Car Hire Purchase Agreement Question

[postggj]

Was He Made Aware Of The Application To Repo The Car Through The Court

 

If They Have Terminated The Agreement While In Default Of The Cca Request, They Are In Big Trouble

 

He Will Be Entitled To All The Payments Back

 

Ive Never Known Vat Be Charged And Put On An Agreement

 

It Should Be Inclusive Of Vat In The Ammount Of Credit

 

 

Can You Confirm

 

The Agreement Was Terminated While Waiting For A Legible Copy Of The Cca

 

The Car Was Repo While Waiting For The Cca

[andrew1]

Was He Made Aware Of The Application To Repo The Car Through The Court

 

If They Have Terminated The Agreement While In Default Of The Cca Request, They Are In Big Trouble

 

He Will Be Entitled To All The Payments Back

 

Ive Never Known Vat Be Charged And Put On An Agreement

 

It Should Be Inclusive Of Vat In The Ammount Of Credit

 

 

Can You Confirm

 

The Agreement Was Terminated While Waiting For A Legible Copy Of The Cca - YES

 

The Car Was Repo While Waiting For The Cca

- Yes They (The finance co) were ordered by the court to supply a legible copy and didn't, they repo'd the car before the legible copy was supplied as far as I know.

 

Looking at this copy of the agreement I posted

Key Financial Information:

In box one l/h side - Amount of credit A-B £13039.19

Then r/h side Total Amount Payable £16396.10

 

Other Financial Information:

 

Cash Price of goods £10,915.74

Add VAT @ 17.5% £ 1910.26

Cash Price of other Goods £472 ( not sure what that was)

 

Total cash Price (A) £13,298.00

Less deposit (B) £ 258.81

Charges © £2,852.10

Acceptance Fee (D) £99 (included in first installment)

Credit facility fee (E) £139 ( Payable at same time as last installment

Option Fee (F) £10 (Payable at same time as the last installment

 

Total Charge for Credit £3100.10

 

Car costs £10,915.74 + 1910.26 vat + 472.00 = Total £13298.00

 

£13298.00 less deposit £258.81 = £13039.19 which is what they describe initially as

Amount of Credit (A - B) How does this affect the VAT stated as per your thoughts-is this not just a box to show the breakdown of the figures?

 

At what point does one know the agreement has been terminated?

[andrew1]

Postggj - you are a star... thank you. My chum had his hearing adjourned. The Judge appeared to be confused by the whole thing, slightly unsure of who wanted what, Judge told him that in his opinion the car should not have been repossessed and there was NO order from the court for it to be so, the last hearing was set-aside whilst the finance co came up with the credit agreement. They have now supplied it some 4-5 months late, but the car was repo'd during the period they were in default of the request, the Judge has put a 28 day adjournment in place requesting both parties produce a sworn avadavat stating exactly what each others position is. So, we'll just wait for the papers to come back from the court and I'll come back and we can put a skeleton argument/statement of truth together. I did one for him for the court which he chopped about a bit apparently so I haven't seen what he did submit, but now we can go back and supply the court with a proper breakdown of the case laws which support this breach/default in producing the CCA....if you have anything like a template you can post up I'd appreciate it . Many thanks again, it gave him the confidence to go in with a new vigour which he'd lost feeling browbeaten. So thank you very much for your input everyone on this thread.

[postggj]

Thats Great Andrew

 

So No Court Order For The Repo

 

Thats Is Going To Be One Hell Of A Pay Day

Every Penny Paid Plus 8 % Interest

 

A New Bit Of News

 

This VaT Confused Me And It Seems The Dealer Has Been Naughty

 

you Only Pay Vat On A Vehicle If Its A Company Vehicle

 

COMERCIAL VEHICLE

 

Ill Get Some Of My Papers Together

 

At This Time I Take It You Just Want A Skeleton Argument So The Judge Knows Exactly Whats What

Edited August 20, 2009 by postggj

[andrew1]

Thats Great Andrew

 

So No Court Order For The Repo

 

