faireclareVbritish credit trust

[fairclaire]

Hi folks

 

Have outlined my dealings with BCT elsewhere a couple weeks back but can't remeber where now!

 

After deciding to take positive action against them i thought i'ts start a new thread. so soorry if you've read this before

 

My story:

 

Bought a car through bct little over 4 years ago. overpriced but went to them for the same reason as everyone else does...bad credit...needed a car etc etc.

 

I paid the monthly installments for over 3 years faithfully! never missed one overpriced payment. Then my personal circumstances changed drastically. Won't bore you withthe details. Basically I (and my 4 year old son) became homeless priority debts became my priority - along with securing a roof over our heads and I went into financial meltdown.

 

I missed 3 payments with BCT on the car. They sent a company to reposess the car from me but on that occasion neither the car or myself were there. A letter from this company to that effect was stuffed in my letterbox. I telephoned the repossession company straight away and made it clear to them that they had to obtain a court order for reposession as I had paid (well over) a third of the agreed amount.

 

I recieved several telephone calls and text messages! in the following few day from a man very aptly named Mr Greasly! from the reposession company who wasn't taking no for an answer. I eventually set my phone to block him out.

 

A week after the first reposession attempt I wasn't at home but the car was. Off road because MOT had expired and was in the process of getting money together to have repairs done. They took it anyway. They broke into it and just took it away. I still have the log book and all sets of keys.

 

When I telephoned (and wrote to BCT..because I wanted it in writing) they say that the car had been abandoned??!!

 

At this point i took my case to local trading standards office. thery were very sympathetic...but to be honest not very helpful. they wrote a letter asking that BCT pay up all the monies I had paid to the agreement as they had unlawfully repossessed the car (this is very clearly stated in the original agreement which i still have).

 

BCT replied to that request with a letter stating that I still owe them £2000 on the agreement. TS answer to that was that this was just a reaction and that if i ignored it...no, i wouldn't get my money back but they would be unlikely to pursue me for the rest of the money under the agreement. I felt really let down by this reply.

 

BCT have clearly breached their agreement by repossessing my car withoput a court order.

 

Position now is:

Bought a £4000 car

Have so far just paid short of £5000 on it

I have NO car!

They still want £2000

 

I sent a SAR request to them 2 days ago by recorded delivery. I have decided to take it court. At worst I lose court fee...at best I get my money back.

 

The thing is they have cashed my cheque already! SAR sent mon 04/12/06 cheque showing as cashed in my bank account today 06/12/06. Will be very interesting to see what I get for my £10! but knowing BCT have cashed the cheque without looking at the letter??

 

Sorry so long winded but will keep this thread updated if anyone is interested

 

Claire

[chesham]

I am presuming this was on a HP agreement?

 

A HP company can only repossess a vehicle without a court order if you have paid less than a third of the total payments and the vehicle is parked on public property.

 

People are sometimes advised to park a vehicle on private property to buy some time if they fall into arrears!

 

If you have paid more than one third of the total payments, the vehicle cannot be reposessed without a court order. Before obtaining a court order, the HP company must issue you with a pre-possession notice order, which gives details of the amount you owe and must allow a minimum of 15 days to try and remedy the situation.

 

The remedy for cars which have been illegally repossed is a law suit in a small claims (or county) court for, well, a number of things! Breach of contract, trespass and also a complaint into the Finance and Leasing Association! Seek some legal advice, as you were already in arrears but have been treated wrongly.

[fairclaire]

thanks for the advice. much appreciated.

 

Yes the car was on an HP agreement.

 

Nothing has moved as yet with this situation. Still waiting for a response to my SAR (after they quickest clearing cheque i've ever sent!)

 

Will update when/if i hear anymore.

 

Thanks again for the info and advice.

Claire

[lookinforinfo]

Where was the car when they repossessed it. Was it insured at the time?

 

PS Might be an idea if you move the thread to Debt and Bailiff Advice

as you should get more people viewing it there, and you and Libby

can compare notes easier in the same section.

