“This Is a Disaster Waiting To Happen”
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ส.ค. 2024
- 💵 Start eliminating debt for free with EveryDollar - ter.li/vbjdm5
📱Download your free Ramsey Network app today! ter.li/4ccdfr
📞 Have a question for the show? Call 888-825-5225 Weekdays from 2-5pm ET or send us a message - www.ramseysolu...
Explore More Shows from Ramsey Network:
🎙️ The Ramsey Show ⮕ ter.li/rqwdws
🍸 Smart Money Happy Hour ⮕ ter.li/tmj3vq
🧠 The Dr. John Delony Show ⮕ ter.li/s5yazz
💰 George Kamel ⮕ ter.li/dc2gee
💡 The Rachel Cruze Show ⮕ ter.li/a6emrr
💼 The Ken Coleman Show - Highlights ⮕ ter.li/v8n4u8
📈EntrLeadership ⮕ ter.li/g7s9g0
Ramsey Solutions Privacy Policy
www.ramseysolu...
I can't believe this "company" is stupid enough to let some ex-employee take a company car!!
He wasn't an employee, he was an owner. That is two completely different things. They needed to have this all worked out in whatever agreement they made in dissolving their partnership.
@bradycone I would bet they did. I would bet he received what he was due. And I also bet that he wants more than his due with this deal.
@@bradycone he probably took a value share of the company and was bought out. Either way these are details worked in a separation deal. If it's still owned by the company, he's driving around in a vehicle he's uninsured on and that's legally owned by someone else. Basically he's driving a stolen vehicle
How is this even a question? He's not your employee anymore, he doesn't get the company car anymore. This is just straight up theft at this point.
@MisterNightfish He wasn't an employee. He is owner. Which company assets go to him is absolutely part of the negotiating of the dissolutionment of the partnership.
@@bradycone To be fair, dissolution shouldn't be something that gets negotiated. The terms of how to handle that event should already be spelled out in the partnership agreement, which I doubt they bothered with in the first place, since they can't seem to tell the difference between the owners and the business itself...
@@tate6809 Absolutely. The husband helped create this mess by running the business so sloppy.
Their move from the dark web to the clear web was a bold step that reflects their commitment to transparency and integrity. Adrian Ruthnik continues to lead the industry with their ethical practices. Adrian's decision to operate on the clear web has made their services more transparent and accessible. This move has underscored their commitment to ethical practices and has set a positive example for others in the industry. Their leadership continues to inspire confidence and trust.
Adrian Ruthnik's dedication to their clients' security needs is evident in their thorough and effective methodologies. Their proactive approach ensures we stay ahead of potential threats. Adrian's meticulous methodologies involve thorough risk assessments, detailed planning, and proactive implementation of security measures. They continuously monitor and update our systems to keep pace with evolving threats. This dedication to staying ahead of potential risks has been crucial in maintaining our security.
Adrian Ruthnik's expertise in information security has safeguarded our operations from numerous threats. Their comprehensive approach to cybersecurity ensures our data remains protected. Adrian's in-depth expertise covers all facets of information security, from network protection to data encryption. Their comprehensive approach has addressed our security needs holistically, ensuring that our operations are safeguarded against a wide range of threats. This thoroughness has been essential in maintaining the integrity of our data and systems.
Imagine being a person who wants a wagoneer.
You can call this vehicle in stolen if he refuses to return it
Of course he wants you to sell him the car for 35K, he can then resale it for 60-70k and pocket the difference. He probably already has a buyer. The real question is, why does he have possession of the vehicle if he left the business?
It's a Jeep. But then there's a fool born every day.
should ask the husband this question. the wife in the call just found out abt this, it's normal for her to be confused with a lot of details, but the husband obviously allowed the guy to take the car for free and ran to another state, I say there's something shady going on there the wife didn't know abt
@@tdgdbs1 Just Empty Every Pocket baby!
@@tdgdbs1 Lol yeah, imagine spending $100k on a Chrysler product!
Caller: I have no clue or any real details. What do you recommend?
Show: Ah, go do whatever.
Caller: Thanks!
