Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • HP Mum
      Private Land parking issue

      By HP Mum · Posted

      So I just found a couple abandoned traffic cones locally by some bins.   A bit squished but free!  So have placed them on the land.  Will wait to see if the cones get moved and signs ignored again this week before I consider rocks/ boulders.
    • lookinforinfo
      MET ANPR PCN - NtK - BP Blue Boys Tonbridge - Burger King Car Park NOT BP car park.

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later the your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. So if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place and park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and then unload the children followed by reloading the children getting seat belts on etc before driving to the exit stopping for cars, pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • FTMDave
      MET ANPR PCN - NtK - BP Blue Boys Tonbridge - Burger King Car Park NOT BP car park.

      By FTMDave · Posted

      Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • FTMDave
      VCS SpyCar PCN now Claim Form - No Stopping - Bristol Airport

      By FTMDave · Posted

      New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Sach45
      Asda - caught shoplifting

      By Sach45 · Posted

      Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

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

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Bill Of Sales and repossession of goods - NOTE: much of this is now out of date - dx 2016

tomterm8
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3750 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

cctv engineer

cctv engineer

Posted
Posted

OFT COMMENTARY ON BILLS OF SALE*

In researching the area of car finance two authorities gave us details of cars being sold under a Bill

of Sale. We have looked at the Bills of Sale Acts (BSA) and their interaction with consumer credit

legislation and the Office's view is set out below. We have also researched how to check if a Bill of

Sale has been registered.

Royal Courts of Justice

The Bill of Sale must be witnessed and registered at the Royal Courts of Justice, in the time and

manner set out in the BSA, otherwise it will be void and cannot be treated as a licence to take

possession. You can check if this has been carried out by making a written request to the Court

and paying £5 or visiting there in person and searching the register for free. To search you need to

know the name of the borrower, their address and the year of registration.The entries in the

register are made alphabetically in the name of the borrower.

The address is:

Room E17, East Block Ground Floor, Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2A 2LL**

Bills of Sale Acts

As we understand the position –

a. Buying a car under a bill of sale will be a regulated consumer credit agreement

b. The goods will not become ‘protected’ in the same way as for hire-purchase agreements

(for which section 90 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 provides that if the consumer has

paid one-third or more of the total price of the goods, the creditor cannot recover

possession except by judicial proceedings or consent).

c. However, the creditor will not be able to enforce the security unless he has first served a

default notice under section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and this has expired (after

not less than 14 days) without remedy or the debtor applying to the court for relief.

d. If the creditor repossesses without a valid default notice, the consumer may apply for an

injunction or a time order, or seek damages for breach of contract.

On this basis, whilst the consumer will have less protection under a bill of sale than under a hirepurchase

agreement, he will not be completely unprotected, and the creditor will be at risk of

licensing action if he acts unfairly.

In addition –

e. The bill of sale is given as security, and where this is provided in relation to a regulated

consumer credit agreement it must comply with section 105 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

f. The credit agreement must embody any security, by virtue of regulation 2(8) of the

Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983. A document embodies a provision if the

provision is set out in it or in another document referred to in it (a bill of sale will usually be

incorporated by reference).

g. The debtor must be provided with a copy of the bill of sale, pursuant to sections 62 and 63

Consumer Credit Act 1974, since this is a document referred to in the credit agreement.

h. If the bill of sale does not comply with section 105 of the Act it will be unenforceable by

virtue of section 106. Furthermore, if the credit agreement does not comply with the

Consumer Credit Act 1974 so that it is unenforceable, this will preclude the exercise of any

remedies under the bill of sale (except pursuant to a court order where relevant).

i. The bill of sale must also comply with the statutory provisions in the Bills of Sale Acts. In

particular, it must be in the form given in the schedule to the Bills of Sale Act (1878)

Amendment Act 1882, otherwise it will be void and cannot be treated as a licence to take

possession.

j. The bill of sale must also be witnessed and registered (at the relevant department of the

Supreme Court) in the time and manner set out in the Bills of Sale Acts, otherwise it will be

void in respect of the chattels comprised in it.