If you PM one of the mods, they should arrange it for you if you want.

[fairclaire]

I have a thread on this subject (faireclaireV british credit trust)

 

I have sent a sar to them with no response so far, even though they have cashed the £10 payment for the info.

 

Is there a tempalte for a reminder to the sar. I have looked but I couldn't find it.

 

Would be grateful for anyone who can point me in the right direction

 

Thank you so much

 

Claire

[Rooster-UK]

Hi Fairclaire.

 

You should have posted this on your own thread. This is the Newbies forum.

 

When did you send your SARs? They have 40days to comply.

If the time is dragging on, there are a number of letters in the templates library.

 

Click on this link for letters....

 

For info regarding the letters.....

 

Just select the letter version that suits your circumstances.

 

Regards, Rooster.

[stan5131]

I dont think there is a template for this. You just need to drop them a line (send by recorded delivery) saying.... Further to my SAR dated xxxx, I note that you have not todate complied with my request. By my calculations, you now have xxx days remaining to comply.

[cheddar]

A template for a reminder isn't there but the template for non compliance has been posted by Rooster above.

[fairclaire]

Thanks all for the help. Much appreciated.

 

I will post in the correct place from now on too:)

[MARTIN3030]

Not to worry....I have moved your latest posts into your thread!

[fairclaire]

reminder letter for the SAR sent today by recorded delivery.

 

Lookingforinfo, sorry i didn't reply to your post. The car was on the drive in front of the house I was living in at the time. It's not a proper drive - a sort of drive that used to be a front garden, if you know what I mean. It had no gates or anything it's just open to the pavement but it is 'on' the property and not on the public road.

 

Part of their reason for claiming it was abandonded was that this address was not my home. Fair enough it wasn't my home but it was the address I was staying at temporarily as I was homeless at the time.

 

As for insurance, yes it was insured at the time. With hindsight I probably should have reported it stolen at the time. Technically i suppose it was stolen but with everything that was going on at the time I wasn't thinking as straight as I am now.

[lookinforinfo]

Fairclaire, the reason I asked the questions was more to establish the grounds

they may have had to claim the car was abandoned. By telephoning the repo company on receipt of their letter, was an indication that you wanted to keep the car, otherwise why care if there was a Court Order? Is there anything in their T&Cs that requires you keep the car maintained in good

mechanical order, or some other stipulation relating to the car being kept

in good condition [i am thinking of their grounds for a cross petition against you, and perhaps why TS wimped out]?

 

It is not only their T&Cs that mention the result of having paid off more than a third-this is what the Consumer Credit Act states-

 

90.—(1) At any time when—

(a) the debtor is in breach of a regulated hire-purchase or a regulated conditional

sale agreement relating to goods, and

(b) the debtor has paid to the creditor one-third or more of the total price of the goods, and

© the property in the goods remains in the creditor,

the creditor is not entitled to recover possession of the goods from the debtor except on an order of the court.

 

it then goes on to say-

 

91. 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.

 

In addition to being unable to repossess the car without a Court Order, they

were also in breach of s92-

92.—(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.

So even if they did believe the car was abandoned, they were trespassing by entering the front garden of a private property without

a Court Order as well as in breach of the CCA.

 

Going by your first post, you must have been pretty close to have paid around

half of the payments-do you know how far short you were? That should be

diaplayed when you get the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) results back.

[fairclaire]

Thanks for that, very interesting. I don't believe they thought the car was abandoned at all. I believe they were determined to take it whatever.

 

I'm not sure about the T&Cs saying that the car had to be in good repair. I will dig the paperwork out shortly and have a look. The car was certainly off the road as I've mentioned before. I needed a few small repairs done to get it through the MOT and was having to wait until payday. So, they may possibly use that excuse if it is in the T&Cs but I still think they're pushing it if that's the case.

 

I had actually paid off around three-quarters of the total I owed. I had 11 months worth of payments on a four year agreement to pay off. The £2000 that they say I still owe them is made up largely of charges for the payments I missed etc.

