Yes Car Credit - Help please

[chopperclaire]

I surrendered my car 8 weeks ago having had it for over 2 years and had nothing but problems with it.
Firstly after having it 8 weeks the exhuast fell off! YCC actually replaced this free of charge. Then the fly wheel on the engine went not long after - cost £1000!! Had the car repaired and it still squeaked, made noises, and was unreliable. Finally decided I'd had enough and spoke to Direct Auto about surrendering the car. Funnily enough it then broke down 2 days before they were due to pick it up, so they had to tow it!! That completely summed the car up!
Anyway, yesterday received a letter from Golds Solcitors saying I owe them £5397.32 and must pay within 7 days otherwise they will commence Court proceedings.
Am not sure what to do, as I certainly can't pay it, but also don't agree that I owe that much. I paid £235.14 per month for 26 months = £6113.64, so how can I still owe them £5397.32, when the car was only £5995? It was only a crappy Fiat Punto, not a Merc or owt!!!
Can anyone help? Does anyone know where I stand legally and what I should do?
Many thanks
Claire

[sequenci]

hello.

i take it the agreement was HP?
how long was the agreement for?
did you excercise your voluntary termination clause?

[bakedalasker]

Hi Chopperclaire,

This looks like you did not exercise your voluntary termination rights and YCC have treated your case as an "abandoned vehicle". That means they will charge you the full amount of the agreement minus your already paid instalments and the value of the car at auction.
If you exercised the VT then they would have charged you for the remaining insurances which going on your figures would have been around £1500 or perhaps less.
Anyway, not all is lost yet. The time you took out your car with YCC was a time a majority of their contracts were "wrongly executed". There are a number of legal arguments that have been used successfully to force the likes of Gold solicitors to "set aside" the debts. These arguments are of a technical nature and you need to seek legal advise here.
My recommendation is that you approach your local CAB with your issue. They are the guys leading the fight against YCC and have a specialist advisor team who are very familiar with the YCC contract. When you visit the CAB ask to speak to a specialist advisor regarding YCC and I'm sure you will end up feeling alot better.

[chopperclaire]

Thank you for your post, this is most helpful. I will arrange an appointment with my CAB. They have sent me a breakdown of my costs and I have the full agreement from when I took out the car. Hopefully CAB will be able to help me in my fight against YCC and Golds Solicitors.

[chopperclaire]

Can anyone help me please. I have been served papers from Direct Auto Finance (Yes Car Credit) for a balance of around £5000. They are claiming the same saying they repossed the car as they served a default notice. I want to defend the same as a) no default was served/received b) I returned the car under my rights to terminate the agreement c) default cannot have been served as I obtained credit with another company at the time I returned the car. Having read my Agreement with them it does state that the insurances would be payable if I returned the car, however I also dispute this as I believe I was missold these as I was not told at the time I got the car that they were "optional" it was advised I HAD to have these.
Has anyone been in the same circumstances with Direct Auto? If so can anyone point me in the right direction? I was previously advise to go to CAB, but my local one only opens two days a week, and I work full time so it is hard for me to get out of work!
Help would be much appreciated.

Claire

[chopperclaire]

Have drafted a response, which I have copied in below. Can anyone advise me that I am on the right lines with this. I have 14 days to respond to the Court stating my intentions.


The Defendant wishes to defend the claim issued by the Claimant for the following reasons:-

1) It is disputed that Default was served on the Defendant by the Claimant at any time. The Defendant requests that the Claimant provides a copy of the said Default along with proof of postage.
2) The Defendant admits that the account was in arrears, due to circumstances changing, and the Defendants partner commencing a new job which required work in advance to be carried out prior to being paid.
3) The above circumstances were explained over the telephone to a gentleman only know to the Defendant as “John”. The Defendant does have a contact telephone number for the above mentioned person.
4) It was discussed with John at the time of the arrears that the Defendant was considering returning the vehicle due to a change in circumstances and also due to the vehicle being consistantly unreliable.
5) Once the Defendant had decided to return the vehicle she contacted John to advise that she wished to return the vehicle using her rights under condition “” of the Agreement. It was then arranged between the Defendant and the said, John, for the vehicle to be returned.
6) The Defendant disputes that the vehicle in question being a Fiat Punto 1.6 ELX, registration Y724 HCN was repossessed from the ownership of the Defendant.
7) The Defendant utilised her right to return the vehicle under Condition “ “ of the Contract, copy herewith.
The Defendant was entitled to return the vehicle under the Condition referred to above as over half of the term of the Agreement had expired.
9) The Defendant wishes to point out that the only balance which would be payable by the Defendant under that condition would be the balance of the “optional” insurance premiums.
10) The Defendant further disputes that the insurance premiums would be payable as it was not advised by the Claimant at the time when the Agreement was signed that the Insurance premiums were in fact “optional” and it was stated by the Claimant that these had to be taken out in order to have the credit for the vehicle. The Defendant therefore claims that the insurances were mis-sold to the Defendant, and should therefore not be payable.
11) The Defendant furthermore believes that had the Defendant been aware of the Sale of Goods Act, that the vehicle in question could have been returned to the Claimant some time prior to this due to it being unreliable and consistently requiring repair. The repairs in question not being due to general wear and tear (as these did not qualify to be repaired under the Warranty which was in place), but major items such as the exhaust falling off within 6 weeks of owning the vehicle, and the engine having a major fault having owned the vehicle for just over 18 months, and having only travelled 8,000 in that time. The Defendant estimates that along with the balance of the car being paid, that in total she has paid around £1200-£1800 in repairs throughout her ownership. The Defendant is trying to obtain a duplicate copy of the invoices from the garages who carried out the repairs as copies were not obtained and the original were returned with the vehicle to ensure the service history was correct.
12) The vehicle in question had to actually be towed from the Defendant’s property when it was returned to the Claimant as it had in fact broken down two days prior to the date that had been arranged for it to be returned. It was therefore agreed between John and the Defendant that the vehicle would be towed by the Claimant’s representatives, and the Defendant therefore does not dispute paying any costs in this respect.
13) The Defendant did contact Golds Solicitors, representing the Claimant to request a breakdown of the costs which they were stating were owed. The Defendant to date has not received the same, and the Court claim being the only form of correspondence received from the Claimant since my request on the 13th September.
14) The Defendant believes that the Claimant cannot claim that they repossessed the vehicle as the Defendant also believes that no Default was registered with the Credit Reference Agencies at the time that the vehicle was returned, as the Defendant obtained further HP with an alternative Company prior to the vehicle being returned. The Defendant does not believe that she would have been able to do this had the Claimant served Default Notice and repossessed the vehicle.
15) The Defendant therefore claims that the Claimant is not entitled to any sums of monies which they are claiming are owed to them under the Agreement.