Thats Is Going To Be One Hell Of A Pay Day

Every Penny Paid Plus 8 % Interest

 

A New Bit Of News

 

This VaT Confused Me And It Seems The Dealer Has Been Naughty

 

you Only Pay Vat On A Vehicle If Its A Company Vehicle

 

COMERCIAL VEHICLE

 

Ill Get Some Of My Papers Together

 

At This Time I Take It You Just Want A Skeleton Argument So The Judge Knows Exactly Whats What

 

Thanks my friend - My chum is a bit of a misnomer when it comes to these kinds of things-admin-technicalities and can't believe the stuff we come up with on here, he gets tickled pink when he can pull one over on these companies because he is more than likely to call these guys all the names under the sun in rage when they come after him and loses the plot - having a cool mind around to help certainly has focussed his attentions -so thanks for that.

 

Now this VAT, is this true, there is no vat on vehicles unless they are in a company name? I have just checked this with a fellow I know in a car showroom and he says that VAT would be charged on new cars, if this was new as the agreement shows would that change things here? The agreement was in his name not a company so if what you say is true then the agreement is wrong too.

 

I'm going to have to have a serious chat with this guy because he just told me the £472 shown on the agreement in the 'other financial Information' box was in fact a figure put in for what he thought was the trade in for another car...which should therefore mean the £472 should be a deduction rather than an addition to the sums shown. He also said he thought he got £1472 not £472 for the other car, but it sounds like the car salesman was indeed a 'car salesman' and fiddled about with the figures so he was never quite sure what the actual deal was - typically, he just signed the agreement thinking it had been done correctly - where have we all heard that before?

 

I've asked him for copies of all the documents he wrote and then we can get this sorted properly and a skeleton done.

 

Many thanks

Edited August 20, 2009 by andrew1

[postggj]

Its Payback Time

 

I Can Confirm

At Point Of Sale, Vat Is Only Charged On Comercial Sales

 

So If The Vehicle Is Not In A Ltd Company Name

 

Its Fraud To Begin With

[postggj]

Cash Price For Other Goods 272

Whats This Rubish

 

If Its A Charge It Should State What It Is

 

Multiple Agreements Falling With In An Agreement For A Start

 

Where The Hell Did He Dig This Agreement Up From

 

Its Pure Crap

 

It Wont Even Be A Challenge Plus Him Getting All His Payments Back Through The Illegal Repo Is Poetic Justice In My Book

[andrew1]

Sounding good, but as I just added to my post, this seems like it was a new car -as shown on the agreement - haven't checked with my mate but it's possible. Now if this was a new car then vat could be payable could it not?

[postggj]

You Pay Vat On A New VehicLe And Must Be Shown On The Agreement

 

NEEDS TO BE CONFIRMED IF THIS WAS A NEW VEHICLE

Edited August 20, 2009 by postggj

[andrew1]

The Vat Must Be Inclusive

I Repeat

 

You Only Pay Vat At Point Of Sale On Comercial Vehicles

 

I Have Checked With The Local Tax Office On This One

 

In My Job And A Small Town, You Get To Know People By There First Name

 

Okay, please don't think me argumentative...I'm just trying to get to the real nitty gritty...if you look at the agreement document you see the various boxes with the breakdown of the figures.

 

Under the ' Other Financial Information ' on the left hand side it just breaks the figures down and 'could' just be for information only as there will be a vat element if it is new. The dealer gets charged vat by the providing supplier and therefore makes the figure up to show the actual price as you say to be an 'inclusive figure' Which, if you add (forget the £472 deduction and add it for the time being until we establish exactly what it is) Cash price for goods £10915.74 to the VAT of £1910.26 and the £472 - you get the figure in the right hand box labeled (A) Total Cash Price - £13298.00

 

At the top under Key Financial Information in A - B Amount of Credit is the £13298 less the deposit of £258.81 = £13039.19 so one would imagine that this has been laid out correctly is it not?

[elizabeth1]

Thanks you guys sorry, been tied up with family issues..( Lizzy's a guy )

 

 

There are worse things that I could be!!