 

I still think it's worth pursuing through the courts. They have made alot of mistakes and simply haven't followed procedures correctly. My circumstances at the time and the missed payments didn't help but I don't think that gives them the right to behave the way they have.

 

Thanks again for the info. I will have a look through the T&Cs and let you know what they say.

[fairclaire]

Hi have just been through the T&Cs. I needed a magnifying glass to read them! lol

 

3.2 Repair and Maintenence. The customer will keep the goods in a repaired and serviceable condition, making good all damage whether caused by the customer or not. If any service, repair, maintenance or replacement of parts is required to the goods the customer will have it carried out at his own expense, in the case of a motor vehicle by an authorised agent of the manufacturer of it.

 

This is the only part that refers to state of repair of the goods. I think that even if they did want to argue that I was at fault under their T&C that still doesn't give them grounds to reposess without a court order.

 

What do you think?

[lookinforinfo]

I don't think for one moment that they believed the car was abandoned either, however they needed an excuse. The "repair and maintenance" clause

would give them a possible case but not to remove it from someone elses'

property without any sort of permission. Is there a further clause in the T&Cs

that spells out what action they can take if they find out the car is not

being kept in good repair? And how did the know that the MOT had expired?

Or did they not know? That would make their case for taking the car even

weaker.

Once you have paid over 50% of the debt, you are not liable to pay anything

further if they repossess, except for any damage to the car. You can probably

discount the charges levied by them for missed payments if they are similar

in amount to those levied by banks, since they will not be enforceable in Court.

I am surprised they took the car when you had paid so much already. That shows you obviously had intended to keep the car for the duration, and had

they shown a little patience their chances of getting all their money by the

end of the 12 months left was probably pretty good. So it seems bizarre

that they would not take out a Court Order and rely on a trumped up charge

to repossess [they had already said they would take the car back] and risk

having to pay you all your previous payments.

They have behaved poorly and unlawfully [no Court Order and trespass] and

agree with your appraisal of the situation. you are risking a small amount

[possibly around £100] to take them to court, with a good chance of

getting your payments back. Can't see they would want to contest it in

court and so will probably come to some settlement before then with you.

[fairclaire]

They didn't know the MOT had expired before they reposessed. They have found this out from a copy of the letter I wrote to trading standards explaining the situation. So, they might be using it as an excuse now but it wouldn't help them in court if it got that far.They'd be pretty hard pressed to prove that they knew this beforehand.

 

I think their main problem was with not being able to get in touch with me. I left my home pretty quicly with nothing in the way of paperwork at all. To be honest at that time they were not at the top of my priority list being homeless etc. I can understand why they would seek to recover the vehicle in view of the fact they couldn't contact me (I wasn't getting my mail sent on at that time) but like you at a total loss as to why do it in such an underhanded way.

 

By the time the vehicle was reposessed i had managed to get all my paperwork back, had gotten in touch with them to sort out the missed payments but was told that it was too late as the account had been passed on to recovery agents. This is how the recovery agent had the address at which I was living at the time.

 

They wrote the following letter in response to Trading Standards:

 

Thank you for your letter of XX in which you express concerns that Ms. xxxx's vehicle was recovered when in excess of one third of the total amount payable.

 

We are satisfied that the recovery agent ensured the vehicle had been abandoned. Ms xxxx left her address on XX/XX/XX and our last contact with her was on XX/XX/XX. She left the address without notifying British Credit Trust. We had no reply to our correspondence to her at that address. She recently informed us that she was living in temporary accommodation at XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.

 

As a direct result of non-payment and no response to our correspondence, the agreement was issued to our recovery agents who visited the address. There was no-one at the property at that time and no way for the agent to confirm that Ms. XXXX did indeed live there. It was therefore reasonable for them to assume that the vehicle had been abandoned at that address.

 

Ms. XXXX has also informed you that the vehicle was not roadworthy.

