Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

bought a car saturday afternoon no tax supplyed are you able to drive it around?


leroist
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5363 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

I'm interested to know how this conspiracy case is going - Anyone shed any light on it?

 

Well, I recently bought a three year old Vauxhall direct from the Police through BCA. They forgot to mention that the gearbox was to follow. Having only two gears does make driving a tad difficult!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Good afternoon..............first time poster so please be gentle. :)

 

Ended up on this thread because I've been trying for the past 9 days to buy a car from a very well respected car dealer.

All the paperwork has been done and approved but the main holdup seems to be that the previous owner had private plates on the car and the car dealer "can't get the right paperwork" to tax the car. All they have is the part of the V5 which is given to the new owner [me].

 

Apparently, DVLA will not allow them to purchase an excise disc as they cannot prove that the original owner has traded it into them.

 

I read the posts above about the form V62 and wonder if any experts on here could confirm it works.

 

I have the distinct feeling the garage are trying to cheese me off so they can sell it at a higher price. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ended up on this thread because I've been trying for the past 9 days to buy a car from a very well respected car dealer.

All the paperwork has been done and approved but the main holdup seems to be that the previous owner had private plates on the car and the car dealer "can't get the right paperwork" to tax the car. All they have is the part of the V5 which is given to the new owner [me].

 

A dealer/trader should have the whole V5 less the yellow section (section 9 - which the previous owner should have sent to the DVLA to notify them of transfer of keepership).

 

If the cherished number transfer has been done correctly, DVLA would have issued a new V5 with the original (as opposed to the cherished) VRM to the previous owner - who should then have used this to trade the car to the dealer.

 

If the dealer only has the green section, then he must register the car in his/company's name. He can obtain VED using the green section alone for up to 2 months from the date he acquired the vehicle. However, he will have to produce valid insurance (I'm am not sure if a motor trader's policy is adequate - GWC100 will know) and a V62. On obtaining VED, the green section and V62 will be retained and a new V5 issued in the dealer's name.

 

Apparently, DVLA will not allow them to purchase an excise disc as they cannot prove that the original owner has traded it into them.

 

This is just nonsense, the DVLA are not in the least bit interested in ownership. Anybody can apply for VED - they do not have to be the RK.

 

I read the posts above about the form V62 and wonder if any experts on here could confirm it works.

 

A V62 has to be completed by the dealer and handed over with the green section of the previous V5. However, if the dealer has only the green section, then the previous owner should have sent the rest of the V5 to DVLA; who should automatically send out a new V5 in the dealer's name.

 

I have the distinct feeling the garage are trying to cheese me off so they can sell it at a higher price. ;)

 

Possibly. Or they have f*cked up badly on taking the car in

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much for your asssistance PATDAVIES. ;)

 

The garage are saying that the holdup is due to the fact they only have the bottom section of the V5 and it's in the cherished plate. I think they've taken the car in with the cherished number and they are trying to flog that while selling the car to me with the original number on it.

 

Either way, DVLA apparently won't issue a new tax disc for the car with the original reg number applying.

 

Thanks again. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much for your asssistance PATDAVIES. ;)

 

The garage are saying that the holdup is due to the fact they only have the bottom section of the V5 and it's in the cherished plate. I think they've taken the car in with the cherished number and they are trying to flog that while selling the car to me with the original number on it.

 

Either way, DVLA apparently won't issue a new tax disc for the car with the original reg number applying.

 

Thanks again. :)

 

The V5 with the cherished plate should have been returned to the DVLA in its entirety as part of the number retention/transfer. It must accompany the V317.

 

If the retention has taken place then:

1) no document with the cherished number is now valid for the vehicle. The V5 (and the green slip) are void.

2) if the entire V5 was not returned, then the retention may be voided and the number lost forever.

 

To retain a number, you must send off

a)form V317 duly completed and signed by the RK;

b) the MoT certificate (if applicable)

c) the retention fee (£125 I think).

You do not send any valid VED disk until the retention is complete.

 

In return (usually about 3 - 5 days - they used to do it while you waited at LVLOs, but have stopped this now), DVLA will send back:

 

a) A V948 authorising you to obtain plates with the 'new' VRM and from when they must be displayed

b) a new MoT certificate showing the 'new' VRM (they used to simply modify, stamp and sign the old MoT certificate, but not since the computerised ones came into full use);

c) the retention certificate - V778

D) A new VED disk with the 'new' VRM. At this point the old disk is void and must be returned

 

The new V5 will be sent separately within about 4 weeks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pat..........the only paperwork they have is the bottom part of the V5 which they have asked me to sign.

 

They say that the paperwork relating to the change from the cherished number to the original number has been sent from DVLA to the original owner [for some reason] and are contacting him to obtain that paperwork.

 

They say that when they went to the local Vehicles Registration Office , the bottom part of the V5 [relating to the CHERISHED registration number] was rejected as the car was being taxed under its 'original' number.

 

I also telephoned DVLA who told me that they could not help me as "although there was a reference to that vehicle with the original number, that number was not active".

 

Thanks for being so patient. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pat..........the only paperwork they have is the bottom part of the V5 which they have asked me to sign.

 

They say that the paperwork relating to the change from the cherished number to the original number has been sent from DVLA to the original owner [for some reason] and are contacting him to obtain that paperwork.

The (entirely valid) reason is that only the RK can retain/transfer a cherished number. the garage is holding the vehicle as a trader and not RK - so they cannot do the retention.

