SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the you-just-can't-replace-Harry-Dean-Stanton dept.
The US Federal Trade Commission is investigating an auto lender that often requires subprime borrowers to have so-called GPS starter-interrupter devices enabled on purchased vehicles. The so-called kill switches, which can monitor a vehicle's constant whereabouts, also have the remote ability to shut a car off and to prevent a car from starting. This makes it easy for lenders to repossess the car for missed payments. But this modern-day version of the repo-man raises both safety and privacy concerns.
The Credit Acceptance Corp. of Michigan said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing this month that it received a civil investigative demand from the FTC "seeking information on the Company's policies, practices and procedures in allowing car dealers to use GPS Starter Interrupters on consumer vehicles. We are cooperating with the inquiry and cannot predict the eventual scope, duration or outcome at this time. As a result, we are unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible loss arising from this investigation."
The lender did not immediately respond for comment. There are more than two million of these devices affixed to vehicles on US roads. They are often hidden, and they are required for car buyers with not-so-rosy credit scores as a condition of acquiring a car loan.
The FTC isn't commenting on the probe, which may include other lenders. The investigation likely centers on whether buyers are given adequate notice that the vehicles they are purchasing can track their every move and whether this is an acceptable business practice.
Source: ArsTechnica
(Score: 5, Informative) by NewNic on Friday February 24 2017, @07:26PM
Wrong. This is simply established by asking who takes the risks of ownership? If the car depreciates very quickly, who loses money on this? If the car doesn't depreciate, who gains? This test clearly distinguishes it from a lease, where the lessor takes any loss from higher than expected depreciation.
No, the consumer owns the car and the lender has a lien on the car. That's all.
The UK has something called "hire purchase", in which the consumer rents the car until the loan is paid off, but I don't think that this concept exists in the USA for cars. Also, it's clear that the consumer has not purchased the car, unlike these contracts.
Many jurisdictions make certain contract terms null and void by law, irrespective of what the parties agreed to. That's what may happen here. Just like you cannot sell yourself into slavery.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday February 24 2017, @07:41PM
The concept exists, but it's not a good deal for either party (or wasn't a few decades ago, when I looked into it), so it's almost never used. The only time it might make sense is if you were doing a long term rental of a used car...and thought you might need to keep it for years. Even then you'd want to pay it off early.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.