Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Can you ask your GP to get a second opinion on the NHS?  (I ought to know because I'm a retired NHS manager, but worked in mental health where x-rays didn't really feature very much(!).)   Your GP may be reluctant for various reasons but you've got nothing to lose by asking.  Might be difficult if there's only one consultant in that specialty locally.   If that is a non-starter, you could ask your GP for a private referral if any of the relevant specialists run private clinics.  Your son'll get seen quicker and an initial private consultation shouldn't cost more than about a couple of hundred quid.  Then take it from there.   (Emphasise to your GP what your real concerns are and why you have them - even if it's just "I looked it up on the internet and it looks like this which can lead to serious complications.  What do you think?  I'm really worried...")   EDIT:  Just looked on my local NHS Clinical Commissioning Group website and searched for "second opinion" but nothing comes up...  I thought you were entitled to one - you'll have to ask your GP.  Or look on your own CCG site.  Oh - despite being a NHS manager I have paid to see a consultant privately.  £150 well spent - if you can afford it... which I appreciate not everyone can.
    • dont think they are even allowed to offer settlement by instalments, they are not creditors.   read the letter carefully and understand what it doesn't actually say....like the word WILL anywhere.   they,  a DCA, can't recommend anything and their client most certainly wouldn't have disclosed anything to a powerless DCA about what their solicitors might or might not have said to them. and ofcourse a solicitor is in no position whatsoever to suggest to their client they get back to the DCA and tell the DCA to tell you their client will accept instalments!   the letter is a load of ole BS that is concocted by the dca without any input or knowledge of their client nor their clients solicitor...   dx      
    • The paediatric orthopaedic consultant at the fracture clinic told us today that he believes it is just a sprain behind the knee. I'm concerned my GP will say something along the lines of, 'you have seen a consultant, he says it will heal in 2 to 3 weeks, you don't know more than him!', or something like that. It's just that I believe I can clearly see a fracture. And as there was no fall or hard knock, only a very tightly streched knee bending at an angle behind, with a load. I figured that the temdon must have pulled some bone up. And thats the injury I found online. I totally take on board what you are saying. You are correct. I guess I'll see what my GP says tomorrow, hopefully she allows me to email the images, if she doesent have access to them already. Thanks again
    • With the global market for recycled cardboard worth billions of dollars, it is attracting criminals. View the full article
    • UK house prices are predicted to fall but a report spells out why property may remain out of reach. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • Curry’s cancelled my order but took the money anyway. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423055-curry%E2%80%99s-cancelled-my-order-but-took-the-money-anyway/
      • 11 replies
    • Father passed away - Ardent Credit Services (Vodafone) now claiming he owes money. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423040-father-passed-away-ardent-credit-services-vodafone-now-claiming-he-owes-money/
      • 9 replies
    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 6 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 16 replies
postggj

Vehicle repo and s.92 of the cca 1974

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3341 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

THIS IS SECTION 92

 

2 Recovery of possession of goods or land

(1) Except under an order of the court, the creditor or owner shall not be entitled to enter any premises to take possession of goods subject to a regulated hire-purchase agreement, regulated conditional sale agreement or regulated consumer hire agreement.

(2) At any time when the debtor is in breach of a regulated conditional sale agreement relating to land, the creditor is entitled to recover possession of the land from the debtor, or any person claiming under him, on an order of the court only.

(3) An entry in contravention of subsection (1) or (2) is actionable as a breach of statutory duty.

 

 

NOW THAT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE CREDITOR/REPO AGENT WOULD NEED A COURT ORDER TO REPO OFF PRIVATE LAND/PROPERTY

 

NOW SAY HE DID NOT HAVE A COURT ORDER BUT THE LAND OWNERS PERMISSION TO REMOVE THE VEHICLE

 

EVEN WITH PERMISSION, THE LEGISLATION STATES COURT ORDER TO REPO

 

ANY COMMENTS ON THIS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also note CPR 'Practice Direction 7B -CCA 06-Unfair Relationships', incl. para 3.1 (4)

Edited by Ford

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..

Edited by Ford
duplicate post deleted

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..

