Oh, hail. Totaled car, confused about buy-back options
It seems like there are  a few different things going on here because there are multiple parties involved with different interests. The car loan almost surely has the car itself as collateral, so, if you stop paying, the bank can claim the car to cover their costs.  Since your car is now totaled, however, that collateral is essentially gone and your loan is probably effectively dead already.  The bank isn't going let you keep the money against a totaled car.  I suspect this is what the adjuster meant when he said you cannot keep the car because of the loan. The insurance company sounds like they're going to pay the claim, but once they pay on a totaled car, they own it.  They have some plan for how they recover partial costs from the wreck.  That may or may not allow you (or anyone else) to buy it from them.  For example, they might have some bulk sale deal with a salvage company that doesn't allow them to sell back to you, they may have liability issues with selling a wrecked car, etc.  Whatever is going on here should be separate from your loan and related to the business model of your insurance company.  If you do have an option to buy the car back, it will almost surely be viewed as a new purchase by the insurances company and your lender, as if you bought a different car in similar condition.
If you are talking straight dollars then leasing is always a losing proposition when compared with purchasing. The financial workings of leasing are so confusing that people don’t realize that leasing invariably costs more than an equivalent   loan. And even if they did, the extra cost is difficult to calculate.   Still, many people can’t afford the higher payments of a typical loan,   at least not without putting a substantial amount down. If payments   are an issue, consider buying a lower-cost vehicle or a reliable used   car. http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/12/buying-vs-leasing-basics/index.htm If you are talking about convenience, lifestyle, ability to purchase a car you could not pay for outright, then you will have to evaluate that. "He sounds like a very bad salesman and I should know, because I was a sales manager at a bike shop which sold bikes from $200 to $10k. Now I had a clear goal, which is to sell as many bikes at the highest price possible, but I didn't do that by making customers uncomfortable. Each customer received different treatment depending on what they were looking for.  For example, the $200 beach cruiser buyer was going to be told ""You look great on that bike... can I ring you up?"", whereas the racer interested in saving grams will receive a detailed discussion about his bike options.  The $200 bike customer won't have very sophisticated questions (although I could give a lecture on cruisers), so giving out too much info complicates a likely quick impulse buy.  On the other hand, we are building a relationship with the racer which will include detailed fitting sessions and time-consuming mechanical service.  While I also want to close a high priced sale, it will take several visits to prove both I have the right bike and this is the best shop. But no matter what you were buying, I was always pleasant and unhurried, and my customers left happy.   Specifically with this situation of high pressure tactics, the problem is the competition with internet sales.  Often customers will have only 2 criteria, the model and the price, and if a shop does not meet both, the customer walks right out.   Possibly this sales guy is a bit cynical with his tactics, but the reality is that if you have no relationship with that shop, you fall into the category of internet buyer.  One thing the sales guy could have done was not tell you we wasn't going to honor this price if you came back.  Occasionally there would be an internet buyer, and I showed no unpleasantness even though internet sellers could crush our brick and mortar shop.  I would mention a competitive price and if he bought it, great, and if not, that's just business.   As for the buyer, I would treat these tactics with a certain detachment.  I would personally chuckle at his treatment and ask if I could kick the tires, an user car saying.   I suppose the bottom line is if you are ready to buy this specific model, and if the price is right (and the shop is ethical so you won't get ripped off with garbage), then you have to be ready to buy on the spot. I will point out one horrible experience I had at a car dealership.  I came in 15 minutes before closing and a sales person gave me a price almost a third cheaper than list.  I wasn't ready to buy on my first visit ever to a dealership and of course, buying a car has all kinds of hidden fees.  I asked will this be the price tomorrow, and he said absolutely not.  I told him, ""so if I come in tomorrow morning, your dealer clock has only gone 15 minutes"" but that logic did not register with him.   Maybe he thought I was going to spend 15k on the spot and pressure tactics would work on me.  I never came back, but I did go another dealership and bought a car after a reasonable negotiation." &gt; In other words, one might conclude based on this data that it's the smartphone, more than any particular transportation service, that's greatly disrupting city mobility... Why haven't official taxi companies (if not cities themselves) invested more time and energy into developing smartphone-based services?  My local taxi service has an app from which one can hail a cab and pay for the ride.  But the app is shittier, the service is worse, and the ride is more expensive.  I swore off of cabs when it cost me more than double to make the trip back compared to what Uber charged me to get there (my phone was dead).  Then I recanted and took a cab from the airport because it was easier than waiting for Uber.  Well, that cost me about a 50% premium and now I've sworn off of cabs again. Your first step is to talk to the current lender and ask about refinancing in the other person's name. The lender is free to say no, and if they think the other person is unlikely to pay it back, they won't refinance. If you're in this situation because the other person didn't qualify for a loan in the first place, the lender probably won't change their mind, but it's still worth asking. From the lender's point of view, you'll be selling the other person the car.  