[HiTech RedNeck]

If the bank owns it now, they are the landlord and any civil property violations run with the property and are owned by the bank. If the man is accused of crimes, that would not go to the bank. It is not clear what is happening. If a car got a parking ticket yesterday and then I bought the car today, I’d expect the previous owner to be liable for that ticket, not me.

[allmost]

?

[JudgemAll]

This is not new. You have plenty of divorced people out there who are forbidden from homeschooling their children and controling them, and, yet, when the kid at the other end of the country does something wrong, he owes “child support”.

The government considers this guy a serf who lost ownership but not ties to his property. The government wants its money and control now and automatically. It’s retarded but this is what we get under communism and blocking others from doing business.

[Qout]

There are lots of cases where the banks foreclose and evict the homeowner but never actually take title to the property.
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/07/bank_walkaways_from_foreclosed.html

If your car got repossessed but the bank doesn’t take your name off the title who’s responsible for the parking ticket when they leave it on the street?

[rawhide]

I once sold a car to a guy. The tags stayed with the car. A few months later, I received a traffic citation that the new owner had received. He never transferred the tags to his name. I called explaining I no longer owned the car. I was asked me to send in a copy of the bill of sale, listing the new owner's name and address. I did this and I never heard back from the authorities.

A couple years later, the state changed the law where the current owner now keeps the tags, when selling their car.