Edited by Ford
dup post deleted

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
also note practice direction 7b, para 3.1 (4)

 

link please

 

thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3.1

 

Subject to paragraph 3.2 and 3.3 this practice direction applies to claims made under the following provisions of the Act:

(1) section 141 (claim by the creditor to enforce regulated agreement relating to goods etc),

 

(2) section 129 (claim by debtor or hirer for a time order),

 

(3) section 90 (creditor’s claim for an order for recovery of protected goods),

 

(4) section 92(1) (creditor’s or owner’s claim to enter premises to take possession of goods),

 

(5) section 140B(2)(a) (debtor’s or surety’s application for an order relating to an unfair relationship);

 

(6) creditor’s or owner’s claim for a court order to enforce a regulated agreement relating to goods or money where the court order is required by –

(a) section 65(1) (improperly executed agreement),

 

(b) section 86(2) (death of debtor or hirer where agreement is partly secured or unsecured),

 

© section 111(2) (default notice etc not served on surety),

 

(d) section 124(1) or (2) (taking of a negotiable instrument in breach of terms of section 123), or

 

(e) section 105(7)(a) or (b) (security not expressed in writing, or improperly executed).

 

 

 

3.2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THIS IS

 

SECTION 92 (1) OF THE CCA 1974

 

(1) Except under an order of the court, the creditor or owner shall not be entitled to enter any premises to take possession of goods subject to a regulated hire-purchase agreement, regulated conditional sale agreement or regulated consumer hire agreement.

 

AND THIS IS PRACTICE DIRECTION 7B PARA 3.1 (4)

 

(4) section 92(1) (creditor’s or owner’s claim to enter premises to take possession of goods),

 

 

COMMENTS PEOPLE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how I see it.

 

If there is no consent from the debtor, a creditor needs a court order to enter 'any premises' to repo HP goods, regardless of whether the goods are 'protected' or not (i.e. the 1/3 rule)

 

The case of Spring House v Mount Cook Land (CoA 2001) outlines that a private driveway is classed as premises.

 

Here's the case:

 

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2001/1833.html&query=title+(+Spring+)+and+title+(+House+)&method=boolean

 

Therefore a HP repo CANNOT be carried out from a private driveway unless they have the owners permission or a court order (a return of goods order is not sufficient)

 

I really hope this helps anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spot on

 

Thanks :whoo:

 

It's a bit of a shame that the act doesn't outline much to do with the possible sanctions that could be brought for wrongful removal. I'm guessing that would mean a claim for damages, either via the tort route or maybe perhaps breach of contract?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you bet sanctions

 

unlawful recession of contract for a start

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are several causes of action you could use in this situation:

 

  • Trespass
  • Wrongful Interference with Goods
  • Breach of Statutory Duty
  • Unfair Relationship/Extortionate Credit Bargain

The ONLY defence to any of these is Informed Consent.

 

With trespass the claimant doesn't need to show any that any damage was caused, the mere act of trespass is sufficient to warrant a claim for damages.

 

A Breach of Statutory Duty is actionable by a measure of the damage, injury or loss caused. In this situation I would think that the loss of the vehicle and the cost of a replacement vehicle at the very least are apparent losses that can be claimed for.

 

It would be the Unfair Relationship/Extortionate Credit Bargain part that would allow for the return of all monies paid. When making a claim it is crucial to have a clearly defined cause(s) of action with a basis in law and clarification from statute and case law of what the acceptable remedies are, that way you can give them little room to wriggle out of it.

 

There is case law on this but I will have to find it out when I have more time.

 

Hope that helps.


“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” - Ghandi

"You must have the resources to deal with the judicial intervention - the confidence not to be overawed, the resilience to respond, the tenacity to challenge, the tact to mollify, the authority to inform and persuade."

 

Strength does not come from winning. Your struggles develop your strengths. When you go through hardships and decide not to surrender, that is strength.

 

<-- If I have helped in any way please click my star!! ;)

Oh and I am a lady!! :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks wanabe

 

just update when you can

 

i see you are still turning the knife with your claim:lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

see this CA case for an eg

HUMBERCLYDE FINANCE LIMITED v. ANTHONY GRANVILLE THOMPSON EILEEN MARJORIE THOMPSON (t/a A.G. THOMPSON a firm) [1996] EWCA Civ 787


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is how I see it.

 

If there is no consent from the debtor, a creditor needs a court order to enter 'any premises' to repo HP goods, regardless of whether the goods are 'protected' or not (i.e. the 1/3 rule)

 

The case of Spring House v Mount Cook Land (CoA 2001) outlines that a private driveway is classed as premises.

