Bill Of Sales and repossession of goods - NOTE: much of this is now out of date - dx 2016

[postggj]

on the red2black doc

 

can you post up the company registration number

 

when you have time also post up your agreement

deleate personal info but leave in the figures

 

google photobucket

[applecart]

A Footnote:

 

When an agreement is coupled with a bill of sale normally you will find that it is the Bill of Sale that carries the 'core terms and conditions' that apply to it and the agreement simply will make reference to it and may only show a few terms itself.

 

So lets say the bill of sale is invalid (or declared unenforceable) - then its terms and conditions are also invalid and most interestingly once it is rendered invalid the agreement is as well; mainly because the 'prescribed terms' that the CCA 1974 insist on - make it clear that an agreement should not contain 'implied terms'......the reference made to the bill of sale in an agreement where the bos is invalid has the affect of being an 'implied term'.

 

My thoughts are that once you can show that the agreement is invalid in this way - then it is only the 'loan' that the lender can pursue you for....but without an enforceable bos or cca - this makes it very difficult if not impossible for the lender to 'enforce' the loan.... this is why the cca 1974 act was borne......to protect consumers from unscrupulous lenders who are thought to be in a position to employ solicitors and barristers to get their paperwork right and to conduct their business in a manner that is fair to the consumer.....if they mess up.....then the law of the CCA 1974 is there to ensure the lender doesn't 'profit' and the courts are supposed to uphold this.

 

However; in recent times; case law is adding its own interpretation of the CCA 1974 and 'twisting' it in favour of lenders.... so be very wary of this; take nothing for granted; even the wilson case has been re-scrutinised and re-interpreted to assist lenders win favour. (my thoughts are that this is being done; mainly because of the companies that set up to challenge any cca - the industry was in danger - something had to be done)

 

Recent case law has made it more than acceptable for lenders to 'side step' the legal need to send you a 'true copy' of the original agreement - so say bye bye to SAR's - the lender could send you a bog roll with your name, address, and the loan amount on without your signature! (this is effectively what case law has done).

 

Also case law has overturned the part of the CCA 1974 that says all core terms must be contained in a single document containing the borrowers signature.....say bye bye to this legal loophole too ...... it's closed!!!!

 

Don't loose heart though, my take on this is that the 'system' is seeking to make it 'fairer' for lenders - the CCA 1974 is heavily in favour of the consumer and in current times is seen to be far too draconian - consumers are being made to be more responsible for their actions and case law is what helps the system ensure this happens.

 

In my mind... relying on only a few errors in your agreement is no longer sufficient to have it overturned - the lender must be shown to be in breach of a number of the terms of the agreement/regulations before you can be sure a Judge is likely to side with you.

 

Apple : )

[applecart]

Can we agree something else?.... This subject of HPi....... my understanding is that this is used when a lender OWNS the vehicle and under an agreement you are hoping to buy it...and the lender is the owner until you have paid all payments as due......this is why the HPi is registered.......when the final payment is made, then you are the owner and the hpi is removed..........quite different from a situation where the lender does not own the car I would have thought?

 

For this reason my thoughts are that you should find that a 'HP agreement' will and should contain a 'half way' indicator....a 'credit agreement' with a vehicle merely as a security will not because you already own the 'security'.

 

The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 as amended by the 2004/2007 Regulations give you info on what should be contained in any type of agreement.

 

Apple : )

[actionblusox]

if i own the vehicle outright because i am the owner of the vehicle, and like the rep told me " and that never changes" then why does the HPI act ignorant by saying nowt to do with them contact LBL?

 

anyone could contact them and say i have an interest in so and so's car because i like the colour! can you mark it Mr HPI man!

" doh! of cause I will Mr Conman" the real owner idiots cant contact us anyway to complain hee hee hee!

Edited May 7, 2010 by actionblusox

[trooper68]

if i own the vehicle outright because i am the owner of the vehicle, and like the rep told me " and that never changes" then why does the HPI act ignorant by saying nowt to do with them contact LBL?

