Ford Motor Credit Company They repossessed my car even though my payments were current! Pasadena, California

1:Contact a Consumer Attorney
2: Have your full history of payments showing you met term for this particular loan and were never late or paid partials or ever attempted to modify loan payments.
3: Pull your credit reports to see how it was reporting
4: Have your method of payment (canceled checks, electronic payment) receipts.
5: Bring your loan agreement.
6:Leave your emotions at the door step. Think clearly.
7.And yes- its feasible that OTHER FINANCIAL institutions follow procedures for repo'n. It doesn't make it UNETHICAL. Learn business ethics verses you speaking as a customer.
8: Society or generational upbringing are irrelevant on this particular matter.


Ps- Jim in Orlando- you are silly, hope you meant that as a comic relief comment

Ambulance chaser? Is that what you think lawyers are? Talk about small minded! Go ahead and get mad...I'll have you know I DO NOT chase ambulances! Never have...never will. I own some!

On the face of it, yes, it smacks of being unethical for the lender to repossess the vehicle without some kind of pre-notification or due process, when the payments are technically up to date.
HOWEVER, off the face of it, the repossessing lender expects to get less than is still owed to them upon disposing of the vehicle, due to depreciation. Given that, then they see the payments made to date as simply part of the compensation they figure will still be due them when they sell the vehicle.
It still smells to me, but I'm assuming this plays a part in their legal right to do what they did.
And, it doesn't account for if they end up getting as much, or more, than they were still owed by you when they sell. In a normal repossession, I believe the borrower would be owed that difference back from them, and maybe you would be. I don't know how bankruptcy plays into that.
So what's the big shot attorney doing for you regarding this. No matter how you slice it, in the general consensus, it keeps coming back to the ambulance chaser.

She is saying that she just claimed bankruptcy and did not fall behind on her payments (again, smart move, as it is secured debt). I am not up on all the legal aspects, but others have said she did not reaffirm the debt and thus they took it. 

Look, I get that the auto company was within their rights, but it really looks like the OP was trying to do the right thing here. Whether she got shafted by Ford, her lawyer, ignorance, or whatever, she is not like the typical deadbeat that comes on here and talks about how mean their creditors are for not cutting them some slack. So I feel for her (and I am usually pretty harsh). 

I truly understand what youre saying.  But I dont think you understand me!  I know Ford was within their RIGHTS.  Im not disputing that.  I know the attorney SHOULD have paid close attention to what was going on, especially since this case was a little unique in that a family death occurred almost simultaneously with the discharge. 

Im merely saying that I believe that accepting payments AND repossessing a car is an UNETHICAL business practice!  Would any of you that own a business really do this to a customer even though it may be, within your rights?  Why are other corporations, banks, etc. offering programs like loan modifications, lowering interest rates, etc?  Theyre doing it because its a good will gesture and reflects positively on their businesses. ... and it's just the plain right thing to do.  

Im not stupid, I know they dont HAVE to be nice, but since their slogan implies, Ford Cares, they are really going to do this to their customer and former longtime employee?  Why dont the other financial institutions accept payments AND repo the car?  Because its bad business and unethical!

Many of you have proved my point that this is what this country has come to.  No one wants to Do
the right thing.   That means treating each other fairly and with respect.  This is why we have kids running around today with a sense of entitlement.  The attitude of Let me screw you before you screw me!

I dont care what some of you say.  If this is not a rip off, I would like an example of what is.  Do you mean paying for something you didn't get?  Isn't that what happened here?  This is a perfect example of Ford doing the wrong thing!  

AUTHOR: Jim - Orlando (USA)
SUBMITTED: Tuesday, March 13, 2012

If Ford was served with a notice the borrower has filed a BK, then it would have been illegal for them to contact the borrower at all. We are then back to the same bottom line...your atty. If you told your atty you wanted to reaffirm this debt and your atty failed to perform, then you have a clear cut case against the atty.

------My Response_------(Righteous1)
Its NOT illegal to contact the Lendee. Its illegal to attempt to collect. HUGE Difference.

The Creditor (FORD) had the right to appeal any inclusion into the Bankruptcy proceedings. The Trustee (mediator) for the account would then need to show irrefutable proof that the Lendee has no collateral or future funds to meet this satisfaction of debt. This Poster is casting shame and blame on a CORPORATION , which the Poster WILLING signed to pay back the debt . They fell behind and that in itself allows the creditor to attempt collection or repo. Its a FACT. Stop it with the "gee they could have called or contacted me". Nope! No where in the LOAN agreement does it say they MUST CONTACT you PRIOR or DURING proceedings to repo. Its called THEIR TERMS and you agreed to them.  You don't get to PICK AND CHOOSE WHICH DEBTS you can pay or exclude from Bankruptcy ....the COURT APPOINTED TRUSTEE is to present ALL DEBTS and assets for the judge to determine your levels of payments and exclusions. Were you even there DURING THE DISCHARGE proceedings???? Seriously ...I am appalled that as a consumer who made a life changing decision to file BANKRUTCY can be so ignorant and think this Lender Owes them..??? You still had a debt, they claimed the only asset...the car. Bury your pride and think with your head. You have more choices to make ...fight this in court...or work with the Creditor for a satisfaction of this debt....Good Luck, because overall you do seem to care about your financials and making good on your debts...