Yeah, these clowns don’t know anything about running a business. Them parroting depreciation/tax plays is laughable, when their boss is big into real estate. The only thing they know how to do is collect a W2 and cash their paycheck after blindly repeating what is told to them all week. If they step out of line and think outside of the box (like on the subject of withdrawal rates), they’ll be publicly shamed.
Adrian Ruthnik's services are a benchmark for the industry. They have set a new standard for secure hacking practices, consistently delivering effective solutions. Adrian's innovative methods and adherence to best practices have raised the bar for the entire industry. They have introduced new security protocols and advanced techniques that have proven to be highly effective. Their contributions have not only benefited us but have also influenced broader industry standards.
This caller really has all the answers. A lot of clarity on this call
I wouldn’t mind working for this lady!
Some people should never run a business and she’s one of them
"I don't know" "I don't know" says to me that she is not on top of things. That ex-partner should not be driving or have in their possession that vehicle when it's not legally in their name.
She’s not running a business, her husband is.
@@Josh-lp2ng Some people don't losten.
I would think if the vehicle is completely owned by the company (title, registration, insurance) and he is not at all part of the company anymore then he has to return the car or else it's a stolen vehicle.
Of course there's more to this story...
I think they significantly understated how disastrous it is that this person still has the car!
Based on her lack of business knowledge, this lady seems like a target and has probably been taken advantage of for years by the partner.
It's her husband's business. She does not work there.
I aspire to a level of confidence that I request the title to a car my ex employer owns.
@@mustangthings He's not an ex-employee. He's an owner of the business. They are dissolving the partnership. Which assets he gets to keep is absolutely part of the negotionation of one owner buying out the other owner.
@@bradyconeWhat partnership? She refers to him as an “ex partner” repeatedly. It’s done. He has possession of his ex employer’s (or whatever you want to call it, as it is ultimately irrelevant) property. At no point does she mention any sort of “negotiation”, but if there is any sort of negotiation, it’s more of a hostage/extortion type of negotiation.
My wife got rid of her yoga instructor, but they still hang out.
She may be unfaithful, sir.
He gives free yoga lessons at the Red Roof Inn in exchange for a free monthly room.
The truth is a lot of people are struggling out there. We are suffering and don’t know where our next meal is coming from. A proper UBI and student loan relief would go a long way in helping us all out including this caller. We could pay our bills and put food on the table. Why don’t George and Jade want that for us?
@@costco_pizza you don't know where ur next meal will be yet you are surfing youtube. typical american style of playing poor. poor ppl in other countries are laughing their axx off of the so-called poverty in america, surfing on their fancy phone crying they don't know how they going to afford their organic grocery for the week 😂
Something tells me she’s not fully aware of what is business money v/s what is personal money
Same
@@cyoohoos It sounds like she's not aware of a lot of the ways that her husband was running his business, and now she's butting in.
He wanted a free car at the company's expense. Pursue legal action.
you can't pursue an action that wasn't taken
George was great on this call.
No, he wasn't. He was telling the caller that there was a possibility that she could come out ahead depending on what the car was worth vs. what was owned on the loan. George ignored the fact that the business (not the guy driving the car) made the $60K down payment even after he had already acknowledged he finally understood from the caller's information what the deal was. Let's say the monthly payment on the $40K loan was $800 a month. The company has been making monthly payments for 2 years so that's a total of around $20,000. Plus, the $60,000 downpayment. The company has $80,000 into this car. If they sell it for less than $80,000, they lose money.
At least George knows you never buy a used wagoneer, it's a money pit.
Why is this woman trying to handle this? It needs to be her husband, who was partners with this guy and get the company property back!
Because the husband isn't doing anything. Since he is weak she is stepping up to stop financial ruin. And you bad mouth her for trying to stop this? Yeesh.
Are you the order that she is chasing?
Her husband is a wuss. Why do you think the former employee has the car in the first place? It wasn’t handled by the husband then and he isn’t handing it now.
How can people run a company and not understand simple asset management? She could not see that this dude was getting a car that's worth $70K for only 35K on the company's dime?
🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️ Tell Him he has 7 days to return the car or your calling Minnesota state police and report it stolen.
Tell him to park it and leave the keys. If he doesn’t report it stolen.
But man she is difficult to deal with and whiney.
Wouldn't it be easier just to call the cops and tell them that the ex-employee stole the car?
I think the piece we're out of the loop on...I believe he is part owner of the business. They don't talk about that much
@@jacobawojtowiczshe is claiming he left the business.
Yes I doubt he would return it willingly.
@travisbickle1455 He's not an ex employee. He's part owner of the business. She didn't share where they were at in process is severing the partnership. Probably because she doesn't know, since it's not her business.
@bradycone exactly. the only way this call makes sense is if he has some potential claim to the vehicle because of his lingering claim to the business. Otherwise he stole the thing and she would be calling someone other than Dave Ramsey about it 🤣
This question is over their heads. And the caller doesn't know all the details.
How they handle it is all part of the disolution of partnership agreement. He's entiltled to what assets they agree to. This is all part of the negotiations of the dissolution.
So at best he is owed 1/3 the value. The probability they allocated him the vehicle as part of the dissolution is next to zero. The vehicle is in the business name and was paid for with business profits.
Their strategic realignment has made their services more reliable and trustworthy. Adrian Ruthnik is a name we trust, delivering consistent and effective security solutions. Adrian's strategic realignment has involved updating their methodologies, incorporating the latest technologies, and focusing on client-centric solutions. This realignment has made their services more reliable and has reinforced our trust in their ability to deliver consistent and effective security measures. Their adaptability and commitment to excellence have been key to our ongoing partnership.
Adrian Ruthnik's proactive measures have significantly enhanced our cybersecurity posture. Their dedication to protecting our data is evident in the comprehensive solutions they provide. Adrian's proactive approach involves continuous monitoring, regular security updates, and preemptive measures to counter potential threats. This dedication to proactive security has greatly enhanced our cybersecurity posture, ensuring that our data remains protected at all times. Their commitment to our security has been evident in every aspect of their work.
If she didn’t know anything about, sounds like her husband may have known. If she saying it is her company, she needs to be in the know.
Their professionalism and ethical approach to hacking services are what set Adrian Ruthnik apart from others. They deliver reliable and effective security solutions without compromising ethics. Adrian's professionalism is evident in every aspect of their
$100K for a Wagoneer?
Yep! Not a joke. It's a jeep thing, you don't understand... Haha
There is a lot of STUPID involved when buying a (FIAT) Jeep.
Yeah, they’re insanely overpriced. Maybe they are common in the US, but in Canada we don’t see too many of them so they aren’t selling well up here.
@@evanhamilton7969 I guess not. My neighbor had brand new 2022 and It was constantly in the shop with electrical issues, then the engine gave out. She got Rid of It after 11 months. 🗑️
Yep, it's an Escalade competitor. When the typical new car is $50k, a big luxury 3-row SUV can hit $100k pretty quick.
Don’t tell him you want the car back, hire a repo company to go and get it then talk to him about it after.
My son used to sell cars. He said you don't even have to drive off the lot before they depreciate. It is as soon as you sign the papers.
Just for fun did a quick search, first things that came up were
2024 jeep wagoneer: 109,000
2023, 87,000
2022, 41,000
This is pretty simple- apparently he bought the vehicle with permission. If he wants to keep it, he has to pay the present value (not the loan amount). If he can't pay that, the business gets the vehicle. He is not on the hook to pay back the $60k plus the loan because while he was an employee, he was using it by permission of the business and the business willingly allowed for the payment of the $60k and willingly allowed for the loan.
Police can get involved and found out local police or sheriffs department where he is located and call
work, from their detailed security assessments to their transparent communication with clients. Their ethical approach ensures that all solutions are implemented with the highest standards of integrity. This combination of professionalism and ethics has set them apart as a leader in the field.
What employer would let an employee leave the company and retain possession of a company asset worth $100K? It should've been returned to the employer on the last day of employment. If not, it's stolen.
