Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Logbook loan by previous keeper - repossesion


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2351 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

On 25th March 2016 I purchased a van to be used for my business.

 

I carried out an online HPI check before agreeing a deal which was clear of finance.

 

Unfortunately this was on my phone at the time and no longer have a trace of it as it was 20 months ago.

 

I paid £5000 cash and received the log book on the day of sale.

 

Today I had a note posted at my home address from a bailiff company.

 

On ringing their office they informed me they had attended to reposses the vehicle.

They told me to ring another company called Varooma to whom explained the situation and have now sent a new keeper questionnaire to them detailing the sale.

 

They have said that I will be liable to pay the debt owed or the van will still be repossessed

 

however at this stage have not told me what the amount is.

They said there will be a meeting with a manager tomorrow and they will then inform me.

 

Problem is this vehicle is my lively hood but will also affect the jobs of 3 other staff if this vehicle is taken away.

 

Any help or ideas would be appreciated.

 

I have also now got the Bill of sale registration number which I will check with the high court that it is valid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Log book loans or bill of sale loans have to be registered as finance. If you have done a hpi check and it didn't come to light then they have not registered the finance so I un enforceable and you will be covered by the hpi guarantee.

 

 

From another site.

 

Used car buyers can get protection from the HPI Check guarantee http://www.hpicheck.com Last night's episode of Watchdog highlights the issue of outstanding finance and the risks used car buyers face from unscrupulous sellers, warns HPI.

 

The BBC report featured a man who bought a Vauxhall Omega, which went missing. He called the police only to find it had been legally taken by the finance company and he had to pay £1,500 to get it back.

 

An investigation revealed the car had a Bill of Sale agreement (often called 'a logbook loan') registered against it, which meant it had been used as security for a loan leaving the buyer vulnerable to being left out of pocket.

 

'Logbook loans' are a type of finance often accessed by people that struggle to obtain finance through conventional channels. They are normally secured against a vehicle and have become increasingly popular over the last couple of years as the economy restricts the amount of lending available. The Watchdog feature raised awareness of an old law called the 'Bill of Sale', which was itself the topic of a Government review during 2010, the results of which lead to the trade body, the Consumer Credit Trade Association (CCTA) to introduce a Code of Practice offering consumers a range of additional benefits not previously available, including the requirement to register the loan with a company such as HPI.

 

However, Watchdog pointed out very forceflly that this requirement is not mandatory and some 'logbook lenders' still do not register such loans.

 

"In the wake of the recession there has been an increase in the number of logbook loan style finance agreements bring taken out, as people find it difficult to get traditional finance deals from the bank," says Nicola Johnson, Consumer Services Manager of HPI. "The two stories on Watchdog show the risks associated with buying a used car that is still on finance, particularly a Bill of Sale style agreement.

 

However, an HPI Check still offers buyers one of the best forms of protection from falling foul of this type of agreement. "HPI has access to a comprehensive list of outstanding finance deals, so the chances are that an HPI Check will uncover a logbook loan. We were the first to provide a check that categorises these agreements as 'Bill of Sale'.

 

If a customer conducts an HPI Check, follows HPI's buying guidance, but subsequently finds that the vehicle is subject to a 'Bill of Sale' agreement that was not flagged, the buyer will be protected by the HPI guarantee, which provides financial reimbursement of up to £30,000 (subject to terms and conditions, see http://www.hpicheck.com for details).

 

Johnson concludes, "Outstanding finance including logbook loans continues to be a major issue for used car buyers, but the HPI Check offers the best protection and is the most likely way to uncover a logbook loan prior to purchase."

Link to post
Share on other sites

you sure it was a BAILIFF

I bet not.

 

simply a repo company.

 

They must have and show you the BOS.

They do not need a court order

 

Unless (very rare) the BOS is linked to an hp agreement

 

Your redress would be to claim from the seller or

 

Keep the car locked away and negotiate with the LBL co

 

where is the car kept?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly yes just a repo co.

 

I'm expecting them at our workplace tomoro as they won't put the matter on hold. The van is has a different reg plate on it so hope this will sway them and although it needs to be at our premises for loading several times a day we will try and keep it away as much as possible until we can deal with the matter properly.

I still have contact details for the seller and have spoke to him on the phone today. He is apparently going to speak with the logbook loan company tomoro.

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the situation if I have had several thousand pounds worth of work on the vehicle.

 

It is a hot and cold sandwich van and I have spent over £3000 on new ovens and fridges and inverters ECT.

 

Legally I own these so how does this affect the situation of a repossesion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you remove them.

 

where is the vehicle parked.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's taken home each day by a member of staff. It comes to our premises in the morning to be loaded and is then off on it's rounds. Comes back twice to reload for 10 mins then is taken home again at end of day by staff

Link to post
Share on other sites

then its at risk whilst on the public road.

 

but as its on a differing reg plate

that could make things interesting.

 

theres no harm in calling the police into this if they do try something.

 

it will only delay things as its a civil matter

but it might well make the repo guy think twice.

 

some can be very reasonable esp if you have the evidence to hand

and show you are attempting [to in a way do LBL's job] in finding and chasing the original debtor.

esp again as this is now a business vehicle too.

 

i'm not aware you could take a LBL out against a business vehicle [go check]

see where i'm going here....

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh and you don't let the repo guy anywhere near the motor to check VIN or engine numbers or anything

they ARE NOT BAILIFFS

they have NO POWERS TO DO THAT

 

and have

ZERO LEGAL POWERS.

 

that's why I say involve the police if you have too.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they HPI the vehicle with the new plate then it will bring up the original plate on the results and they will then know it's the same vehicle. I will see Whether seller rings loan co tomoro as he has stated he will.....and see what they say regarding moving forward

Link to post
Share on other sites

But the company that did the search for you will.

 

Get busy on the phone and just ask them.

 

You will also have a record via your bank statement for the fee they charged so you will know who and when by that and that will get them scrambling for their tin hats if they got it wrong.

 

However, there is a trick that some people do,

they know you are interested and about to make a visit to view.

 

they then apply for instant credit from Varooma or whoever and by the time you buy the van they have got the loan so walk off with 2 lots of money and you owe the finance co 1 van..

 

Difference between a saturday morning and the afternoon.

 

Wont pop up on the HPI check untl monday afternoon.

 

I appreciate the reply.

 

However I have no record of the HPI.

 

It was all good at the time and was deleted from my phone some time later.

 

I can't even remember the company I used.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two options really, negotiate hard with Varooma to get as low a settlement figure as possible

 

Bring as much pressure as possible on the person who sold Varooma,s van

and issue claim against them for your losses, especially if they own a property or are in regular employment

 

As regards hpi, protection would depend on whether it was a full genuine hpi check

or just a cheaply imitation

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE

 

After pressuring the seller of the van on the phone it turns out he values his knee caps higher than his wallet.

 

He has paid the outstanding balance of £3874 to Varooma and the issue is now resolved.

 

One question I now have is

 

I've been told that for the past 18 months I have not been the owner of the vehicle as varooma owned it.

 

Would this has rendered my insurance cover void had I have had to make a claim?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...