[andrew1]

There are worse things that I could be!!

 

...a woman?

[andrew1]

I have now seen my friend Bob and have a good background to this now. We have to get a Witness statement together and presented as an advadavit(?) (signed I guess by a solicitor) and into court by the 9th so I have to get my skates on.

 

There was a hearing in April with regards to the repossession of the car. On the day of the hearing his wife fell ill, the hearing was at 2pm and he phoned the court and informed them of this and that he was unable to attend. For some reason the hearing went ahead in his absence and the Judge granted Judgment to the claimant. However this was quickly appealed against and the Judge granted an extension until mid June and issued a stay on proceedings.

 

At this hearing the Judge ordered that the original judgment be set-aside and questioned why it went ahead in the absence of the defendant in any case. He also ordered that in 7 days a legible copy of the credit agreement be provided by the claimant as the one supplied to date was illegible, so too the terms and conditions which accompanied them. This was not complied with and the finance company asked for an extension. Eventually in August they managed to blow a copy up big enough to make it legible, but only the agreement, not the T & C's they are still illegible and not supplied. However, whilst the stay was still in place the vehicle was repossessed AND sold in mid May.

 

Over one third of the payments on this HP agreement had been paid, he had offered prior to the original hearing to voluntarily surrender the vehicle.

 

So, we still have no t & c's legible and they are therefore I'd assume in breach of the cca request - do we just ask again or let them fall on their face in court yet again or will the agreement suffice the Judges needs without the t & c's ( I'd doubt that personally)?

 

In some way it appears the first Judge is at fault for allowing the case to be heard at all, but what difference will that make now? - The second judge questioned this, but what effect can that have now? The car was repo'd whilst the stay/set aside was in place and sold, without any reference to Bob whatsoever.

 

The finance company are after the balance of the payments. The Judge told both parties to go away and lay out exactly what they wanted the court to do.

 

I now have to put together a Witness Statement informing the court what he is asking for. Primarily what are our options.

 

1) Default on T & c's CCA request?

2) Vehicle sold whilst under stay of proceedings

3) Amounts paid already?

4) ???? suggestions????

 

If anyone knows of case law to back up any of this what I would like to do is prove the finance company in breach of their responsibilities, no further payment due, refund of the £7000+ he's already paid and some kind of compensation for his loss of the vehicle which shouldn't have been taken at all and sold. Can anyone help construct this argument then I will draw up the Witness statement from it?

 

Much appreciated ....

[andrew1]

An order was granted by the court on 6th April following the first hearing 30th March which Bob didn't attend for the vehicle to be repossessed.

 

The car was taken in May and sold on 10th July

 

Following his appeal, at a hearing on 12th JUNE (note the date) the Judge set-aside the order of 30th March and stated the first hearing shouldn't have gone ahead without him. He also ordered the Fin Co to produce a legible copy of the Agreement within 7 days, they failed to do so and asked for an extension, they failed there too and eventually provided it in Aug without legible t & C's.

 

Despite this set-aside, the finance company went ahead and sold the vehicle without his knowledge on 10th July and are using the Order granted at the first hearing 6th April as their excuse...Should this have happened?

 

The CCA request was just a letter asking for a copy of the agreement, it did not include a £1 fee, but the company wrote acknowledging his request and forwarded a copy (illegible) so would that still be classed as an official request?

[andrew1]

Can anyone add anything at all to this before I get this Witness statement done?

 

Thank you..

[postggj]

hi andrew

 

seems the finance co have well and truly shot themself in the foot

 

let me get this straight

 

the hearing to set asside the judgement on the 6 april was done on the 12 june.

 

the judge upheld the application and set asside that original judgement.

 

they then went and sold the car which they allready had in there possesion on the 10 july.

 

what a foul up

left not talking to the right it seems.

 

they have sold the vehicle when they have no order as the original court order has been set asside.

by rights the vehicle should have been returned to him.

