Name first on car loan can you also be the cosigner
"I want to first state that I'm not an attorney and this is not a response that would be considered legal advice.  I'm going to assume this was a loan was made in the USA.  The OP didnt specify.   A typical auto loan has a borrower and a co-borrower or ""cosigner"".  The first signer on the contract is considered the ""primary"".  As to your question about a primary being a co-borrower my answer would be no.  Primary simply means first signer and you can't be a first signer and a co-borrower.  Both borrower and co-borrower, unless the contract specifies different, are equally responsible for the auto loan regardless if you're a borrower or a co-borrower (primary or not primary).     I'm not sure if there was a situation not specified that prompted the question.  Just remember that when you add a co-borrower their positive and negative financials are handled equally as the borrower.  So in some cases a co-borrower can make the loan not qualify.   (I worked for an auto finance company for 16 years)"
You're driving a car worth about $6000 which has a $12,000 loan against it. You're driving around in a nett debt of $6000. The best thing your grandfather could do for you, if possible, is to take your name off both the title and the loan, refinancing the car in his name only. If possible while still letting you drive the car. When he dies, you will be out of a car, but also out of a $12,000 debt which I'm sure you could do without. Okay, the best thing your grandfather could do, from your wallet's point of view, is paying off the loan for you and then taking his name off the title. "I am not sure how anyone is answering this unless they know what the loan was for.  For instance if it is for a house you can put a lien on the house.  If it is for the car in most states you can take over ownership of it.   Point being is that you need to go after the asset.   If there is no asset you need to go after you ""friend"".  Again we need more specifics to determine the best course of action which could range from you suing and garnishing wages from your friend to going to small claims court.  Part of this process is also getting a hold of the lending institution.  By letting them know what is going on they may be able to help you - they are good at tracking people down for free. Also the lender may be able to give you options.  For example if it is for a car a bank may help you clear this out if you get the car back plus penalty.  If a car is not in the red on the loan and it is in good condition the bank turns a profit on the default.  If they can recover it for free they will be willing to work with you.  I worked in repo when younger and on more than a few occasions we had the cosigner helping.  It went down like this... Co-signer gets pissed like you and calls bank, bank works out a plan and tells cosigner to default, cosigner defaults, banks gives cosigner rights to repo vehicle, cosigner helps or actually repos vehicle, bank gets car back, bank inspects car, bank asks cosigner for X amount (sometimes nothing but not usually), cosigner pays X, bank does not hit cosigners credit, bank releases loan and sells car.  I am writing this like it is easy but it really requires that asset is still in good condition, that cosigner can get to the asset, and that the ""friend"" still is around and trusts cosigner.  I have seen more than a few cosigners promise to deliver and come up short and couple conspiring with the ""friend"".   I basically think most of the advice you have gotten so far is crap and you haven't provided enough info to give perfect advice.  Seeking a lawyer is a joke.  Going after a fleeing party could eat up 40-50 billable hours.  It isn't like you are suing a business or something.  The lawyer could cost as much as repaying the loan - and most lawyers will act like it is a snap of their fingers until they have bled you dry - just really unsound advice. For the most part I would suggest talking to the bank and defaulting but again need 100% of the details.   The other part is cosigning the loan.  Why the hell would you cosign a loan for a friend?  Most parents won't cosign a loan for their own kids.  And if you are cosigning a loan, you write up a simple contract and make the non-payment penalties extremely costly for your friend.  I have seen simple contracts that include 30% interests rates that were upheld by courts." As a former banker, the title of the car will be assigned to the loan account holder(s) because legally, he/she/they are responsible for payments. I've never heard of any case where the car title differs from the loan account holder(s). Throughout my career in the bank, I've come across quite a number of parents who did the same for their children and the car title was always assigned to the loan account holder's name.    You do have a choice of applying for a joint loan with one of your parents unless if you are concerned about what your credit score might be.  