The first thing is not to worry about clause (2) - that protects you as you are the transferor (or one of them) from action by anyone as a result of any breach of a covenant by your ex after the date of the transfer. If there is a mortgage then the lender should be joining in as a party, and signing/executing the transfer to give their consent to it. Are they are party to it also? Really the transfer should also contain a covenant by your ex to observe the terms of the original mortgage and the lender should be releasing you from your obligations pursuant to it. That is how a transfer of equity normally works. Again, there should be some reference to the amount that your ex is paying to you for the transaction. This might, however, refer back to the court order. The reference to your ex using best endeavours to remove you from the mortgage is a court term and you must make sure that the transfer contains a provision that the lender releases you from the obligations under it. At the moment I would not sign it if I were you.

Update - Council have taken it back and I have to write to them explaining. Bailiffs suspended now.

Thanks everyone. Yes there is a redirection on but nothing has been sent. It may have gone to the old address in the period when there wasn't a redirection in place but either way the bailiff knows that they have not served anything at this address. They are trying to enforce a warrant they know he hasn't had which I don't think they are allowed to do. He hasn't got a new car as all three cars are in my name as it makes the insurance cheaper. I'll see what happens and may just ask the local authority to take it back and I'll pay the original charge. Thanks again guys.

Dear Caggers Sorry to be asking for advice again. OH received a letter from B&S at the end of last week (dated 8th August) with usual stuff about levying goods etc. It's for an unpaid PCN from last November just before we moved house. OH recalls vaguely that he had the ticket for overstaying in a council car park (by ten minutes) but owing to move and my ill health at the time (stroke) overlooked it and subsequently sold the car just before we moved. No further correspondence has ever been received by him until last week. He rang TEC today and filled out their out of time application today but received an email back to say that none of the grounds for appeal were ticked on the form. Well, none of them applied (there were only four). He does not contest the penalty itself but wants to get the matter dealt with by the council and not the bailiffs (they haven't been contacted). Rang the council and explained and they have put a hold on things for two weeks. However, we seem to be at an impasse. I presume the bailiffs will not turn up but they can go and sing if they do. Should we pursue via TEC or the council? I don't think the council should have instructed the bailiffs knowing that we had never received the warrant or other statutory correspondence/notices owing to the change of address. I wonder whether, if we were to present this to the council in this fashion, they might just waive the pcn altogether or what other recourse might we have? TEC were not aware of OH's new address at all so it is the bailiff who has found that out and carried on regardless of due process. Whilst OH does not dispute the pcn would there be grounds to get it revoked under the circumstances? Thanks to you all for your great advice to all on here. When I am feeling a bit better an ex-lawyer might be able to add to it! OB

Thanks for that. I'll write and see what happens. TBH I'd be happy just getting some of the money back although he clearly hadn't bothered to check it was working. They wouldn't have got it done any cheaper as the reconditioned motor is £300 in itself and if a SAAB garage did it would probably charge upwards of £1000 as they have a special calibrator for the roof. I'll let you know what happens but thanks for the advice which I'll certainly remember in the future.

Thanks. The only problem is that it's already being repaired at the garage. Expect to get it back early next week. It hadn't crossed my mind to go back to the dealer until I was reading stuff on this site and realised that they should have rectified it particularly as my purchase was based upon a misrepresentation that the mechanism needed a bit of oil. I should in hindsight have asked them to 'oil' it and then see what happened when it wouldn't work. I usually buy cars privately so not used to having rights to send them back. Once I get the bill next week I am just tempted to send a copy of it and ask them to pay it as they would have had to do if they had got it fixed. The problem really is that a convertible car is worthless if the roof doesn't work.

Thanks Rebel. Where is your signature?

Hello there After reading other posts I thought I might be able to get some of your splendid advice about this. I bought a Saab 900 convertible a couple of months ago from a dealer. The car was described in the usual way FSH, MOT, etc. Whilst it has a service history it is not complete but I'm not worried about that as I've had it serviced. Apart from a few issues the car had a reasonably clean bill of health from my local independent Saab specialist. When we viewed the car the roof would not operate properly. The tonneau (the bit that raises up near the boot where the roof hides when it is down) was making a grinding noise. The chap at the car sales said it needed a bit of oil as the car had been stood for a while. On this advice I decided to buy it anyway. However, my garage has said it needs a new motor (common fault I now discover) which with fitting and the motor will cost around £500-600. This is one third of what I paid for the car at what I thought to be a reasonable price. Do I have any redress here or should I have been more prudent? I bought the car about two months ago and the hood has now failed completely. It is only since joining this magnificent forum that I thought that I might have some redress at all. I don't know whether SOGA might help but any guidance would be much appreciated. Many thanks OB

Thanks everyone Just in the process of writing my letter to Lloyds. Does anyone have the necessary addresses to send for Current Account, Credit Card, Loan, or should the letters all go to one address? I tried ringing them to ask but they won't talk to me without name and account number and all sorts of other nonsense which, at this stqge, don't want to give them. Thanks OB

Thanks. I suppose I can afford three quid instead of one.

Many thanks everyone. With regard to the Bank they appear to be dealing with all three debts separately, i.e. different DCAs are writing about different amounts. Will I need to send three separate CCA requests or just one? Thanks.

Many thanks for the form. I think best not to ignore really. I opened a different bank account a while ago and haven't used the indebted account for a long time.

Last year the firm I worked for put me on part time, temporarily, and then dropped a load of poo on me by refusing to review the arrangement at the agreed time. This put me in financial difficulties as I was net £500 down per month. Consequently I had to stop paying credit card bills and a bank loan. The usual three calls a day started including to my place of work, home, and mobile.Within two months my caller display had clocked up over 500 calls between the two organisations. (One was an 01273 number if that is a clue). I put in a complaint to the Bank and the calls then stopped. Not long after I had a stroke (last November - I was only 36) and haven't been able to work since. My firm terminated my contract. I've not really been up to doing anything about my finances since but I'm thinking that I probably need to before I get a CC summons on the doorstep. I owe the bank about £20,000 made up of overdraft, loan, and credit card. Also another credit card of about £10,000 - this one was arranged on the internet. I've been having the usual Moorcroft, etc., letters threatening all sorts to my old address but there is a re-direction on so I get them. Moorcroft have, however, sent a letter to my new address saying they are looking for Mr. Xxx Xxxx and if they don't hear back they'll presume that it's me - tossers. Anyway, my question is, should I continue to ignore them or should I do SAR and CCA letters to them? What are the chances of them issuing proceedings? Sorry to go on a bit. Many thanks.

I think HC says you give way to traffic already on the roundabout which is not quite the same as giving way to the right. There are few roundabouts with Give Way markings on them. It may be, therefore, that he should have given way to you if you were already on the roundabout and he was driving to fast.