 

anyone could contact them and say i have an interest in so and so's car because i like the colour! can you mark it Mr HPI man!

" doh! of cause I will Mr Conman" the real owner idiots cant contact us anyway to complain hee hee hee!

 

 

And added to that they do not have to give a reason (they say they do but its flawed)-HPI work by using a network of sources, to put a marker on a car, you buy credits, its that simple... They are SELF regulating and open to abuse. Taking one off is the hard bit....As we all have seen time and time again, LBL and these type of companies abuse the system.

 

Take my case I purchased a car, I did a HPI CHECK, two HPI companies, nothing completely clean... Then they put on the marker-all legal, print of a copy, throw that around, stick it under a Policeman's nose....who is he going lean with..

 

Thats why you have to hit them hard, everything they do Must be challanged...

 

trooper68

[actionblusox]

i will try to open a new thread with this, because so much hard work is being put in by the caggers it seems a little wrong if we cannot sell the car? do you agree?

[applecart]

I based my comments on logic and 'known' law - but trooper is right these HPi dudes appear to be unregulated - it's just a business model,..... but I can't find who or where they can be made liable for errors : (

 

I think a call to OFT might be in order - they should let us know if this hpi business model is really as fair as it should be : )

 

Apple

[Sammi1985]

Do you know where i can do a HPI check online? I'm really hoping this BoS is void as I have been paying out for a car that I am unable to use for the last 3 years, and was only when I cam across this site I have really managed t get down to the nitty gritty! Thanks for all your help guys....Post I will try and get the agrements posted up this evening....Thanks

[caro]

There you go.

 

Vehicle check services : Directgov - Motoring

[trooper68]

There you go.

 

Vehicle check services : Directgov - Motoring

 

 

All well and good, but the tactics these guys use is they wait, so when you check there is no intreast "mark" on the car when you use the checking services that day....three months up the line, they stick one one, I found this out in court, when asked the reply "its easy, as the new owner alot of time has no clue, so we can just turn up and take it, as in your case" at this point the judge asked "do you know that the car has a new keeper-reply yes sir we use the DVLA and mark the car as in intreast-

 

As the car is often sold very quickly (often the agents are car dealers) for very little money, between a trusted group of dealers, by the time you find out from the police the cars is gone, it very slick- its about numbers, these guys chase cars twice three times aweek..

 

As with many many cases, alot of people do checks like me, and only realise when the car has been clamped or taken....What i do urge everyone is to keep a copy of all checks and make sure you use an email based system, a time stamp is a must....Clearly this is theft, but within the law-a very gray area indeed.

 

But there is hope, I would urge anyone in the same position as I.

 

Don't give up-complain to the police, keep doing so until they listen...

 

 

trooper68

[ST220]

Incondition that he does not breach the agreement - if you breach the agreement whilst reality - my thoughts are that - even If the Bill of Sale is valid - you can still sell your car - you are the LEGAL owner of it - the lender retains 'title' on the lender has 'title' - then he knows he can only exercise a right to the vehicle after having conformed with the Bos Acts 1878 & 1882 & CCA1974 (I have seen lbl's bos's - I didn't see anywhere where it says 'you cannot sell the vehicle' it only makes reference to 'execution'....they know they cannot restrict you selling the car because you own it NOT them) (selling the car as far as I can interpret their bills of sale is not a breach on your part)(just maintain your payments under the agreement).

 

Hi

 

The Bill of sale I have from LBL does state that I can't sell the car and also that lbl now own my car untill completion of the agreement. It also states that as they now own it that I must insure it in joint names with them!!

[applecart]

ST220 - I am perplexed by your understanding of the terms of your bill of sale - a conditional bill of sale - which is what LBL will have registered against your vehicle (albeit may have been done incorrectly) - does not give them 'ownership' of yours or any other car....

 

It may be that you have a recent bill of sale - and it may be that in lieu of the amount of consumers that do sell vehicles under a bill of sale that they have chosen to include additional terms and conditions in an effort to strenghten their position.