 

Here's the case:

 

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2001/1833.html&query=title+(+Spring+)+and+title+(+House+)&method=boolean

 

Therefore a HP repo CANNOT be carried out from a private driveway unless they have the owners permission or a court order (a return of goods order is not sufficient)

 

I really hope this helps anyone.

 

That is exactly right and what I have been telling people on the forum for a long time. Also even when a court order has been granted, only a County Court bailiff with a copy of the order in his hand can take the vehicle from private premises.

 

Of course the repo firms take no notice and work on the assumption that people don't know their rights.


Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another poser

 

what if when the repossession on private land was done

 

the hire purchase agreement had all ready been defaulted and terminated by the creditor

 

does section 92 of the cca 1974 still apply

 

comments people and please keep it relevant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another poser

 

what if when the repossession on private land was done

 

the hire purchase agreement had all ready been defaulted and terminated by the creditor

 

does section 92 of the cca 1974 still apply

 

comments people and please keep it relevant

 

Yes, the fact that the agreement has been terminated does bot change the fact that they are trying to take the vehicle from a 'premises'

 

Best wishes,

 

Seq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just what i thought

 

many thanks

 

do we have any statute or case law to confirm this

 

case trial links would be nice:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what ime after is to quote case law on a pertic of claim for the replacement of the vehicle and refund of all payments made under the hire purchase agreement for

 

breach of statutory duty

 

but its the relevant case law i need to quote so some links please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
just what i thought

 

many thanks

 

do we have any statute or case law to confirm this

 

case trial links would be nice:-)

 

The Spring House case posted earlier in this thread :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quick bump

Edited by postggj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May i also add for future reference (if it helps)

 

the creditor does not have to physically remove the vehicle, just restricting your use will suffice. once they have restricted your use of the vehicle, (most common tactic is to clamp the vehicle) then they are equally stuffed.

 

section 92 (1) Except under an order of the court, the creditor or owner shall not be entitled to enter any premises to take possession (the act of having and controlling property).

 

cab


Cab1ne-Lombard-Shoosmiths **Claim Recieved**

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?181761-Cab1ne-Lombard-Shoosmiths-**Claim-Recieved**/page25

Summary Judgement 01/02/2011 **REFUSED** set for trial "May 23rd To June 30th 2011"

DISCONTINUED 3rd MAY 2011 **WON**

 

santander" Responsible Lending!!!!!!!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?219431-quot-santander-quot-Responsible-Lending!!!!!!!

 

Capquest "V" Cab1ne

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?262962-Capquest-quot-V-quot-Cab1ne

 

"STAYED"

 

CAB "Sittin Tight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just need to clarify one point

 

say the vehicle was parked on next doors drive and you are on holiday.

 

Repo men turn up and say to your neigbour they are there to repo the car and neighbour being innocent gives consent to the repo

 

my question is

 

1/ has the repo agent committed an offence under the dpa 1998 by saying he is there to repo the car

 

and

 

2/ given that the neighbour has given consent does s.92 of the cca still apply

 

i cant see anything in section 92 that mentions consent by the landowner to bypass the requirement of needing a court order

Edited by postggj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have learned from my own experience that this is in fact an incredibly complex piece of legislation. However, there are several causes of action you can use depending on how complicated you are prepared to make it.

Probably the most relevant offence committed is that of the tort of Conversion, (the civil equivalent to theft), based on The Wrongful Interference With Goods Act 1977 and there are a multitude of remedies and case law that can be applied depending on the entire circumstances of the individual case.

There is Scottish Case Law on Section 92 itself but this can only be used as "persuasive" as far as I know.

The other case laws available to use are to do with trespass, conversion and breach of statutory duty, all of which are relevant and can be used to back up your claim. I'll look them up later today and post up the links in PDF.

I have found that Judges tend to have limited knowledge of this sort of thing so everything really does need to be covered in minute detail down to the exact definition of premises, which has already been covered in this thread. The creditor will do everything they can to squirm out of it and rely on the lack of case law on section 92 to argue their case.


“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” - Ghandi

"You must have the resources to deal with the judicial intervention - the confidence not to be overawed, the resilience to respond, the tenacity to challenge, the tact to mollify, the authority to inform and persuade."

 

Strength does not come from winning. Your struggles develop your strengths. When you go through hardships and decide not to surrender, that is strength.

 

<-- If I have helped in any way please click my star!! ;)

Oh and I am a lady!! :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...