If Ford was served with a notice the borrower has filed a BK, then it would have been illegal for them to contact the borrower at all. We are then back to the same bottom line...your atty. If you told your atty you wanted to reaffirm this debt and your atty failed to perform, then you have a clear cut case against the atty.

Could it just possibly be that there is really not an attorney involved here ????????

But the cash for clunkers program was absolutely a subsidy for the dealers, AND the buyers. "Bailout" is way too strong a word. 

But that is irrelevant, just as it is when people complain about banks treating them poorly even though they received bailouts. You can have a problem with the bailouts themselves, but there is no reason for a business to do anything less than profitable because of them; in fact, the reason FOR bailouts is because the company was not being profitable enough! 

All that being said, I really feel for the OP or not. No matter who is at fault (Ford, lawyer, etc) they go the shaft. 

Like it or not, Ford did not perpetrate any "rip off" here.

They acted within their legal rights as well as the terms of your loan agreement.

(But who actually reads those agreements, right??)



People often expect big business to give special, individual consideration.

Simply put, that's never gonna happen.

You are simply an account number at Ford. Nothing more.



As far as the cash for clunkers deal.

You are wrong again.

That money was sent to the dealer, IN CARE OF the buyer.



Get your facts straight.

Get a reality check.



The real rip off report should have been written against your lawyer!

 It is comforting to know the Team Rebutt knows all the answers. I'm so happy:)~

Would suck hard having your car repo'd when you are current on payments. I mean, paying your secured debts first is always the smart play. 

That being said, stop with the "you all must work for Ford" crap. Ford does not care. 

Throughout these post you have stated that the Trustee didn't notify your attorney.  You stated that Ford didn't talk to your attorney.  You have stated that your attorney didn't even know the status of your case.  You have stated that your attorney knew that Ford does this, but they didn't tell you.

Do you notice a trend?

So why do you seem to be set on blaming Ford and so against going after your attorney?

When the debtor files a BK, its a big, giant sized red flag. They get extremely concerned about the security for the loan, the car. They also know it is possible the debtor may wish to reaffirm the loan and the debtor's atty will contact them. In your case, there as no contact and therefore they assumed you did not wish to do that and they picked up the car. Could they have called? Yes. The puzzling thing here is any atty who has done a BK will ask the client about secured debts like a car loan and then begin the reaffirmation process. For whatever the reason, your atty screwed up! Every atty carries E and O insurance...Errors and Omissions. I've not seen any of your paperwork but from just based on what you said, my advice would be for you to run this by another atty. DO NOT assume one atty will not go up against another atty...that is patently not true! You will need to determine what your damages are. Bad credit will not be one of them because a BK ruined it anyway. I would contact your county bar association and ask them for a list of atty's who are experienced in defending clients in an atty malpractice matter.

Actually I have owned a business for 9 years and I would NEVER treat a PAYING customer the way Ford treated usmuch yet a long time, loyal employee.  If this means I have no business sense Guilty!

You are not getting the POINT.  The point is that they did not HAVE to do this.  If they really CARED, like they claim in their advertising they would not have this practice of repossessing cars that are paid current.  Like I said, it would take less than 5 minutes for them to, AS A COURTESY, to pick up the phone, call the attorney and say, We understand your client has filed for BK, however their payments are current.  Do they intend to keep their vehicle?  Please be sure to fine a reaffirmation agreement.   

But they instead take the money AND the car!  Legal?  Yes.  Ethical?  No.  Good business practice?  Absolutely not!  

Actually the payment for the Cash For Clunkers program goes to the dealership.  Like I said my husband worked at Ford for many years. 

Yes it was discharged.  However it remained open because of a death in the family and the trustee had to check out any possible inheritance.
- Based on what you have said it really can't be both.  Once it is discharged that means you are no longer legally responsible for any discharged debt.  The only way it would be re-opened is if the trustee felt their was fraud on your part that was found out after the discharge.  But if you were up front with the courts BEFORE it was discharged I could see the trustee keeping it open until the issue with the inheritance was resolved.  Also, if it is still open and you were current most likely the Court ordered Stay was still in effect, meaning that Ford probably needed permission of the court to repossess it, which again your attorney should have been notified of.

Yes, I know ... some of you "Ford" people will want me to know sue the government!
- Next, while I doubt the trustee didn't notify your attorney.  If in fact that did happen, your attorney should be taking the initiative to handle their blunder.  Third, as others stated if your attorney knew that Ford did this, if they did not inform you from the beginning they appear to have failed again. 