 

can you confirm the date they received the cca request

 

just an acknowledgement is good enough. its up to them if they ask for a quid or not

 

i thinks its time to have a quiet word with the finance co for settlement.

 

by selling the car, they have gone againt a court order.

lets see them explain that in front of a judge.

 

let me know the date of the original cca request

[andrew1]

The original cca request was at the end of October / beginning of Nov 08

 

that followed 2 telephone requests which brought nothing.

 

Sadly we do not have a copy of the letter, but we do have a letter acknowledging it and the illegible agreement which they sent in the response.

 

Would the fact that the Judge at the first hearing gave them possession not have actually transferred the ownership at that time when they took the car in May giving them the right to sell it? I know the June hearing set aside the judgement like you understand, but they sold it in July which is a bit strange..

 

The t & c's are still illegible and it now appears the t 7 c's were in fact a document on sheets of paper AFTER the signature document..so could be trouble there too...?

 

Thanks for responding

[postggj]

well if you made the cc request then and was acknowledged,

they are stuffed as long as you have confirmation of receipt in writing

 

the set asside granted would put the agreement back to the beggining

they would have no rights to sell it as it still belonged to your pal in a sense

 

the set asside was in june and they have gone against a court order by selling the car july

 

some direct talking with the finance co is in order telling them of there foul up and exploiting it before it goes back in front of a judge

 

at the end of the day

 

they have sold the vehicle against a court order

 

this case has gone back to the start so no repo order is valid as that has been over tirned by the later set asside

[andrew1]

well if you made the cc request then and was acknowledged,

they are stuffed as long as you have confirmation of receipt in writing

 

the set asside granted would put the agreement back to the beggining

they would have no rights to sell it as it still belonged to your pal in a sense

 

the set asside was in june and they have gone against a court order by selling the car july

 

some direct talking with the finance co is in order telling them of there foul up and exploiting it before it goes back in front of a judge

 

at the end of the day

 

they have sold the vehicle against a court order

 

this case has gone back to the start so no repo order is valid as that has been over tirned by the later set asside

 

 

thanks..sorry I'm back a bit late! - quick peek before I turn in..LOL - Trouble is Judge said at the last hearing that he didn't quite understand what Bob was looking for him to do -( sounds like the judge just couldn't grasp things) so he told him to get an avadavat signed stating exactly what he expects the court to do and get it in by 10 am on Wednesday - this Wednesday coming (Bobs 150 miles away from me so it has to get posted tomorrow latest) the Claimants to do the same but 7 days later for some reason, but then there'll be another hearing before the end of the month, so what I'm doing is putting together a witness statement and a whole package of errors outlining what laws they have broken, pleading niavety as an LIP in previous hearing but having researched this is what the company has done so the Judge doesn't have to look far, I'll do it all for him CCA , Consumer Credit Agreements regs etc... My arguments to date are:

 

No legible t & c's still despite court ordering them

 

T & C's coming in the document outside the 4 main corners of the agreement

 

APR not right

 

Car sold whilst stay ordered

 

What I could really do with is knowing exactly what recompense we can ask ?

 

Thanks

[Toulose LeDebt]

As you're short of time here I've put a few words together if you get stuck on your deadline. You've been getting some very good help from the Caggers on this thread, good luck!!

 

In November 2008 the defendant served a request upon the claimant pursuant to Section 78(1) of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA), the claimant failed to comply with this lawful request and thus whilst in breach of this Sec 78(1) CCA request the claimant was unable to enforce the agreement (CCA 78(6)(a)).

 

Due to the defendants wife falling ill upon the day of the hearing in March (**/03/2009 the defendant was unable to attend the hearing and thus the defendant was unable to bring the claimants failure to comply with the Sec 78 request to the attention of the Court.

 

Since the defendant was unable to appear at this hearing, the claimants failure under Sec 78 of the CCA was not made known to the Judge and judgment was awarded in default.