Any comments?

Claire

[bakedalasker]

Claire,

Please visit our site www.saynotoyes.co.uk.

We have a number of users who are in the same situation as you. We believe we have the right channels for you to go down.

You need to seek the proper legal advice when it comes to contesting the likes of DAF. They are a stubborn organisation who will try all the tricks in the book to get as much out of you as possible.

We believe we have the right people in place to take on DAF.

[chopperclaire]

Thank you, will have a look on the website.

Claire

[Karnevil]

Just a quick run through for you - my personal opinion is you can defend this yourself - just do your homework - theres lots of information around about these cases, there is some help on the say no to yes site although they stop short of disclosing the legal arguments used - you may be able to request these arguments off of Baked Alasker.....

Originally Posted by chopperclaire

The Defendant wishes to defend the claim issued by the Claimant for the following reasons:-

1) It is disputed that Default was served on the Defendant by the Claimant at any time. The Defendant requests that the Claimant provides a copy of the said Default along with proof of postage. (Have you formally requested a copy of this from the Claimant ?)

3) The above circumstances were explained over the telephone to a gentleman only know to the Defendant as “John”. The Defendant does have a contact telephone number for the above mentioned person. (phone John and ask his surname - also you need to state in what capacity you were talking ot him - as an employee of the claimant etc)

4) It was discussed with John at the time of the arrears that the Defendant was considering returning the vehicle due to a change in circumstances and also due to the vehicle being consistantly unreliable. (I think you should seperate the facts that the vehicle was consistently unreliable and the change of circumstances reasoning for wanting to return it)

5) Once the Defendant had decided to return the vehicle she contacted John to advise that she wished to return the vehicle using her rights under condition “” of the Agreement. It was then arranged between the Defendant and the said, John, for the vehicle to be returned. (specify arrangements made)

6) The Defendant disputes that the vehicle in question being a Fiat Punto 1.6 ELX, registration Y724 HCN was repossessed from the ownership of the Defendant. (The vehicle was returned by mutual agreement as outlined in paragraph 5)

7) The Defendant utilised her right to return the vehicle under Condition “ “ of the Contract, copy herewith. (type out the paragraph relevant)

The Defendant was entitled to return the vehicle under the Condition referred to above as over half of the term of the Agreement had expired. (specify dates and sections of agreement which say you can do this)

9) The Defendant wishes to point out that the only balance which would be payable by the Defendant under that condition would be the balance of the “optional” insurance premiums (again refer to paragraph that relates to this in the contract)

.
10) The Defendant further disputes that the insurance premiums would be payable as it was not advised by the Claimant at the time when the Agreement was signed that the Insurance premiums were in fact “optional” and it was stated by the Claimant that these were complusory in order to obtain the credit for the vehicle. The Defendant therefore claims that the insurances were mis-sold to the Defendant, and should therefore not be payable. (need some law bits to back this up - should be quite a bit about on this site about misselling of insurance etc)


11) The Defendant furthermore believes that had the Defendant been aware of the Sale of Goods Act, that the vehicle in question could have been returned to the Claimant some time prior to this due to it being unreliable and consistently requiring repair. The repairs in question not being due to general wear and tear (as these did not qualify to be repaired under the Warranty which was in place), but major items such as the exhaust falling off within 6 weeks of owning the vehicle, and the engine having a major fault having owned the vehicle for just over 18 months, and having only travelled 8,000 in that time. The Defendant estimates that along with the balance of the car being paid, that in total she has paid around £1200-£1800 in repairs throughout her ownership. The Defendant is intends to obtain a duplicate copy of the invoices from the garages who carried out the repairs as copies were not obtained and the original were returned with the vehicle to ensure the service history was correct. And will forward these to the court in due course.