1

k. In practice, the majority of such bills of sale may well be unenforceable because the

provisions of the Bills of Sale Acts are unlikely to have been followed, and even if they

have, the relevant requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 must also be satisfied.

l. The bill of sale and related credit agreement may also be susceptible to action under the

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 or under the extortionate credit

bargain provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

m.Whether title can pass to a third party where there is a valid bill of sale will depend upon

whether the bill transfers legal or equitable title to the grantee, and each case would need

to be looked at on its facts.

The Bills of Sale Acts are unduly complex and outdated, and should be reviewed – as

recommended by the Crowther Committee in 1971. We suspect however that BERR will be

unwilling to include this in the current Consumer Credit Act 1974 Review unless there is clear

evidence of consumer detriment. You may wish to bring your concerns to the BERR’s attention by

writing to –

Consumer Affairs Directorate, Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, 1

Victoria Street, London SW1H 0ET

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 281
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Nicky Bodmin

Nicky Bodmin

Posted
Posted

Its covered in the BOS Act she would have an equitable ownership on the car. Lets face it no matter what they are governed by they just simply ignore it all. They will only listen eventusally to a court order asking to return the car.

I would suggest to go straight to the courts ask advice and then make an application to the judge to put an order on the car to stop them selling it.

An injunction, the court staff are =very helpful and will point you in the right dirrection.

It will allow you time to get legal help, you could even get the car returned if you have enough proof of ownership.

Just walk in to the courts and ask for help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
postggj

postggj

Posted
Posted

I Agree But I Need To See The Relevent Section In Bos Act Before I Advise A Return Of Goods Order

 

I Do Not Like Ending Up With Egg On My Face

 

I Just Need A Link Or A Cut And Paste Of The Legislation On Bos And Third Party Repo

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nicky Bodmin

Nicky Bodmin

Posted
Posted
so you have your car and you do not have a fight with lbl ???

Yes I have my own fight as we speak, action is happeniong now. I cant say untill I have heard back. If sucessful will be a major break through for all.

Will post when I here

Link to post
Share on other sites
postggj

postggj

Posted
Posted
Hi i am not off topic. the bill of sale in the post i have just proved to be void in court. and that type can not be used.

 

 

I TOTALLY AGREE BUT ITS MY QUESTION ABOVE THAT IS RELEVANT IN THIS CASE

Link to post
Share on other sites
cctv engineer

cctv engineer

Posted
Posted
Yes I have my own fight as we speak, action is happeniong now. I cant say untill I have heard back. If sucessful will be a major break through for all.

Will post when I here

 

 

fair enough i will leave the topic alone. but i will leave with this. only 8 people have ever won with a bill of sale. me being one of them. that bill of sale listed in void in every way as a bill of sale. i have oft come to my house after court for statement. a total of 200 miles.

 

but at the end of the day you are fighting a bill of sale and NOT a credit aggrement.

i have posted on this forum for people to pm me so as i can let them know what makes it void. do you know how many people pm me .......NONE

Link to post
Share on other sites
postggj

postggj

Posted
Posted

I Agree

 

Ive Spent The Last Two Hours Looking At The Legislation Ref Bos

 

Remember

 

Bos Are Secured On The Car, Not On The Owner, Whoever And When Ever That May Be

 

Thats Why I Need To Quote The Correct Legislation In My Post 197

 

Thats All Ime Asking

Link to post
Share on other sites
postggj

postggj

Posted
Posted
fair enough i will leave the topic alone. but i will leave with this. only 8 people have ever won with a bill of sale. me being one of them. that bill of sale listed in void in every way as a bill of sale. i have oft come to my house after court for statement. a total of 200 miles.

