CW1: So I sold my BMW at last!
CW2: Great! Who did you sell it to?
CW1: Some guy from [city] who's buying it for his 19-year-old son.
CW2: You checked the money went through before you gave him the car, right?
CW1: I didn't need to! He just transferred his bit to the dealership then I sent in enough to pay the rest of the loan off - but the loan's for the car not me, so even if it didn't, now he's got the car, he's got the loan too!
So many WTFs. I work in admin - we are not paid that much. She should not have bought a BMW, let alone PAID SOMEONE to take it away!
I guess that paying someone to take it away could be seen as cutting losses and not buying into the sunk cost fallacy...but then again, they bought the BMW that they couldn't afford in the first place!
As much as I would love to charitably think that, I'm pretty sure she has just bought another car to replace it because she lives in a village. If £A=total loan, £B = how much the buyer paid, £C = how much she had to pay to make up the difference, and £D = the cost of the new car, then I'm pretty sure C + D = A.
Just maybe-possibly-perhaps she had thought about that but bought a super-efficient car so her capital put into the car stays the same but her petrol costs go down. But this is a woman who went shopping as a birthday present to herself even though she complains about not having enough money to buy (yes, buy) lunch. (Rant: How hard is it to bring lunch?? We only get half an hour and the nearest place is a supermarket ten minutes walk away. So she spends twenty minutes of her lunch break walking to then spend ten eating some shitty sandwich at double speed. It's not even like we're surrounded by delicious, tempting cafes. It's an EFFORT to NOT bring lunch!)
I do feel a little bit sorry for her, because she has just completed an awkward divorce with 50/50 childcare arrangements, so when her son is not around she self-soothes by spending money (mostly on clothes and beauty products). But only a little bit.