 

 

At the subsequent hearing to have this judgment set aside **/**/2009 the defendant was able to bring the Sec 78 breach to the attention of the Judge who ordered the claimant to comply with the request by producing a legible copy of the agreement and terms & conditions of this agreement within 7 days. At this hearing the Judge ordered that the order of **/03/2009 be set aside

but the vehicle which had already been repossessed under this order was subsequently not returned to the defendant despite the claimant having no effective Court order granting possession. The claimant did not comply with the order of the Judge at this hearing and took until August 2009 to produce an enlarged copy of the original agreement, (this copy was simply a blown up version of the previous document not a better more legible copy). The claimant remains in breach of the order to produce a legible copy of the terms and conditions of the agreement.

 

The supplied copy of the agreement fails to meet the requirements of the Sec 78 CCA request on technical grounds.

 

At some time after the hearing at which the order granting possession to the claimant had been set aside, the exact date is not known but it is believed to be in July, the claimant sold the vehicle.

 

At the time of sale of the vehicle there was no Court order in existence granting possession to the claimant.

 

Since the defendant had paid more than one third of the amount of the agreement the terms of Sec 90(1)(b) of the CCA were met and the claimant was thus not lawfully entitled to have or take possession of the vehicle without an order from the Court.

 

Without a Court order granting possession the claimant was in breach of Section 90 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 at all times between the date of the hearing to set aside the order of possession and the time of sale of the vehicle and being in breach of the condition set out in Sec 90(1)(b) of the CCA the claimant was not lawfully entitled to dispose of the vehicle which should have been returned to the defendant when the possession order ceased to exist.

 

The remedy for a breach of Section 90 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is set out in Section 91 of this Act which I reproduce here.

 

Section 91 CCA 1974

 

91.

Consequences of breach of s. 90.

If goods are recovered by the creditor in contravention of section 90—

(a)the regulated agreement, if not previous terminated, shall terminate, and

(b)the debtor shall be released from all liability under the agreement, and shall be entitled to recover from the creditor all sums paid by the debtor under the agreement.

 

The defendant avers that the claimant first became in breach of Sec 90 CCA when they failed to return the vehicle after a reasonable period when the original Court order granting possession was set aside.

The defendant avers that the claimant disposed of the vehicle at a time when no Court order granting possession to the claimant existed and that such possession and subsequent disposal of these protected goods represents a breach of Sec 90 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 since the terms set out in Sec 90(1)(b) were met and the claimant did not have a valid Court order as prescribed within section 90.

 

The defendant seeks the following remedy pursuant to Sec 91 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974:

 

That pursuant to Sec 91(a) of the CCA the agreement be deemed terminated.

That pursuant to Sec 91(b) of the CCA the defendant be released from all liability under the agreement.

That pursuant to Sec 91(b) of the CCA the claimant be ordered to return all sums paid by the defendant under the agreement.

 

The defendant has attached a financial statement of this account which he believes to be accurate, the claimants failure to provide such statement under the Sec 78(1) request has severely prejudiced the defendants ability to ensure that all payments made by the defendant appear in this account but states that any omissions from this account are de minimus and in favour of the claimant in each instance.

 

The defendant seeks full payment of the sum set out on the attached financial statement of the account with interest claimed under Sec 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per year.

[andrew1]

You sir/madam are a star - thank you very much for this, I really do appreciate it. As you say, along with others like postgg I have what I need and this really is appreciated putting it into the terminology these judges understand..

 

Do you think the cca request which went in the form of a letter in Oct/November, but not in the format as we caggers know it will make any difference without the £1? postgg thinks as long as we have the acknowledgment (which we have) as a request for a copy then that should suffice, just wondered how you feel the Judge may view that with regards to a reference of breaching a CCA request?

 

This is brilliant, thank you..

[Toulose LeDebt]

 

Do you think the cca request which went in the form of a letter in Oct/November, but not in the format as we caggers know it will make any difference without the £1? postgg thinks as long as we have the acknowledgment (which we have) as a request for a copy then that should suffice, just wondered how you feel the Judge may view that with regards to a reference of breaching a CCA request?