 

We are satisfied that the recovery agent acted appropriately, however if Ms. XXXX wishes to pursue this matter further we will await further instruction from her solicitor

 

your etc.....

 

 

Will hopefully get the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) pretty soon then I can moving with this.

 

Incidentally, would I treat this like bank charge claims and send them an LBA before proceeding to the court stage?

 

Thanks again for the advice

[lookinforinfo]

I don't think that there is much doubt that when you were out of touch

with BCT and neither paying them or responding to their letters, that it would

not have been difficult for them to obtain a Court Order. Which rather begs

the question as to why they didn't apply.

But once they didn't, they put themselves outside the Law by repossessing

it-especially in the circumstances. Because now, you had been in touch and

had tried to get your payments back on track, AND supplied them with your

current address. Hardly the actions of someone who has abandoned the

car, nor attempting to do a runner with their car.

 

Their letter to TS would be rather damning in Court. You told them where the car was, they went there, and because there was no one in, they

assumed the car was abandoned! A ten year old could tear holes in that

logic.

 

In answer to your question, yes you will need to give them a chance to

put things right before going to Court.

[fairclaire]

Well they haven't long left to comply with SAR so hopefully that info will turn up soon.

 

I'll just have to wait for that and take it from there. I hate waiting...All fired up now!

 

Happy new year:)

[lookinforinfo]

Sorry-posted on wrong thread.

Lookinforinfo

[parasite_swatter]

hello fareclare

 

ive recently had dealings with BCT, see my thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/vehicle-retailers-manufacturers/35936-court-case-re-hire.html#post464728

[fairclaire]

Thanks very much for that and congratulations on your victory!

 

I haven't come accross many posts on here relating to BCT so it's good to know it isn't just me.

 

My situation with payments sounds similar to your in regards to amounts paid, missed payments etc. It still totally puzzles me why they didn't go to court to try and get a reposession order for my vehicle when looking at your case it's what they would normally do.

 

Unfortunately I have no copies of any correspondence sent to me at the time as my mail was not passed on to me so I have no idea what/if any charges were applied to my account. Hopefully the SAR I am patiently waiting on will make it all clearer.

 

Thanks again

Claire

[parasite_swatter]

I had a couple of occaisions when they had agents contact me to arrange for me to 'voluntarily' hand back the car, I managed to keep them at bay by telling them in , shall we say, very clear language that I knew my rights.

It sounds to me as if the car was repossessed by one of these; they are essentially private firms that are contracted to repossess the cars, and i suspect they get a good fee if they manage to do so - theyve probably taken it back on this basis, BCT would then defend the repo as they stand to lose out if they admit its illegal!

 

I had a deal of difficulty getting account info from BCT also, even though they were taking me to court for the repossession. In the end, I rang them direct and told them i was considering settling up, but said i needed a statement to tell me what id paid already; they sent it the next day.

 

Almost £900 of the amount they claimed from me was for late payment letter charges. They have effectively admitted that these are unenforcable in accepting my offer that did not include these fees.

 

Stick to your guns and keep battling, it sounds like youve got a good case! Dont worry that youve not kept the correspondance theyve sent you, in my case every single letter i received from them throughout the entire account history was marked 'without prejudice', which means that legally you cant use them as evidence in court anyway.

 

Good luck, PM me if you want any more info on BCT

 

Parasite swatter

[fairclaire]

Well British Credit Trust's 40 days are up tomorrow. Despite a reminder letter and cashing my £10 cheque I haven't heard a peep from them.

 

I now intend to send them a non-compliance letter and take whatever steps are next.

 

Problem is that I don't quite know what the next steps are?

 

Do I complain about non-compliance to the ICO? And is it unlawful for them to have taken the payment and not supplied the info.

 

What is the process that I use to take them to court....where do I start?

 

I also wondered if I first take them to court to force them to supply my SAR and then when/if I get that do I start on a claim to get my money back. Or can both these issues be dealt with at once?

