Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Driver entered car park run by CEL Ltd .Tried to purchase lozenges  at Pharmacy , saw it was busy so left . Time there approximately 5 minutes . Left to go to pick up some goods  a couple of miles away . I have a copy of a collection of goods note with an approximate time on it  Stayed a while to chat with client On return journey stopped  to try again . Bought lozenges and left . There were no restrictions on returning  ANPR cameras registered first entry and last exit  Was sent photos showing vehicle with 2 blown up with the times on them   Company refuses to divulge landlord or show contract ....said it was data protection ! Photo of a sign blown up .....could be anywhere ! Been to site itself . No signs at entrance . When entering from main road nothing ! Where there is parking a few signs visible depending on parking space . Large sign on an external wall which can only be seen when walking out or entering from side road on the left . After a number of letters  I received demands from ZZPS ....a “debt collector “. They gave up on that ! This incident took pace in February . Now a Letter Before Court requesting details of my salary and how I intend to pay the debt  The length of stay is 40 minutes . Tiny car park !   Do know why there are even limits . Length of stay maybe 15 minutes in total . It is madness The pack of lozenges cost £185 ! Am 72 years old with multiple health problems ! Cannot let these cowboys win . Feel as though I am being intimidated . Very stressful ! Any  advice please ?I have drafted  together bits from all over the place ! Need it to stop ASAP !
    • Hi    This is my draft WS, please do let me know of nay changes or additions required, thanks.    IN THE County Court AT                                                                              CLAIM NO:      BETWEEN: CABOT FINANCIAL (UK) LIMITED   -and- (DEFENDANT)     ___________________________________________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF        INTRODUCTION    1. I, XXXX, the Defendant in this case, make this statement in support of my defence against the Claimant, Cabot Financial (UK) Limited.  The matters set out below are within my own knowledge, except where I indicate to the contrary.    THE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT    2. The Claimant states in Paragraph 3, ‘….refer to various documents, true copiesof which are contained in the paginated bundle to this statement marked “JK”1’, but then states in para 4, ‘Acopy of the reconstituted agreementwith associated terms and conditions….pages 1-10’. There are 3 versions attached of the alleged Agreement and Terms & Conditions and according to para 4 they are not the original but ‘a reconstitutedversion’. They have attached 3 Agreements namely, ‘Original Agreement’, ‘Default Agreement’ and ‘Terms of your Capital One Credit Card Agreement’.  The Claimant has provided 3 sets of generic/reconstituted Agreement and Terms & conditions.     3. The Claimant in Para 4 also states ‘On or around 5thNovember 2012 the Defendant entered into a Credit Card Agreement,’ but Page 2 of JK1 has a date inserted 2/11/2012.  It has my name, address and a date inserted in the form but no mention of how the agreement was made, online, post or telephone, and furthermore not mentioned in the Claimant’s Witness Statement.     4. As a rule of thumb I always ensure that no 3rdparty is to contact me or to send me marketing information via telephone, post or electronically’, but Page 2 of JK1 has an unticked box, another indication that this is not an original agreement.    5. Page 5 of JK1 has too many typo mistakes in the heading as follows: TERMSOF YOUR CAPITALONE CREDITCARD AGREEMENT, furthermore there are no ‘full stop’ punctuations at the end of each sentence, this surely cannot be a document sent out by Capital One.     6. The Claimant states in Para 9 that my defence is a ‘templated defence’, requesting documents pursuant of CPR 31.14 and Section 78 of the Credit Card Act 1974, this is a defendant’s right for request of information but the Claimant has failed to provide the true original Credit Card Agreement and Terms & Conditions.   7. The Claimant states in Para 25 that, ‘the Claimant allowed the proceedings to be stayed in order to allow the parties to attempt settlement negotiations…..’ this is not correct as the Claim was stayed due to the Claimant not being able to provide the requested documents pursuant of my CPR 31.14 and Section 78 of the Credit Card Act 1974.   8. Para 30 and 31of the Witness Statement requests to restore the proceedings, to strike out the Defence, has requested for a Summary Judgement, together with costs to be assessed summarily by the court. I, the Defendant, strongly object to the Claimant’s Witness Statement requesting to lift the stay and enter Judgement. I believe therefore, that this should be denied and I respectfully ask for you to strike out the claim. My reasons for this have been outlined in points 1 to 7.    9. By the reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief and invite the Court to strike out the claim.   I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.    Signed:  Dated:
    • District Judge has considered the statements of case and directions questionnaire filed and allocated the claim to the small claims track on 13th January 2020 for 1 hour.    Claimant has by 16th December 2019 pay the court trial fee or file a properly completed application, otherwise the claim will be struck out with effect from 16th December.    I have a few questions if possible to get an answer from anyone please.    The following directions apply to this claim: 1. It says that each party must deliver to the other party and to the court office copies of all documents on which that party intends to rely at the hearing no later than fourteen days before the hearing.  My understanding this will my witness statement, images of the parking area, out of time sent NTK documents. Is this correct? What else am I not thinking about?    2. I have to leave country for important work trip from 10th to 19th of January 2020. Is there anything I can do to postpone this case since its booked for 13th January?  Thanks!      
    • However having had a quick look at the consumer rights act, I see that it doesn't seem to apply if you have bought second-hand goods sold at a public auction and you had the opportunity of attending the same person – section 2 (5) Unless someone has some better ideas, I'm not sure what you can do.
    • I'm trying to understand your story because is not completely clear. You bought the car auction and you were aware at the time of the purchaser there was an ABS fault. Subsequently an ABS fault developed both this was a different fault and not of the type that have been flagged up at the auction. Is this correct? If you bought the car knowing that there was a particular ABS fault then I don't think you have any comeback. However if the fort which subsequently occurred is not the one which was flagged up at auction then you may be in a better position
  • Our picks