 

 

Since you have written acknowledment from the Finance Co and the Judge at the previous hearing has made an order that they produce the agreement and T&C's this shouldn't be a problem. However wrongly the original request was made, there's no escaping the fact that the claimant was ordered to produce documents by the Judge.

I set out the case as your friend believes it stands. If the claimant were to make any argument over whether the CCA request was valid it is now actually of very little consequence to the matter.

 

What your friend is doing is not arguing that the Sec 78 request was not complied with, that's just a statement he believes to be true.

 

Your friends argument is simply that as a result of the April? hearing the possession order was set aside, the reasons for that are not important at this stage, all that matters is that it was set aside and the claimant had due notice in which to apply to have that decision varied, stayed or overturned and failed to do so.

 

 

Whatever the rights and the wrongs surrounding any of the earlier hearings or disclosure, this legalities of this case changed drastically when the claimant first failed to return and then subsequently disposed of the vehicle.

Instead of being the 'normal' argument over whether the agreement is enforceable etc. you can ignore all that and go straight for unlawful repossession and recission of the agreement with the Sec 90 breach.

 

The above statement simplifies matters by introducing the sec 90 breach and 91 remedy so there's no need to get involved in the nitty gritties of the agreement as the whole case against your friend has at this stage been reduced to one single point.

 

The over riding question facing the Judge now is simply:

 

At the time of sale did the claimant hold a valid Court order granting them possession?

 

 

They didn't:- We know it, they know it and the Court know it or will know it very soon. Therefore the claimants possession and ultimate disposal of the vehicle was in breach of Sec 90 CCA 1974.

 

They can argue that the sec 78 request was not valid all they like but that request was later superceded by the Judge ordering them to produce certain docs anyway. Strictly speaking the original should be made available to the Court so you would have had them over producing a copy had they made the effort.

 

They sold the vehicle whilst in default of the Court order requiring this documentation to be produced and at a time when no Court order awarding them possession existed.

 

Even had they produced the original agreement in Court (as they are indeed obliged to) the fact remains that there was no possession order in their favour.

 

Don't lose sight of this fact it's what in all likelihood will win your friend his case.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Toulose LeDebt

[andrew1]

Thank you, I can now put this together. I'll let you know how it transpires, but I think you know guys the result already

 

Much appreciate all your efforts...I feel a donation coming on...

[Toulose LeDebt]

I've had a very long few days and myeyes are tired so I read 'donation' as 'domination' and thought 'me too'.

 

ps don't forget to ask that any adverse entries recorded against your friend be removed and the account marked as satisfied with all CRA's.

[andrew1]

Well, just an update and perhaps a cry for further advice...

 

This case gets more bizaar by the day...my chum went for his hearing and because of the post strike the finance company's solicitors are saying they didn't get a copy of his defence in time, well I put up a scorcher based upon advice on here and on the hearing day the solicitors didn't turn up....my chum did and they Judge went off and phoned the solicitors would you believe and they said that in the absence of the defence they 'assumed' it had been adjourned - WTF? so, the Judge came back into court and told my chum he'd have to go to trial. Whilst he has now said exactly what his requirements for settlement are there would need to be a trial to settle this....so, we now have the Allocation Questionnaire to complete and get in by Monday (tomorrow). That's not a problem in itself, but reading through this form n150 I wonder, despite it being fairly straight forward, if anyone has any tips to add in this?

 

Recap:

Arrears on agreement, car repo'd, judge placed stay but finance co sold the car - we have counterclaimed for both no legible agreement ( judge agreed) and being in default of cca request, cca just about legible sent all be it a blown up version, but no T & C's supplied even now. Also for selling the car whilst stay in place. So claim is for something like 9k back which is what has been paid to date + any damages the court feels just awarding.

 

My thoughts are to slap in a part 36 offer to the solicitors to try to get settlement of say £8-9k....it would be useful to know what you feel having had previous on this? The allocation Questionnaire looks like it might go fast track, but is there an advantage to keep it small claims even though it's over 5k?

 

Thank you.

Edited November 8, 2009 by andrew1