Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.  
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 160 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

The car I have just purchased privately has been repossessed by finance company


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3069 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

On Aug 21 2015 I purchased a 2009 BMW 730i Ld privately (not from a trader or dealer).

It had been advertised on Autotrader with a full 9 page HPI Check.

I paid £12,500 by way of £12,000 bankers draft to the seller along with £500 cash.

 

On 28th October a woman knocked on our front door saying she was from Bow County Court

and wanted to speak to my wife in regards removing our vehicle in respect of a court order she held.

 

 

The court order was from a finance company to the owner previous to the seller I purchased the car from.

Transpires that the previous owner sold the car to the seller we bought from in July 2015 with finance of £7,000 still owing to the finance company.

 

 

Our seller sold the car on to me within 1 month with what appears to be a forged HPI check stating there was no finance on the vehicle.

The seller didn't register the vehicle as he said that because he was selling the car on so quickly, he didn't have time to register it.

 

The 'Bailiff' who we later found out was a Collection Agent for the finance company said that she was removing the vehicle immediately from our front drive.

She said that if we tried to prevent her from taking the car then a truck would come to lift the car off of our drive.

 

 

My wife and I simply couldn't understand this was happening to us and has caused us huge distress.

Concerned by her threat to forcibly lift the car from our drive,

I phoned our solicitor (who doesn't specialise in matters of this kind) and he spoke to the collection agent

saying that under section 27 of the Hire Purchase Act 1964,

where a motor vehicle is subject to an HP or finance agreement,

while the vendor does not own it and has no right to sell it,

 

 

a private purchaser who buys the car in good faith without notice of the HP or conditional sale agreement

obtains good title to it and that the collection agent therefore had no entitlement to our vehicle.

 

 

Whilst I was speaking to Mr Lucas, the agent asked for the car key so she could take down the vehicle mileage.

At that point I said I was calling the police as we had good title to the vehicle and she had no authority to remove it, especially from our property.

 

 

I went into my house to call the police and a minute or two later looked out of our front facing window to see the vehicle was gone.

 

A number of questions.

 

1. The finance company is now in possession of the vehicle, does this section 27 of the HPA 1964 require them to return the vehicle to me

and if they refuse what are my options?

I don't have the money to seek a solicitor to take out an injunction preventing them from selling the car / return the car to me.

 

2. If they refuse the car I don't have the money to issue proceedings in the court for the £12,500 I paid for the car in good faith, again,

what are my options?

 

3. My car is probably worth about £13,500 as I spent £1,000 on repairs last month.

The outstanding finance I understand is around £7,000.

Do the finance company have the right to pocket the difference and is there anything I can do about this?

 

4. The collection agent falsely represented herself to us and our solicotor as a court bailiff,

do we have redress against the collecion agency

 

We now have no car and no money to purchase another one, it is all very distressing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will try and find someone who can help.

 

How did they remove the vehicle, did you give her the key ?

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will try and find someone who can help.

 

How did they remove the vehicle, did you give her the key ?

 

If there was no court order, then this is a theft by the collection agent and the finance company will have to return it. Report to the Police if they fail to do so. Also pretending to be a court bailiff is a criminal offence. You cannot claim to be an officer of the court under a warrant, if this is not the case.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for responding.

Yes, I was on my drive speaking to my solicitor on the phone and she asked me for the key to check the mileage.

Stupidly I gave it to her without thinking,

passed the phone to my solicitor who spoke to her,

 

 

she passed the phone back to me because she didn't want to acknowledge what my solicitor was saying

about my having title to the goods under section 27 of the Hire Purchase Act 1964.

 

I then went into my house to call the police on the advice of my solicitor,

came out less than 2 minutes later to find my car gone.

 

There was a court order dated 17 August 2015 that the claimant (the finance company) do recover against the defendant

(the person who sold the car - with finance outstanding

- in July to the person we bought the car from),

for goods wrongly kept by the defendant.

 

What nobody seems to be able to explain to me

that it seems clear under section 27 of the Hire Purchase Act 1964

that even though the person I bought the car from (in good faith and without any knowledge of outstanding finance)

may not have had title to the goods, by me paying for those goods means the title passes to me lawfully.

 

 

It's all very confusing and even if this section 27 does apply in my case,

how on earth do I get the car back from the collection agent / finance company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?265444-Bought-car-with-HP-still-on-it-now-Finance-company-want-it-back!!!

 

 

http://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-0964707606882478:652l7hswbgv&ie=UTF-8&q=section+27+of+the+Hire+Purchase+Act+1964&sa=Search+CAG#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=section%2027%20of%20the%20Hire%20Purchase%20Act%201964&gsc.page=1

 

 

don't think theres a lot you can do really.

 

 

bar suing the person you got the car from.

 

 

sad trick that is pulled nearly every day.

 

 

sadly the bottom line is you should have done an HPI yourself.

 

 

if whomever took your car had a return of goods order from a court

then matters not what they claimed to be

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...