bdkelly72

used car deposit question

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2549 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

Hi

 

I put a deposit on a car £500, non-returnable option to buy.

 

My circumstances have changed and while I do not wish for it back require to be transfered to another cheaper car than i can afford.

 

I am now being told that the deposit is Non-Transferable. Is this a new express term that voids the agreement or is this allowed. There was no mention of non-transferable on the receipt

 

Anymore detail i will happily oblige, he told me today it was non-transferable.

 

regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had alot of views and respect them all. If you cannot advise of certainty, its a grey area i admit, can you speculate :D ... i have some contract law experience 20 years drafting construction contracts. And in my terms added an express term late had to be agreed, or else it wasnt or would allow renegotiation.

 

I always see most contracts ie plane tickets etc state expressly non-transferable. Is it implied deposits are therefore transferable unless expressly stated otherwise

 

I woudl like opinion , but would love case law.

 

Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arguing with myself now.. is there a defined term for what is transferable.. i do not want to transfer the deposit to another person , just the understanding that the car company will allow the deposit to transfer on another car.

 

As there are no implied terms for used car sale, maybe I assume changes outside of consumer law have to be expressed.

 

The contract has no defined terms. Its a A4 piece of paper

 

I need a solicitor to confirm if deposits are implied non-transferable and what the transfer permits to

 

regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would of thought a deposit on a car would be non transferable. At the point you ordered the car and left the deposit, the trader had to remove that car from sale thus losing potential sales on it. He also has to prepare the car for retail eg service, MOT and valet. Personally, If it were me I'd of tried to find a car to suit you at your new budget, just for the sake of customer service. But in these days of small margins and difficult trading I can understand the traders stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for comment. Why would you think a deposit is non-transferable. Thats why I am wondering why the biggest and best have to express the term. Its obviously not or they would not waste their ink. just wondering what case law made them express it. It is there some where.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And he did not valet or any-such, and he car was unsold for 6 months he local like me. if he did that would be a cost and not a penalty, penalties not allowed under contract law. Again maybe deposits differ still waiting on a solicitor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi, the purpose of a deposit is to show the seller that the customer wants to buy, the purpose is that in paying the deposit the customer then loses the deposit money if they change their mind.

 

you may have cancellation rights but only if the car dealership has given you the rights.

 

a deposit is non transferable because the car dealership can not be expected to lose money caused by customers changing their mind about what car they are going to purchase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They wont lose the money ... i didnt ask for a refund. Non-transferable is an express and should be expressed accordingly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear some dealers talking and not any solicitors, As a contract law specialist i will take my chances in small claims and let you know. If i was to tell a subbie i negotiated with that there were new conditions he would ask for a change request. A new condition/term was added outside of our agreement this make it up to me to accept or not. I choose not to.

 

You have the same right in any contract you go into when fundamental terms change. Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They wont lose the money ... i didnt ask for a refund. Non-transferable is an express and should be expressed accordingly

 

i dont understand - it is an express and should be expressed accordingly?

 

the car dealers will lose money as described above!

 

when you gave them the deposit, you both entered into a contract. as you are now not buying, then the car dealership can pursue you and make a legal claim for their loss of profit from you, because you did not commit to your side of the contract. but i guess they would not bother doing this as that is what the deposit is used for...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i dont understand - it is an express and should be expressed accordingly?

 

the car dealers will lose money as described above!

 

when you gave them the deposit, you both entered into a contract. as you are now not buying, then the car dealership can pursue you and make a legal claim for their loss of profit from you, because you did not commit to your side of the contract. but i guess they would not bother doing this as that is what the deposit is used for...

 

thanks for answer

 

1/ what loss of profit.. it has to be demonstrable.. loss of opportunity is a hard one to prove, very hard

2/ i did not sign a penalty clause

3/ he stated after the contract a new term , non-transferable.

 

why will they lose money, you are a dealer ?

 

what did they lose?

 

i want to buy he wont let me ..... he dint say i could not transfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1/ already - the loss of profit is demonstrated by you paying the deposit. when you paid the deposit, you entered a legal contract with the car dealer.