 

If the V5 that you have signed is the cherished number V5, then you have wasted a journey. Or, they send in that V5 to transfer keepership to you and you then effectively 'own' the cherished number.

 

They say that when they went to the local Vehicles Registration Office , the bottom part of the V5 [relating to the CHERISHED registration number] was rejected as the car was being taxed under its 'original' number.
Quite rightly

 

I also telephoned DVLA who told me that they could not help me as "although there was a reference to that vehicle with the original number, that number was not active".

 

Thanks for being so patient. :)

The DVLA cannot help you as you are not the RK.

 

This could really yet go all t*ts up. You are not allowed to dispose of a vehicle until the retention/transfer is completed. The RK is specifically warned of this on the V317. The LVLO are entitled to call the vehicle in for inspection (a check of VIN and engine numbers against V5). If it isn't presented, etc. the retention/transfer is voided. If driven to the inspection, it must be taxed and MoT'd. AIUI, this would not be a valid use of trade plates (even if it was, the RK must be the trade plate holder) - GWC100 may be able to further advise on that point as a trader.

 

The DVLA can void the process any time before completion and the cherished number is lost. It sounds from the response that you had from DVLA that the process is going through, but the original owner and the trader are taking a big risk by a) jumping the gun on disposing of the vehicle, and b) not following the DVLA's procedures properly.

 

Every time that I have sold my car, I do the deal making it very clear that the VRM is not included and that the 'correct' V5 will follow in about 4 weeks.

Edited by patdavies
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds very likely Pat

 

Is it possible they are not the legal owners.........yet ....... because to date they have not completed the agreed transaction with the previous owner & are stalling

 

They probably are the owners - some deal having been done with the original owner.

 

What they are not is the registered keeper - that's all DVLA care about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We went in again on Thursday to see what the holdup was and were advised they were 'doing everything they could' but 'with the paperwork not being through, they were helpless'.

 

They were given an ultimatum. Have the car ready by Friday or keep it.

 

Friday lunchtime we got a call 'car's ready'. Went to pick it up and on examination found the car had been taxed on Wednesday.

 

Closer examination found a strong smell of paint and a hastily repaired dent on the front of the car. :D

 

One of the mechanics had had a 'slight bump' within the forecourt.

 

Still looking for another car.

 

Thanks for all your help folks. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

A new bent to the question. Coming to UK from France to pick up a car to export back to France. Car bought from dealer 8 years old, full MOT, no tax. French insurance in place but car cannot be taxed using the French insurance. Any Ideas?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will need to be re-registered in France, using the full V5C socument, whilst the previous owner needs to ensure the 'Export' slip is returned to the DVLA.

 

As for how can you move it to france without a valid tax disc, you can either take it on a transporter, or obtain trade plates which will cover the vehicle until it arrives at the Port.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with gwc that could be the cheapest, and safest option. Also, as you will be taking out of the country on perminant export, you should be able to get a refund on remaining full months tax, which should be a full refund less one months tax cost (about 20quid on most standard cars)

 

Far better to do this than risk getting stopped before you get to the port!

Link to post
Share on other sites

. Also, as you will be taking out of the country on perminant export, you should be able to get a refund on remaining full months tax, which should be a full refund less one months tax cost (about 20quid on most standard cars)

 

Not on a 6 month tax disc. There is a wrinkle that you get back one-twelfth of the annual VED for each full month on the disc. You do not get the premium that you pay for 6 months VED back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not on a 6 month tax disc. There is a wrinkle that you get back one-twelfth of the annual VED for each full month on the disc. You do not get the premium that you pay for 6 months VED back.

 

They think of everything to keep our money don't they!

 

So would it be wiser then in a case like this, to pay for 12 months tax, then surrender it to get 11 months tax back once it is out of the country? Bigger outlay initially, but less total cost after the refund.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be very difficult to get a refund. The name and address on the V14 must match exactly that on the V5c. Is it possible to do a refund from another country?

I suggested taxing the vehicle for six months (and writing off the tax) may be cheaper than transporting, depending how far the vehicle has to go to a port.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, as I suggested earlier, to use TRADE plates - which many garages will hire (with a suitable deposit) for a modest fee. Buying a disc for a day's use is plain crazy.

Sorry, but completely untrue. Lending out or hiring trade plates is a criminal offence. Apart from the fine, the trade plates will be confiscated. (I should know I've had them for 29 years)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but completely untrue. Lending out or hiring trade plates is a criminal offence. Apart from the fine, the trade plates will be confiscated. (I should know I've had them for 29 years)

 

Correct - Trade plates cannot be lent.

 

How about booking an MOT Test in Dover? (or whichever port) The law allows you to use the car on the road if it is being driven to and from the test centre so long as it is pre booked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct - Trade plates cannot be lent.

 

How about booking an MOT Test in Dover? (or whichever port) The law allows you to use the car on the road if it is being driven to and from the test centre so long as it is pre booked.

 

Won't work.

 

To be driven from Calais on UK plates requires the vehicle to be taxed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just spoke to my tame garage - they can provide their customer with the facility for a fee. I cannot find where such usage (as a trade facility) is in any way illegal.

 

As for what happens in Calais, this is clearly a different administration as the rules are different, but with French Insurance in force (pending re-registration) it makes sense to - if possible - have the paperwork completed for the vehicle as it rolls off the ferry at the far end. A firend did suggest if the vehicle 'broke down', it could be transported at a mre equitible rate to the final destination. I'm sure nobody would do this on purpose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...