What we see here is the typical response of someone who cannot offer a rebuttle to your point. What you will usually see are the inane comments such as "who do you think you are" or more often here "you must work for them". Class, when you deal with people who don't much business sense, you can expect that kind of a response. You see, their business experience and business sense is limited otherwise they would realize how foolish they sound. I expect you to be much better than this. Understand, it is possible for someone to make. An excellent point. In that case, the smart response would be to say "you have a point" or "perhaps I should check into that" or simply say nothing. Those responses are reasonable and well thought out. To accuse the other person of working for the other party just gives away you own level of small mindedness. Now class, let's take a 15 minute break and when we come back we will talk about basic personal bankruptcy and what your responsibility is as well as that of your client.

Only Chrysler and GM got federal bailout money.  Cash for Clunkers had nothing to do with that.  It was an economic stimulus plan to get consumers to purchase new, fuel efficient vehicles.  I'm not positive, but I believe that cash went to the consumer.  At the time of purchase, the consumer had the option to keep the cash or use it as a down payment on their new purchase.  And I have to agree with the others, your beef should be with your attorney.  I don't condone what Ford Motor Credit did, but it appears they were well within their rights.

"YOU'RE WRONG!
AUTHOR: NoFordsAgain - Elk Grove (United States of America)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, March 11, 2012POSTED: Sunday, March 11, 2012
Ford did take advantage of the federally funded Cash for Clunkers! So yes, they utilized Federal
funds. I call THAT a bailout!
Sounds like you work for Ford..."

But this looks like your weak attempt to shift blame for your troubles.

BTW, since you consider this to be a Federal bailout, what company are you going to patronize next? According to your thinking they are ALL guilty.

You DID say you would never buy another Ford....right?

Most Ripoff Report filers, when they've run out of logical/reasoned arguments, resort to accusing the Rebuttal writers of being employees of whatever company they are currently ranting against.
It just makes the OP look stupid.

We filed chapter 7.  Yes it was discharged.  However it remained open because of a death in the family and the trustee had to check out any possible inheritance.  The trustee closed the matter without letting the attorney know.  

Yes, I know ... some of you "Ford" people will want me to know sue the government!

Ford could have easily picked up the phone and called our attorney to ask if we planned to reaffirm, since they were still receiving current payments.  No, the law does not REQUIRE them to do this, but you would think that a company that advertises how much they CARE would.  I'm sure it took more time for them to process all the voluntary payments we made then to pick up a phone and make a quick call! 

What they did may not have been illegal, but it is very much a RIP OFF and its also HEARTLESS and very UNcaring!   Why are the banks willing to help people with loan modifications in these trying
times and Ford is willing to continue with this practice?  Especially to one of their longtime loyal employees!  Ford couldn't possibly CARE LESS!

An earlier responder to your matter asked an important question. There are Legal reasons for asking if the Bankruptcy filed under Chapter 7 . 11, or 13. It makes a difference. Was it discharged?

Bottom line is as earlier stated - Without affirming this secured loan, they followed their rights to repo.

Did you at any point receive a 1099 for this ? How long ago was the BK filed ?

Ford did take advantage of the federally funded Cash for Clunkers!  So yes, they utilized Federal
funds.  I call THAT a bailout!

Sounds like you work for Ford...

It is common knowledge with experienced BK attorney firms that FMCC will reposses once you file bankruptcy even with your payments being current. They do not reaffirm. FMCC will not allow "ride through's either. Your attorney should have warned you when you interviewed him in the beginning. FMCC is hard core. They will accept your payments, but also take back the vehicle. I'm sorry you had to experience this event, but it was the duty of your attorney to let you know before you filed.

The only "glitch" in this process seems to be your lawyer if they didn't even know what was going on with your case.  Perhaps that is where you should be concentrating your efforts.

As side questions.  What Chapter did you file?  When you say your case was "closed".  Does that mean that you withdrew the petition, it was closed by the courts(no discharge granted), or it was discharged?

I called my lawyer and due to a mix up (he thought that our bankruptcy case was still open, however it had been closed) he did not have us sign the reaffirmation agreement with Ford.  He went on to explain to me that Ford can repossess my car even though my payments are current.

Let me repeat a part of this that is important:  he did not have us sign the reaffirmation agreement with Ford.

This is why they repossessed the vehicle.  When you file bankruptcy with a secured debt such as an auto loan, you are given a choice:  the lien holder repossesses the vehicle or you sign a reaffirmation agreement for the vehicle loan.  You did NOT sign the reaffirmation with the lender, hence they repossessed the vehicle.

Seems to me your complaint should be about the attorney who represented you in bankruptcy court.

Ford DID NOT take a government "bail out"!

When you did the BK, did you tell your attorney about the open account on the car? If you did and the attorney messed up then you need to go after him.