Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Avg. Content Per Day

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Dodgeball last won the day on April 4

Dodgeball had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,220 Excellent

About Dodgeball

  • Rank
    Gold Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

617 profile views
  1. With due respect to the OP. I don't think anything on this thread is "clear". My point was that whatever occurred there has been little or no damage to the Hirer/buyer. Apparently, the vehicle still has a sale value commensurate with one of its correct mileage. She is not bound to purchase the vehicle, as far as the law is concerned the car is still on hire at this point, there are remedies available under the Act which enable her to return it wit no further cost if she feels she has been sold a lemon.
  2. I really do not understand what is going on here TBH. The OP buys a car for 18K, five months later, no arrears she finds that it has been clocked, yes I can see how that may irritate. But then she says the car is worth 17k TRADE now, that's even with the millage issue. She needs13k to pay off the HP, she could loan the money, sell the car, pay back the loan with a few days interest, and recover the deposit with 5 months free rental under her belt. the HP company would be the ones out of pocket...
  3. AS said she cannot legally can't sell the car until title is transferred. She cannot say there were current damages, she may be able to complain if and when the car was hers, but until the P is settled it ihs the HP company who need to complain to the dealer. Whilst she has the car, she will be paying contractual payments if she stops the will repossess and chase her for the full amount outstanding. I would get the car back under VT then pursue costs, outside the agreement.
  4. You are not the only one. You say you paid £18 for the car now you say it is worth 17k trade, sounds to me like you got a good deal. So what are your loses? Or is this whole thread just an elaborate shaggy dog story. If this is the case you do not want to terminate at all, why would you? just pay the agreement and bill the dealer for work done, if you feel it unjust.
  5. Yes sorry, I thought I had edited it, but it seems not. AS DX says The auction was in reference to a surrender of the vehicle, not the VT. This is set at 50% The advice was that any proceeds in excess to the sum remaining after the voluntary surrender was sent to the hirer, this has been challenged lately, I think I inferred that in the previous post. The OP paid a large deposit it has to be remembered. Also, the idea is to limit the loss to 50%, I have difficulty in seeing how this would be beneficial later in the agreement when the 50% mark had been passed. Are you saying that a debtor should terminate when he only owes ten per cent at 50% to take advantage of this protection? The whole point is to protect the debtor from having to purchase a car which, but for this section, she would be contractually obliged to pay, this is precisely the situation the OP finds herself. As I think I said, at the being of a loan there is very little paid off the principle so a surrender figure would be high. However the further you go, the nearer the two figures get and at some point voluntary surrender is actually a more attractive option, although not in the OPs case. surely it makes sense that the longer the contract runs the more of the contractual sum is paid to the creditor, this is hardly beneficial to the debtor.
  6. There is something else to consider, seems like a lifetime ago now, but didn't you say bailiffs had a warrant on your goods? If so you could not sell the car anyway. they would be bound.
  7. No. If you VT all you pay is 50% of the Total price of the goods( no interest). If for instance, the total price is £2000(and you have paid £1000 including your deposit, there is nothing more to pay. I believe are at the beginning of your loan so you would have paid very little off the value of the goods. In your case, I would guess no more than £700. If you just returned the car or it has defaulted they would be looking at £1300 to settle on top of what you have already paid. If you got the car back, which is by no means certain, you would have paid about £21kor a car which was not worth £18K in the first place. Then, of course, there is the matter of where is the£13k coming from. Are you going to sell the car which has cost you £20k + and make a profit? or even be within spitting distance of breaking even, not on your life..
  8. You couldn't email me, could you? Be interested to read it. please
  9. Hi Fletch how are you\ Are you looking for section 40 of the CCA mate or the amendments in the 2006 section25, I don't think they were repealed by the FCA. Sorry if I have the wrong end, been a long day
  10. DX Did I write this? I wrote something very similar back in 2012. Everyone knows the score now, just a simple letter saying you want to exercise your rights under section 99 of the consumer credit act, and await instructions about how to return the car. They need two weeks notice, say you have another car, and you need it off your drive. You can threaten them with storage charges, but that is for a later date if they do not comply. Recorded of course
  11. Actually, High-value claims can be started in the High court and judgement issued. Also, many Statutes require it. CPR7 I think. 000Some legislation forbids it also like the CCA 1974, count court only.
  12. ^He above should read, "DONT let them default you." Can't edit
  13. Whatever you don't let them you if the HP co. default you, it's game over.
  • Create New...