If they qualify for a loan, it's as simple as getting the loan from a bank, then doing whatever is required by your state to sell a car between either private parties or between relatives (depending on who the other person is). The bank might help you with this, or your state's DMV website.  Here are a few options that don't involve changing who is on the loan: Taking out a loan for another person is always a big risk. Banks have entire departments devoted to determining who is a good credit risk, and who isn't, so if a person can't get a loan from a bank, it's usually for a good reason.  One good thing about your situation: you actually bought the car, and are the listed owner. Had you co-signed on a loan in the other person's name, you'd owe the money, but wouldn't even have the car's value to fall back on when they stopped paying. "One part of the equation that I don't think you are considering is the loss in value of the car.  What will this 30K car be worth in 84 months or even 60 months?  This is dependent upon condition, but probably in the neighborhood of $8 to $10K.   If one is comfortable with that level of financial loss, I doubt they are concerned with the investment value of 27K over the loan of 30K @.9%. I also think it sets a bad precedent.  Many, and I used to be among them, consider a car payment a necessary evil.  Once you have one, it is a difficult habit to break.  Psychologically you feel richer when you drive a paid for car.  Will that advantage of positive thinking lead to higher earnings?  Its possible. The old testament book of proverbs gives many sound words of advice.  And you probably know this but it says:  ""...the borrower is slave to the lender"".  In my own experience, I feel there is a transformation that is beyond physical to being debt free." "The question posted was, ""Should I pay off a 0% car loan""? The poster provided a few details: I'm ahead on 0% interest car loan. I don't have to make a payment until October. I currently owe $3,000 and I could pay it all off. Should I do that or leave that money in my savings account that earns 2% interest? The question seems to seek a general rule of thumb for how to behave with smaller debts. And a general rule of thumb could be taken from one of two principles (which seem to be religious camps). The ""free money"" camp believes that you can invest (even small amounts) of money risk-free and receive high returns, tax free, for zero effort. The ""reduce debt"" camp believes that you should pay off debts so that you have the freedom to live your life unfettered. Which religion do you prefer? I tend to prefer paying off debts. The ""free money"" tent wants you to pay the car off over the next 6 months, earning interest. Suppose you can earn 2% interest (.02/12 per month), paying $500 per month for 6 months. So you earn interest on 3000 the first month, 2500, the second month, 2000 the third month, So, are you feeling rich, earning $13.13? How much time did you spending making the 5 additional payments? You could skip coffee once/month and make a bigger difference. The ""reduce debt"" tent would have you pay off the car. Suppose you change your deductible on the car (or drop collision) to save money, and you will also same time by avoid 5 bill payments, But do you still have enough money in your emergency fund, how do you feel about having less insurance coverage, and did you notice the time savings? We really need more information about the poster's situation. The answer should consider the relevant details of the situation to provide an informed response. Here are questions that would enable a response to address the whole situation. Why are these important? Here are a few reasons why the above might be important." I have this exact same issue.  Event the dollar amounts are close.  Here is how I am looking at the problem. Option 1:  Walk away.  Goodbye credit for 7+ years.  Luckily I can operate in cash with the extra $800 per month, but should I have a non medical emergency I might be SOL.  With a family I am not sure I am willing to risk it.  What if my car dies the month after I quit paying and the bank chooses to foreclose?  What if my wife or I lose our job and we have no credit to live? Option 2:  Short sale.  Good if I can let it happen.  I might or might not be on the hook for the balance depending on the state.  If I am on the hook, okay, suck but I could live.  If I am not on the hook, it is going to hurt my credit the same as foreclosure.  It isn't easy, you need an experienced real estate agent and a willing bank.   Option 3:  Keep paying.  I am going for this.  At the moment I can still afford the house even though it is at the expense of some luxuries in my live.  (Cable TV, driving to work, a new computer).  I am wagering the market fixes itself in the next several years.  Should the S hit the fan in most any manner, the mortgage is the first thing I stop paying. I don't know what other options I have.  I can't re-fi; too upside down.  I can't sell; the house isn't worth the mortgage (and I don't have the cash for the balance).  I can't walk away; the credit hit wouldn't be worth the monthly money gain. I have no emotions about the house.  I am in a real bad investment and getting out now seems like a good idea, but I am going to guess that having the house 10 years from now is better than not.  I don't care about the bank at all, nor do I feel I owe them the money because I took the loan.  They assumed risk loaning me the money in the first place.  The minute it gets worse for me than for the bank; I will stop paying. Summary Not much to do without a serious consequence.  I would suggest holding out for the very long term if you feel you can.  The best way to minimize the bad investment is to ride it out and pray it gets better.  I am thinking I am a landlord for the next 10 years. You buy a $100k sport car, but don't buy any insurance. You take a curve too fast and jump out just in time to see your car go off a cliff, like a chase movie. The value went from $100k to zero in seconds. Where did the $100k go?