it should go to the registered owner. However if the sale fails to cover the lien and recovery costs does the lien holder go after the original purchaser or the registered owner or is that the lien holder's loss?

The UVIP in hand before buying makes things so simple.

Unfortunately, UVIP is not always up-to-date. Once, I bought a bike, UVIP showed lien, but the seller actually paid off the loan 5 months ago! He gave me original title release papers. By the time I was reselling the bike, UVIP was cleaned up.
My concern would be the other way around. What if a bike has lien, but UVIP does not reflect it yet?