2/ there is no penalty here. why do you need to sign a penalty clause?

3/ i can not see any car dealership that would allow transferable deposits on their cars

 

no i am not a car dealer.

 

they lost the ability to sell the car as you have broken your contract, other financial losses are getting the car ready for you etc... and this is represented in the deposit that you paid.

 

you say he wont let you buy?!?! he will let you buy the car you paid a deposit on but will not let you transfer the deposit to another car, he is not not letting you buy...

 

i really dont think you have much chance of getting your £500 back, especially as the car dealer said they wont let you transfer. as the car dealer wont do this to you, if you took this to court then i would guess that the car dealer would then make a counter claim for their financial losses... as well as there not being any chance of you winning this in court. hopefully someone else can magic something up for you, but the law seems to be with the car dealer on this one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will allow them to make their assessment of loss the car is worth 1800 pounds, they added a new term to our agreement, i am dont disputing an obligation just the new term. Lots and lots and lots of dealerships transfer deposits. Google it.

 

I will take my chances. New terms need to be agreed by both parties. This is common law. I know law alot, but basic construction law, just wondering is their a statutory one with regards to transferable deposits. If there is not its a new term, why do you see non-transferable on most other agreements then ? i am curious why they bother.

 

If you are a solicitor please confirm, if offering opion thats great too.. but clarify as you may mislead like i might be other people. I am not a solicitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not a car dealer and am not a solicitor. just offering my opinion.

 

you say you will take your chances? this means you are prepared to take this to court? seriously i wish you all the best with that but its just my opinion that the court wont allow your case, - it would be struck out as you have no argument... or no case. and the the cardealer could make their counter claim against you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be generally held that deposits are non-transferable in the same way the general rule is that they're non-refundabe. This makes sense if you consider that in the majority of cases a contract for the supply of an item would only apply to that item. You are not making a contract for the supply of any car - you made a contract for the supply of a specific car that they will have incurred costs in preparing for sale and now re-listing for sale (whether or not these costs reflect the amount of deposit they're keeping is another matter).You mention deposits for plane tickets being expressly non-transferable and that is probably because they are providing a service and not a product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it would be generally held that deposits are non-transferable in the same way the general rule is that they're non-refundabe. This makes sense if you consider that in the majority of cases a contract for the supply of an item would only apply to that item. You are not making a contract for the supply of any car - you made a contract for the supply of a specific car that they will have incurred costs in preparing for sale and now re-listing for sale (whether or not these costs reflect the amount of deposit they're keeping is another matter).You mention deposits for plane tickets being expressly non-transferable and that is probably because they are providing a service and not a product.

 

not excactly correct, deposits become non refundable or non transferable if the T & C's specificallt state if or a contract states it. Airlines have it in their T & C's. If it wasnt mentioned in the contract or any T & C's then the OP can legitemately claim his deposit back less an agreed fee to recompense the seller for any demonstratable losses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not excactly correct, deposits become non refundable or non transferable if the T & C's specificallt state if or a contract states it. Airlines have it in their T & C's. If it wasnt mentioned in the contract or any T & C's then the OP can legitemately claim his deposit back less an agreed fee to recompense the seller for any demonstratable losses

 

So if there's no contract terms to the contrary then a deposit is automatically refundable? I don't think so. What about consequential loss? (which is what a deposit covers the vendor for in the event of a breach of contract). It's not me that's not exactly correct I'm afraid to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
im not a car dealer and am not a solicitor. just offering my opinion.

 

you say you will take your chances? this means you are prepared to take this to court? seriously i wish you all the best with that but its just my opinion that the court wont allow your case, - it would be struck out as you have no argument... or no case. and the the cardealer could make their counter claim against you.

 

counter claim against me for what ? for keeping my deposit. This is what the small claims are for, for people who believe they have a legitimate claim against a bigger opponent to test it in court. I have heard nothing clear unfortunately either way. It is all revolving around my request to use a term that is generally excluded from deposits so my I would argue not expressing the deposit is non-transferable implies that the deposit is transferable remember (just my opinion) as it is normal to include non-transferable ie "the man on the clapham bus" (sic) test. If they did not wish it to be non-transferable as some deposits state they should have said it.

 

I will let you now what happens. Be curious what I will be counter sued for.

 

Thanks for replies, and take care. Sorry for double post by the way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if there's no contract terms to the contrary then a deposit is automatically refundable? I don't think so. What about consequential loss? (which is what a deposit covers the vendor for in the event of a breach of contract). It's not me that's not exactly correct I'm afraid to say.

 

and yes if the deposit states non-refundable the deposit is refundable less as you said costs, but that is basic law. I didnt ask I may add for a refund just transfer, I was happy to buy a car off him. He was unreasonable (maybe. maybe not) in not trying to negotiate less any costs he incurred preparing the vehicle, which he didnt. Moved it 3 feet. To offer nothing and rely on a term that was not expressed in the terms and conditions is a bit unfair.

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...