Once the loan has been paid off, the title could be changed to your name from your parents of course. As for insurance, there are numerous options where the insurance would cover all drivers of the car however at a slightly higher price like you've mentioned. Full payment is always better than auto-loan if you are prudent with finances. I.E if you take a loan, you are factoring the EMI hence your savings will remain as is. However if you manage well, you can buy the car with cash and at the same time put aside the notional EMI as savings and investments. The other factor to consider is what return your cash is giving. If this more than auto-loan interest rate post taxes, you should opt for loan. For example if auto-loan is 10% and you are getting a return of 15% after taxes on investment then loan is better. Company Car lease depends on terms. More often you get break on taxes on the EMI component. But you have to buy at the end of lease period and re-register the car in your name, so there is additional cost. Some companies give lease at very favourable rates. Plus if you leave the job lease has to be broken and it becomes more expensive. As others have addressed the legality in their answers, I want to address the idea of the dealership being 'a middleman'. A dealership serves more of a purpose than just 'middlemanning' a car to a consumer. Actually, they consume a great deal of risk. Let's remember that a dealership is really an extension of the OEM, albeit independently owned and operated, the dealership must still answer to the brand they represent, if people have a bad experience with a dealership, a customer might go to another of the same brand, but more often than not they will go to the competition out of spite. Therefore, it's in the dealership's best interest to represent the brand as best as possible, but unfortunately that doesn't always happen.  While the internet has made a certain part of a salesman's role null and void, and since this is a finance (read money) Q/A site let's take a moment to consider the risk assume and therefore the value added by a dealership: Test Drive. A car is a huge purchase, and while it's okay to buy a pair of shoes online without trying them on, a car is a bit different of course, we want to make sure it 'fits' before we shell out several thousand dollars. Yes, you (meaning consumers) can look at car pictures and specs online, but if you want to see how that vehicle handles on your town's roads, if it fits in your garage and/or driveway, then you need to take it for a test drive. It's not feasible for OEMs to have millions of people showing up to car plants for a test drive, right? Scalability aside, some business that is handled in automotive plants are confidential and not for the general public to know about. A dealership provides an opportunity for those who live locally to see and experience the car without flying or driving wherever the car was assembled. They provide this at a risk, banking on the fact that a good experience with the vehicle will lead to a sale. Service. A car is a machine, and no machine is perfect, neither will it last forever without proper service. A dealership provides a place for people to bring their vehicles when they need to be serviced. Let's set aside the fact that the service prices are higher than we'd like, because the fact remains most of it is skilled (and warrantied) labor that the majority of people don't want to do themselves. Trade Ins. It is not in an OEMs best interest to accept a vehicle just to sell you another vehicle, especially if that vehicle is from another brand. Dealership's assume this risk, and often offer incentives to do so, hoping it will lead to a sale. That trade in was an asset to you, but is a liability to them, because they now have to liquidate that trade in, just so that you can purchase a car. Sure, you could sell your car yourself, and now you would assume that risk: What if your car is not in perfect shape, or has a lot of miles for it's age? Would it do well in the used car market? What if it takes too long to sell and you miss that Memorial Day car sale at the dealer? This might be okay for some, but generally speaking most people would rather avoid the risk and trade it in at the dealer toward the purchase of a new car rather than the headache of selling it themselves. I'm sure there are more, but those are the one's that immediately sprung to mind. Just like Starbucks, there are terrible dealerships out there and there are great ones, and very few of us venture to farms and jungles just for fresh coffee beans :-) I'm a little confused by your question to be honest. It sounds like you haven't sold it to him, but you have a verbal arrangement for him to use the car like it's his. I'm going to assume that's the case for this answer. This is incredibly risky. If you've got the car on credit and he stops paying, or you guys break up... you will be liable for continuing to make payments! If the loan is in your name, it's your responsibility. Edited. The credit is yours. If he decides to stop paying, you're a little stuck. I have had it two way now: I got pre-approval from my credit union which just so happened to be one of the bigger vehicle lenders in the metro area.  What I found out was that the dealership (which was one of the bigger ones in the metro area) had a computer system that looked up my deal with the credit union. Basically, I signed some contracts and the CU and the dealership did whatever paperwork they needed to without me. I bought a used car and drove it off of the lot that night, and I didn't ever go back (for anything financial) Both my wife and her sister received blank checks that were valid up to a certain amount.  In the case of my sister in law, she signed the check, the dealership called to confirm funds and she drove off. In the case of my wife, she ended up negotiating a better deal with dealer finance, but I was assured she only had to sign the check, get it verified and drive the car home. The loan agent surely knows that having a combination of loans greater than the value of the property (less some margin) is illegal, but also impossible.  Your first mortgage, mechanic's liens, tax liens, and so forth are a matter of public record.  In most states the records can be viewed online, by anyone, for free. The title search prerequisite for getting the second mortgage looks beyond the low hanging fruit for things like aborigines claims for parcels of land that include your property.  The loan agent is trying to sell you a home equity line of credit. Almost everyone gets one after building up some equity.  There's often no closing cost and it's not necessary to ever use it.  Keep it for emergencies.