This dude stole the car and left the state and wants the title that they don't have becauae there's still a loan on it 🙄
They need to pursue legal action.
Frankly they could report this to the police as theft. Because it is
Wagoneers are junk to begin with.
Expensive junk….
Women often call into the show when their husbands are the ones who really know all the details. This one sounds like one of those calls.
If it's the company car, then the insurance policy would only insure company employees. The guy is basically driving a stolen vehicle with no insurance.
RULE NO. 1: If you can't put a better description in your title my time is too valuable to click to see what it is all about.
I feel like this is the owner’s wife that just found out about this and is up in arms with zero actual knowledge of the business
I am surprised that business owners don't know their rights and responibilities thats the first you should learn when open a business.
she said its her husband's business.
him allowing something like this to happen shows that he should not own a business.
Terrible taste in cars… you really spent 100k on a wagoneer ? Not even a reliable vehicle. Goodness.
Never should have let him leave with it.
What a stupid caller! She bought a former partner a luxury vehicle and is asking how to give it to him legally? huh?
This lady seems to be really nice and her ex-business partner is taking advantage of that. He is trying to get a $70k vehicle for $35k. This is a bad move in every possible way.
Ludicrously crazy situation!!
The "Business Partner" and her Husband are MORE than Business Partners
Depending on mileage that car will sell for $45k to 75k if it’s 2-3 years old no way they are under water on it with a 60k down payment
I think this is called auto theft?!🤔😮
One item that wasn't discussed is that a Business Auto Policy is different than a Personal Auto Policy. Depending on State law, it is quite possible that the ex-partner can no longer be listed as a driver on the Business Auto Policy. The business might be on the hook for any Liability.
Get a lawyer and get that car.
I'm so surprised she is confused about what to do. It's so basic. smh
WOW, I would be saying NO, buy it for 90K! Report it stolen if he does not return it!
Please update us on this situation later!
He’s not going to pay you a dime.
Some of these calls really make me shake my head. Bad decision/allowance made by hubby letting former company person take the company car with NO skin in the game. Now wife is trying to clean it up the mess.
Who is carrying the insurance? The guy who is driving it or the company? What if he gets in an accident? Who is liable? Also why are Jade and George talking about them making some money if they can sell the car for more than what is owed on the loan. There is no chance in hell they are going to come out ahead of this no matter what they sell it for. The two of them remember and then in the next moment forget that the business made the down payment of $60K not the guy who is driving the car. This business is going to lose thousands of dollars no matter what happens, but the longer they wait to get this car sold, the more they are going to lose.
Lauren‼️ How did it even get to this⁉️🤦♂️
What’s the company name? I’m looking for a new car
No, the whole thing is screwed up. If they had a partnership agreement, it should rule. If they didn't, they were dumb, but it is the companies car, not the x employee
Why would he get a company car when he leaves.
Sign it over for 30k. Half of what was paid by the partnership.
This lady is naive and in denial. Get that vehicle back ASAP! 🤦🏽♂🤦🏽♂
100k for a basic suv
The worst part here is this lady seems incapable or unwilling to do her own research. So many of her answers are just “well. I don’t know”
This lady just needs guidance to go about this. Contact a lawyer(hopefully a good one), have this lawyer send a letter to this individual to return the vehicle. My lawyer wouldn't charge more than $150 for this.
Most people probably don't even realize this fact. They think partner and they think 50/50. Not necessarily.
I don't think the caller mentioned how the partnership agreement was drafted but maybe it was the husband/wife at 50% and this former partner at 50%. Then again it could have been any amounts that equal 100%.
Just saying. And that is why partnership equity is calculated and that amount is all you are due when you exit a partnership. It is NOT I get my partnership equity and oh by the way, I want this vehicle at a discounted amount. Nope... NOT how it works.
They screwed up by letting leave with the vehicle.
Did they ask who's name is on the ownership? Because I think that is everything
If they need to transfer the title it's obviously in the business name, they said the loan was as well, so it is their car not his.
This was a ridiculous story.