12) The vehicle in question had to actually be towed from the Defendant’s property when it was returned to the Claimant as it had in fact broken down two days prior to the date that had been arranged for it to be returned. It was therefore agreed between John and the Defendant that the vehicle would be towed by the Claimant’s representatives, and the Defendant therefore does not dispute paying any costs in this respect. ~(what costs exactly - receipts etc ?)

13) The Defendant did contact Golds Solicitors, representing the Claimant to request a breakdown of the costs which they were stating were owed. The Defendant to date has not received the same, and the Court claim being the only form of correspondence received from the Claimant since the request on the 13th September. (copy of letter attached ????)


14) The Defendant believes that the Claimant cannot claim that they repossessed the vehicle as the Defendant also believes that no Default was registered with the Credit Reference Agencies at the time that the vehicle was returned, as the Defendant obtained further HP with an alternative Company prior to the vehicle being returned. The Defendant does not believe that she would have been able to do this had the Claimant served Default Notice and repossessed the vehicle.(DO YOU HAVE CREDIT FILE SHOWING NO DEFALT AT THAT DATE ? )

[bakedalasker]

I can only admire anyone who takes on the likes of DAF on their own accord. I think it is a brave road to take but I'm afraid it is a dangerous one. I say this because those who have gone down this route I know of are now bankrupt.

I know of individuals who have had their cases "set aside" but this has been mainly because of assistance from the CAB or legal representation. In fact I dont know of anyone who has seek legal assistance to have been forced to court. All such cases have settled outside court with a majority being "set aside".

Regarding the legal arguments I have been given a list of them from some legal bods but I am unwilling to pass them on. These arguments are of a high technical nature and require proper representation. I personally am not skilled enough to prepare them nor am I insured against a counter claim. I do not want to leave myself open for liable misrepresentation hence my advice for any YCC victim to seek proper representation were insurance cover can be qualified. Legal bods qualify for this insurance, I dont. Need I say more.

Finally I would like to highlight the risk here. Most victims of YCC are being chased for thousands of pounds and are in danger of losing their homes. That is the precedent we have witnessed and this is what we have been fighting against. As I said early I admire those of you for taking on such organisations but please in the case of DAF seek legal advice. Thats all I want to say.

Thank you.

[chopperclaire]

Many thanks to you both for your responses.
I am a lawyer myself although Litigation is not my area, and I work in property. I have easy access to all the statutes etc, and can speak to a Litigation Lawyer here for advice, so guess I am in a better position than some.
I cannot believe they try to get away with this. They had no Court Order to repo the car, did not serve default, and I stated I was surrendering the car!!!
Have looked on the saynotoyes website who recommend a Solicitors, so have contacted them to discuss.
Will definitely not try to defend on my own based on what you have said, as along with all this happening am also 3 months pregnant and do not need the stress of dealing with it myself. I did ask them for a breakdown of the account to see if there was anything which I feel I genuinely do owe them, was then planning to put a payment proposal to them, however they didn't respond and just issued Court papers.
Will teach me to deal with these edit sods ever again!

EDITED due to libelous wording.

[bakedalasker]

Chopperclaire,

I am please you have taken this route and I know you are in good hands.

I do well believe what they have tried as I have heard the same story a few times.

I believe the fact that you have had your car repossessed without a court order, providing you have paid a 1/3 of the agreement, means you are in a position to reclaim all your payments. I hope this is the case.

Good luck with your case and best wishes for the arrival of the new baby.

[chopperclaire]

Thank you. I would be quite happy for it just to be ordered that I don't owe them anything. I aren't overly interested in getting anything back, just want them off my back so I don't have to worry about it.
Should be speaking to Stephensons this afternoon, so hopefully will make some progress there. If they already have the arguments and case law in place then they are certainly the best people to deal with it.

Your advice and comments are much appreciated and have allowed me to breathe a bit easier now.

Claire

[Karnevil]

Good luck with it claire - and hope all goes well with the baby.

Please keep us up to date with how you are getting on


Yes Car Credit - Help please

[chopperclaire]

Hi,
Just to update, and to ask for some advice really.
Have spoken to some Solicitors who specliase in Yes Car Credit, they have told me they will act for me and defend but want £750 on account. However they will not tell me under what basis they are going to defend for me! They told me they needed money asap, but when I asked to speak to the Solicitor for explanation on what terms they were gonna defend was told he was out until Friday. My defence has to be lodged by Thursday at latest, and therefore I am confused as to how they are going to do this! I do not feel 100% confident with this Company, and as I am a Solicitor myself (although in a different field), having spoken to a colleague they have told me they would detail to the client a full explanation of the defence!
Does anyone have any advice for me. I am tempted to lodge the defence that I had done, as from what I can gather, as i sent this to the Sols and the woman I spoke to, they indicated they would defend on similar terms to those which I had written.
Can anyone offer any advice?