 

Clearly, if such terms exist in a valid bill of sale; and you have signed and agreed those conditions secure in the knowledge of what you were/have signed - then, you have agreed 'that I can't sell the car' and to 'insure it in joint names with them'

 

Whether such terms are legal and whether such terms constitute an unfair relationship is of course another matter? It could also render an agreement unenforceable unless an order is granted for enforcement by a Judge.

 

My thoughts are that such terms are unfair; because the cost of insuring a 'named driver' (which is the only way I know of adding a party to your insurance on a car) is an additional cost over and above the cost of the loan - the effect of which would cause the true cost of the loan to be more than what will be stated in the agreement. (adding a companies name to a mortgage for building insurance purposes is quite different of course - and taking such action would cost you nothing)

 

I think if LBL have included a term that incurs the consumer in additional insurance costs and where that cost is not included within the agreement itself - that they have once again shot themselves in the foot - I can see the claims against them hitting fever point!!!!

 

I should look into this further if I were you.

[JonCris]

You don't have to insure in their name you only have to ensure that their interest is noted just as you would when purchasing a vehicle on HP Anyway in the event of a claim the insurer will do an HPI check before releasing any funds & only then to the company named in the HPI check

[applecart]

Hi All

 

I want to take time out to add to my comment made at '248'......

 

Section 9 of the BoS Act 1882 (don't confuse this with the 1878 Act) relates to the 'form' of a Bill of Sale; my thoughts are that where a Bill of Sale deviates from the form specified in the Schedule annexed to the 1882 Act; that it would be a breach.

 

Therefore in my mind; additional words such as 'you will not sell' or 'you will insure in joint names' are not applicable as they do not appear in the form of a bill of sale as specified in the shedule of the 1882 Act.

 

Bear in mind also that when Log Book Loans and the like engage you in a BoS coupled with a credit agreement as regulated by the CCA 1974 - that they engage you into a 'conditional' Bill of Sale - what this means is that; they cannot exercise any section of the Bill of Sale until they have met and complied with the conditions of the CCA 1974.

 

As soon as you are in default - Section 7a of the CCA 1974 applies to the lender - the Law is that he has to serve a valid default notice - if this is not done - any action he takes against the vehicle is unlawful - fullstop!! because...... BoS 1882-section 7a states... lender must comply with CCA 1974 s.87 and if he does not comply with that section; then CCA 1974 s.88 makes it unlawful for the lender to 'take goods' or 'terminate' or 'demand early repayment of the outstanding balance'.

 

Lets say the Bill of Sale was not party to a regulated credit agreement - Then, this would mean that the lender could rely on section 7 of the Bill of Sale 1882 - which allows him to take steps to 'seize' the vehicle without serving a default notice - but he can only 'seize it' - 'seize' in this sense is not about taking the vehicle away - as another cagger kindly pointed out - the lender by virtue of Section 13 - must leave the vehicle in the place where he has 'seized' it for a period of 5 days - this is to allow you time to resolve the issue.

 

I am unaware of any business that these lenders do without a Bill of Sale being party to a credit agreement.

 

Hope this shine more light on things?

 

Apple : )

[applecart]

HI ST220

 

Thankyou for letting me view your docs : )

 

Yes, it's true - looks like the lender has amended its Bills of Sale to include terms not party to the form specified in the schedule of the Act.

 

I'd be interested to see how they get on in court with such a document?

 

Anyone else got a new style BoS and been to court yet?

 

Apple : )

[ST220]

Thanks apple!

 

So in your opinion would I and should I be able to get my BOS voided? (A test case perhaps?) If so how would I go about it?

cheers

[cctv engineer]

You don't have to insure in their name you only have to ensure that their interest is noted just as you would when purchasing a vehicle on HP Anyway in the event of a claim the insurer will do an HPI check before releasing any funds & only then to the company named in the HPI check

 

 

 

Hi st. joncris is right in what he has posted.

