Legal advice: Sold car to a minor and now dad wants to sue

here's some free legal advice:if he sues, you losetake the car back and return the moneyyour state will issue a replacement title

neanderthal dream wrote:

They have nothing to back up their claim and it becomes my word against theirs.

don't they have the car and the title - which you signed? looks like pretty strong evidence against you

Consult an attorney in your area. Contract law is state law and varies from state to state.

You will have two problems enforcing the contract. One is that minors are generally considered to be incompetent to enter into contracts. Contracts with minors are voidable. The second problem you will have is the statute of frauds. In most states, a contract for goods worth more than $500 must be in writing to be enforceable. That leaves you with equitable remedies like quantum meruit.

If you can get the car and the money back, that might be a path of least resistance.

You should have done this research prior to the sale. I am still confused why anyone would enter into this type of agreement with a minor for cash. Nothing good can ever come from that.

Give the money back, call it a learning experience, and move on. It's a pretty simple fix.

get used to it. wrote:

Give them the money back and take the car back. It isn't a legal sale.

I don't really understand this. Kids buy things all the time. How does any retailer ever sell anything to anyone under the age of 18? Should Qdoba have to card everyone who buys a burrito to make sure that they aren't entering a contract with a minor?

how does that work? wrote:

I don't really understand this. Kids buy things all the time. How does any retailer ever sell anything to anyone under the age of 18? Should Qdoba have to card everyone who buys a burrito to make sure that they aren't entering a contract with a minor?

This is what frustrates me. The kid knew a lot about cars and knew exactly what he was doing. There's no minimum age to purchase a car, like there is with guns. I never would have thought the law would treat a minor so irrationally in this case.

See how much hassle this is?

Court, perjury, false police reports. Just offer to buy the car back, and then sell it again. If it was a great price you'll have no problem getting the money back. It's a hassle but much better than drawing it out or even potentially making this a long term hassle. Choose your battles. Chalk it up as a learning experience, not to do legal contracts with children.

What was the sale price?

Don't say that this not the issue. The amount of $ it will take to dispose of this issue is certainly a factor.

genuine random a hole wrote:

What was the sale price?

Don't say that this not the issue. The amount of $ it will take to dispose of this issue is certainly a factor.

Less than $1000

I know it doesn't sound like much, but I put it all to student loans and it would be somewhat painful to come up with it again on the spot.

$1.50 or $999.00 ?

Let's say you have to take it back and refund them.

Since it was a cash transaction it would be really hard to prove how much you received for it.

That's where the buyers are going to have trouble in court.

neanderthal dream wrote:

Ooops wrote:

The only one who hasn't scammed anyone is the very person you accuse of scamming.

Surely you must be trolling. The car was purchased with the dad's money, he obviously knew what was going on.

Why was it purchased with the Dad's money? Maybe the kid got some big birthday money. Maybe he deals weed on the side.

You messed up and sold the car to someone who wasn't legally able to buy it. Just suck it up and take the car back. Your entire defense appears to consist of assuming things that you can't prove to be true and lying about the rest. This will not end well.

If they do a google search or hear of you posting this - they

1) would have proof (ironic isn't it)

2) perjury on your part in a court in front of a judge

you really want to take this risk.

it is funny that people think they can lie and are even willing to do so only because they think others can't prove otherwise.

Everyone who thinks the kid totaled the car raise your hand

+1

I realize you're afraid of being screwed. This is less than by the book, but it looks like you will not just ignore them. Repay the original price less $200, saying you're generous to give this since it's been three weeks. There's no proof of the original price, and it suspect the parents would rather accept renting a car with full insurance for three weeks at $200 than going to court over that amount.

mdvf9-n2937 wrote:

Everyone who thinks the kid totaled the car raise your hand

+1

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.

The kid must've done something really stupid. If it's 3 weeks after the sale, the dad surely knew about the car unless the kid was hiding it. If the OP truly wants to fight this battle for less than $1000, I'd ask the dad when he knew about the car and if he consented to the kid buying it after the purchase was made. Maybe that puts him in some type of ownership. There also might be some kind of law where the dad gives implied consent if his kid purchases something like a car and the dad knows but does nothing about it. f the dad called 2 years after the sale to demand a refund of the car, I kind of think the court would side with the OP.

If you want to fight this, I'd also ask the dad for the right to inspect his insurance records. If he's any kind of smart, he immediately insured that car. If he insured it, then he obviously knew about the car and you could probably show that he consented to the kid having it.

For the record, my advice is to buy the car back if it's in the same condition as you sold it. You'll surely lose more than $1000 worth of time, money and sanity battling the guy in court. I think OP should also ask a lawyer if he's liable at this very moment for that kid driving the car due to the illegal sale. If that's the case, you ought to go get it ASAP.

mdvf9-n2937 wrote:

Everyone who thinks the kid totaled the car raise your hand

+1

This is exactly what came to mind when I read this. And I don't blame the OP for trying to screw the dad over, as the timing and all is sketchy AF on his part. OP just needs to find a reasonable way to do it without perjuring himself. Given the amount in question is less than 1k and the circumstances are pretty shady for the plaintiff, I doubt the judge would award him "treble damages" or really any kind of punitive award, so why not put up a fight and make this a learning lesson for the other side too?

Your username is truly representative of your intellectual ability.

Thank you and everyone else for the rational responses.

After all the input and having time to think it over, I'm going to offer to buy it back less $300 with the plan to go to court if he doesn't accept. I'll negotiate somewhat if he's willing. If the car isn't in the same condition as when I sold it, he's welcome to take me to court.

I'll be honest in court and try to argue that giving his son money for the car makes him the buyer. The dad told me on the phone the money was his, so that is his own confession and not my assumption.

jerrry wrote:

If they do a google search or hear of you posting this -

I've been intentionally vague about the details. I think taking legal action to find out my identity would go above and beyond the scope of this case. It's a calculated risk.