 

I know how much I want to claim from them, as I know how much I paid to them under the agreement. What I don't know is what charges etc. were applied to the account or any of the cirumstances surrounding the repossession. This is what I really wanted the SAR for.

 

I think BCT think if they ignore me I'll go away. But I won't!

 

Any help greatly appreciated. I'm out of my depth with the court process and don't want to make any mistakes.

 

Claire

[MARTIN3030]

Well British Credit Trust's 40 days are up tomorrow. Despite a reminder letter and cashing my £10 cheque I haven't heard a peep from them.

 

I now intend to send them a non-compliance letter and take whatever steps are next.

 

Problem is that I don't quite know what the next steps are?

 

Do I complain about non-compliance to the Information Commissioners Office? And is it unlawful for them to have taken the payment and not supplied the info.

 

What is the process that I use to take them to court....where do I start?

 

I also wondered if I first take them to court to force them to supply my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and then when/if I get that do I start on a claim to get my money back. Or can both these issues be dealt with at once?

 

I know how much I want to claim from them, as I know how much I paid to them under the agreement. What I don't know is what charges etc. were applied to the account or any of the cirumstances surrounding the repossession. This is what I really wanted the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) for.

 

I think BCT think if they ignore me I'll go away. But I won't!

 

Any help greatly appreciated. I'm out of my depth with the court process and don't want to make any mistakes.

 

Claire

 

Welcome Claire again,

 

Your thread moved here as requested.

You are correct in your thoughts.

You should make a complaint to the Information Commissioner who will take this up on your behalf.It is more the breach that has occured on non-compliance than that of themtaking the money although that in itself helps you with a case.

As with many of these data controllers it is quite possible that they are keeping this going until the last minute.For most data controllers they are aware of the seriousness of breaching Data Protection Act .In fact sometimes a call will bring very speedy results as I found with Telewest who paid a fortune having mine sent by a courier after I complained to them of it being late.As with the courts though you may wish to consider giving them a final 7 days,I think there is a temp letter for this.The time it would take the courts to issue your order would probably be much more than this so its probably worth giving them the 7 days in the first instance.

 

As far as the court route goes yes you can tie in non compliance of the Data Protection Act request with your main claim, but you have no figures so going for disclosure of Data Protection Act as well as non compliance would be that road in the first instance by issuing an order at the court.

[lookinforinfo]

If it was me, I would write pointing out that they had unlawfully repossessed

the car since they had no Court Order, plus they were trespassing on private

property in order to repossess the car.

 

According to the Consumer Credit Act, by taking back the car without your

permission after you had paid over 50% of the total without the Court Order

renders them liable to refund all your payments. Consumer Credit Act 1974

section 91.

 

Give them seven days to respond, adding that should you get no response

you will instigate legal proceedings without further notice.

 

 

Don't mention the sar, nor wait for it. If you get all your money back, then

how much they are charging extra is irrelevant [though they do have a case

for repairs to get the car passed its MOT-and bear in mind you wil need to see

what was done to it as an MOT test seems a bit of a lottery as to what is a

pass or fail with different companies].

 

But before you send the letter, make sure you know what you are getting into. That you could lose the case. That you might not get your money back

even if you do win the case. That if you paid [and therefore claiming] more than £5,000, the case will not be heard in the Small Claims Court. However,

if the figure is just a bit over, it might be worth foregoing the extra to cut

down the risk of costs spiralling out of control, and to keep the cost of

starting the action down as well.

 

If you are not prepared to do that then you mayl have to suffer the company

and/or debt collectors harassing you for a while. Though not while they

are in breach of the DPA Act.

 

If you do decide to claim your money back, you are best getting some legal

advice to confirm that your chances are better than 50% at least.

Also write to Trading Standards pointing out that you feel they breached

the Data protection Act by divulging confidential information from you to the

Motor company without your permission, and point out that they have possibly compromised your court case, and ask for their comments.[i am

assuming that you did not give them permission nor expect them to tell the

MC that the MOT had expired-something that they may not have otherwise have known.