[applecart]

Hi guys

 

Can you prey tell where it is stated that one has to show any Lenders interest in relation to a Bill of Sale coupled with a CCA in either Act - I must have missed it??

 

Apple

[applecart]

Hi ST220

 

I pm'd you some info before - (hope you still have it?)

 

It's a quick and simple process - Basically - once you are as sure as you can be that the BoS is likely to be unenforceable (or simply curious) - take the following actions:

 

step 1: request the High Court Stamp Reference No. from the lender if you do not already know it. (you don't have to tell them your plans - but I would advise them of your intention to check the validity of the Bill of Sale - but then I'm like that : )

 

step 2: write off to the High Court of Justice as shown below:

 

 

Your Name

Your Address

Post Code

Date

Enforcement Officer

Royal Court of Justice

Room E17

The Strand

London

WC2A 2LL

Dear Sir or Madam

Re: Bill of Sale - Ref No: XXXXXXX

With reference to the above, I write to request a true copy of the registered Bill of Sale; details of which are below:

Debtors Name & Address:

(Input your name and address)

Lenders Name & Address:

(Input Lenders name and address)

Bill of Sale Ref No:

(Input the known reference number of the Bill of Sale - if you don't have it you will have to send a payment in the sum of £40 with this letter - if you know it, then you only have to send a payment of £5.00)

It is common knowledge that a Bill of Sale can be lodged with you and be done so as an 'out of time' registrations; with this in mind, can you confirm whether the said Bill of Sale in this matter has been registered out of time; and if it has been, would you kindly advise if there has been any application made to rectify the registration.

I look forward to your early reply and enclose the sum of £xx.00 as necessary.

Yours sincerely

(sign your letter)

XXXXXXXX

 

NB: Post it recorded delivery and keep copy of your letter and copy of recorded delivery slip on file.

 

Step 3. Once you get the reply - if they confirm it is registered out of time and can confirm that no application to rectify has been made - then proceed to step 4.

 

Step 4. Check the Bill of Sale Acts of 1878 & 1882 - you will be looking for any sections within your copy of the Bill of Sale that does not comply with these Acts - note any variances or anything that does not comply. (the more you can find - the more chance you have of securing an order to throw it out)

 

Step 5. get in touch with a solicitor and instruct them to file for a declaration that the Bill of Sale is void/uneforceable.

 

The effect of these measures is that once a court declares the Bill of Sale void - then the 'security is void' - this means they cannot seize the vehicle.

 

Interestingly - it could also mean that your credit agreement is also unenforceable - this will depend on the terms and conditions within it and those found in your Bill of Sale : )

 

I will say more once you have completed steps above : )

 

Hope this gives you an insight for now?

 

 

 

 

 

[phelo]

hi i'm in need of help, logbook loans reported my car stolen to merseyside police on friday 6/08/2010 the police phoned me sat morning asked me to come in i didnt so they turned up at my sisters and took my car as they said it was stolen, they asked where i was because there is a warrant for my arrest for taking without consent. i am going to police station at 11am monday morning. any advice would be appreciated.

[caro]

Do you have the log book for your car and all the usual documents to prove that you own the car.

 

Why did you ignore the police in the first place?

[JonCris]

hi i'm in need of help, logbook loans reported my car stolen to merseyside police on friday 6/08/2010 the police phoned me sat morning asked me to come in i didnt so they turned up at my sisters and took my car as they said it was stolen, they asked where i was because there is a warrant for my arrest for taking without consent. i am going to police station at 11am monday morning. any advice would be appreciated.

 

The police acted unlawfully. They should not have just taken the word of LBL further straightforward enquiries would have revealed the truth Also whatever you do DO NOT attend the police station without legal representation If you get stopped ask them why they are involving themselves in a civil matter & are they aware of this firms reputation If not tell them to check the web that should dispel any illusions they might have

[phelo]

thank you, would it be ok if i go to citizens advice

[phelo]

i have started new thread so i didn't hijack this one sorry any help would be appreciated thank you

[Nicky Bodmin]

Hi Guys

 

The room is E15 Enforcements not E17