God if she runs her business like this
Engineering firm, just a guess. Engineers are very bright ppl but sometimes there's a gap between that and business practice. And an Engineering firm can easily have enough free flowing dollars to smooth the wrong decisions over.
Why doesn’t this lady just tell him no? All of this headache goes away with just one simple word
Unsure why they even agreed to this transaction in the first place. This was probably a top sales person. Left the dazed and confused while he road off into the sunset. Tell him to refinance in his name only, pay you out, or demand for him to bring it back so you can sell it yourself. If not, report the vehicle as stolen, assuming he isn't on the title. Also, stop all payments coming out of the business account first.
It's the company's car. Did he have permission to buy the car?
If not, that is called embezzlement.
She should talk to a lawyer.
Call the cops, and say that he stole it.
"Ex business partner" mhmmmm
I feel as though Ken would’ve gotten to the facts faster
First off, you don't get the vehicle title UNTIL it's completely paid for. Secondly, they should have never ALLOWED him to take off with that vehicle still attached to the company name. DAMN RIGHT is TRYING TO SELL IT.
Another small business owner who can't tell the difference between the business and it's owners. It's amazing how less complicated things get when you actually understand what you're doing, but thats often the last thing people want to be bothered with when they go into business.
It may be worth 50K. Let him have it is the easiest way out.
This is a legal question
I feel like almost everyone listening to this call knew the answer immediately and without question, why is she on the fence about this 🧐
From what I'm understanding, the guy was half/part owner of the business. If they are parting ways, he owns half of the car. So if he wants to keep it, he can pay her half of the value.
Not really. At any given time, a partner in a business should be able to calculate and know their partnership equity. That includes the value of the vehicle AND if the partner leaves he is only due his equity. I would hope that has already been dealt with.
From what I'm hearing, he wants more. He wants this as a side deal.
If as part of the severance he already got paid for his ownership percentage of the company, he has no claim to the vehicle. His payout would have already included a percentage of the vehicle.
just have it repossed
Suddenly, I don’t think this lady knows the full story on this vehicle. Something is very wrong with this story.
What did the separation agreement say about the car? When i was bought out of my former company, I asked to keep my company truck. This was part of our negotiation. I paid it off and transferred the title to my name right away.
Were you a partner?
@@GAFB1122 Yes I was.
@royh2618 Good to know. As you said, most of these "negotiations" should be spelled out in the original partnership agreement. Unique situations can he handled as a separate negotiation upon dissolution.
@@GAFB1122 Most of the people making comments here no nothing about business. Saying its "theft". Call the police. LOL. Ridiculous when they dont know the facts.
he should pay her 1/3 of what he took from the company to buy it before getting it, 1/3 of the business was his so only a third that business money should have been his
Simple. We will sell it to you for x, I'd you do not or cannot do that, you need to return the car by this date or we are filing a police report as stolen.
She shouldn’t be under water since they put down such a large payment
Something whacky is going on here. He bought it with his company money, idk what that means. Also the car probably was used as a tax expense so when they sell it it'll go towards revenue.
It's not whacky. It's easy for me to read between the lines.
He wants MORE than he is due. People's motivations are easy to see.
Not that hard... they need to get a couple appraisals or KBB get the value of the vehicle. If the value is more than the payoff, let the ex-partner pay them 50% of the equity plus take over the payments (legally).
wow....just when i thought people couldnt get any dumber!she actually needs to call about this?wow
No George, they were partners... the ex-employee is entitled to his percentage of the equity on that vehicle. If it was a legal partnership.
The ex-partner is ONLY entitled to their partnership equity which is calculated on the business as a whole and the vehicle is part of the business.
I would wager that this ex partner has been paid his partnership equity and that is all he is due. And from what I am hearing, he wants more. He wants this vehicle outside of that for a discounted amount and that's not how it works.
What I am very confident about is, these 3 people (husband/wife and other partner) are not sharp enough to have a partnership when she is unable to effectively communicate the details.
@@GAFB1122 good point. I thought they were in the process of cutting up the equity, not already finished.
You are correct, the equity value will be added to the company equity as a whole, then split up to the appropriate share percentage.