 

but at the end of the day you are fighting a bill of sale and NOT a credit aggrement.

i have posted on this forum for people to pm me so as i can let them know what makes it void. do you know how many people pm me .......NONE

 

 

CCTV ENGINEER

 

AS YOU PROB GUESSED CAR FINANCE IS MY AREA

 

WHAT YOU HAVE SAID TO ME TODAY IS DYNAMITE REF COURT ORDER IF I CAN ONLY GET IT CONFIRMED

 

PLEASE DO PM ME ON WHAT MAKES A BOS VOID INCASE IVE MISSED ANYTHING

 

ITS A LEARNING GAME FOR EVERY ONE

 

EVEN ME:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nicky Bodmin

Nicky Bodmin

Posted
Posted

My case is diff the BOS is the security for the credit agreement that is the security on the car. I didnt have a lone with the company so that is a breech of sec 5 the BOS act.

You cant just put a CA abnd a BOS on anyone elses car but your own.

If the car doesnt belong to the borrower then the BOS is not actionable is it. But tyhe CA is still inforce. Its the only sec of the Act that voids the BOS and leaves the CA in tact. Read sec 5

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nicky Bodmin

Nicky Bodmin

Posted
Posted

Yes thats correct it is secured on the car.

A BOS is the document used in conjunction with a CA and that then makes it a securedn loan. If there is no BOS there is no secured loan.

If the CA is not that of the owner of the car then the BOS is not actionable then it just becomes a normal unsecured loan.

Can you see what Im saying.

Most of the points that void a BOS will also challenge the CA.

Sec 5 just will remove the BOS.

Like wise if the CA is not enforcable the BOS becomes Void to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
postggj

postggj

Posted
Posted
Yes thats correct it is secured on the car.

A BOS is the document used in conjunction with a CA and that then makes it a securedn loan. If there is no BOS there is no secured loan.

If the CA is not that of the owner of the car then the BOS is not actionable then it just becomes a normal unsecured loan.

Can you see what Im saying.

Most of the points that void a BOS will also challenge the CA.

Sec 5 just will remove the BOS.

Like wise if the CA is not enforcable the BOS becomes Void to.

 

 

BANG ON AS THE TWO ARE LINKED

 

ONE TAINTS THE OTHER

Link to post
Share on other sites
cctv engineer

cctv engineer

Posted
Posted
My case is diff the BOS is the security for the credit agreement that is the security on the car. I didnt have a lone with the company so that is a breech of sec 5 the BOS act.

You cant just put a CA abnd a BOS on anyone elses car but your own.

If the car doesnt belong to the borrower then the BOS is not actionable is it. But tyhe CA is still inforce. Its the only sec of the Act that voids the BOS and leaves the CA in tact. Read sec 5

 

 

HI nicky. i was in the same posion as you. you are NOT covered by a credit agreement. a credit agreement does not overtake a bill of sale.

 

now even that your details were stolen for your car. money still changed hands under a bill of sale. this even if it is hard to understand gives the lender right to your car. and you have to go after the guy who used your details. Nicky i am going to pm you my number so as i can tell you the problem with your bos. if i post it lbl will find out and change it (closing the door for others)

http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/corporate/docs/migrated-consultations/a%20better%20deal%20for%20consumers%20consultation%20on%20proposals%20to%20ban%20the%20use%20of%20bills%20of%20sale%20for%20consumer%20lending.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nicky Bodmin

Nicky Bodmin

Posted
Posted

yes thats correct.

So because the person who has just had car taken not knowing there was a loan on it has to challenge the BOS then the CA still falls back onto the person who's name its in.

LBL will do what ever they want they are governed by rules and regulations just like all financial institutes but they ignore all.

For every 100 they take only a few will fight it, and thats why they do it.

British people dont fight they believe what they are told and thats the prob

Fo

Link to post
Share on other sites
postggj

postggj

Posted
Posted

Negative On That

 

I Have That Confirmed From The Oft

 

At The End Of The Day A Credit Agreement Was Signed Be It Secured By A Bos Or Not But If The Credit Agreement Is Crap, So Is The Bos

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3750 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...