Car sold without my permission

[Sirius1001]

Simply put, I bought a car from ebay and it was delivered to a third party (relatives) to their driveway as they were going to be the registered keeper. I put up the cash (over 70% of it I sent them but they offered to pay some as they would be the main user while I wasn't in town). I was also willing to pay all the insurance and tax but they did in the end as it wasn't a great amount and they were responsible in any case being the main user while I was out of town (I was an additional user on insurance). Long story short, they ended up selling it knowing full well I didn't want them to (they seemed to think they could due to the registration, which obviously was a bad mistake of theirs). They basically did it cos they knew it would annoy me as I kept telling them they couldn't sell it and they could tell I was attached to it (they never actually drove the car in the end either, btw, not that it matters).

As far as I am aware, it was criminal for them to assume the right to sell it without my permission (knowing it was me who bought it and have the invoice from ebay - they did gift an amount towards it but this wasn't asked for - knowing them it was just so they could feel like they were in the 'helper' role but then complain about it later). It wouldn't be an issue if the car was easy to obtain in the same condition but they are hard to find now. They may also now complain about money I owe them unrelated to the car but I believe this is irrelevant to this (would be a civil claim) and it wasn't the reason they sold it, anyway, as they were in no need of the cash (the money I owed them was never really asked for as they were in no hurry for me to pay them back which I would have done easily but now I'm more inclined not to give it to them anyway due to their behaviour - if they really cared about this money they wouldn't have sold the car for peanuts in comparison which was less than 25% of the amount knowing it would annoy me - they actually told relatives staying there at the time not to tell me they sold it and it was never even to do with the money I owed them and they never to this day claim this was the reason and they are just saying it was stressful having the car there and sorting out MOTs etc - there was basically no reason to do it other than they knew I would be upset about it and I had already told them I could store it somewhere else instead but they didn't want to listen).

I am worried whether the police would take this seriously and whether I should get a written legal opinion first before going to them about it (they may fob me off saying it was a civil claim etc otherwise). I don't want the people to get into trouble for 'selling' it but just want the car returned (I can get it picked up by a car storage company, for example). Legally, as it should still be mine and I can't steal it, I suppose I can always get it from the people who currently have it (if I can get their address details from somewhere, the DVLA will only give it once I report it stolen due to data protection act)? They were obviously unaware though that it couldn't be sold to them without my permission.

[Sirius1001]

So assuming the police don't take this seriously, it is still still my car anyway as far as I can tell? I can't steal my own car so is it possible to report it stolen just so I know who has it now (DVLA won't tell me without crime number) and maybe retrieve it or won't the police even allow me to do that? It's not the money at all just want the car back.

[Sirius1001]

........... (I didn't realise posts couldn't be edited or deleted on here)

[des8]

Well it seems to me that you will have great difficulty recovering this vehicle.
The person who purchased it will have done so in good faith.
The sellers owned 30% of it, it was registered in their name, they insured it and it was kept at their address so any purchaser would have every reason to believe they had the right to sell it.
A court could well look at the circumstances and decide you had not taken sufficient care to ensure that your car was not sold by the joint owners, and so your recovery would be prevented by estoppel by negligence
e.g. you did not even register it in your name. Given registration does not prove ownership, if a non registered person tries to sell a car it would raise questions in the mind of a would be purchaser

If you trace the car, and just try to recover it without a court order, be prepared to face a charge of theft yourself.

You might have a money claim against the seller, but be aware that if you initiate one they might well counter claim for the money which you admit you owe.

[Sirius1001]

Well it seems to me that you will have great difficulty recovering this vehicle.
The person who purchased it will have done so in good faith.
The sellers owned 30% of it, it was registered in their name, they insured it and it was kept at their address so any purchaser would have every reason to believe they had the right to sell it.
A court could well look at the circumstances and decide you had not taken sufficient care to ensure that your car was not sold by the joint owners, and so your recovery would be prevented by estoppel by negligence
e.g. you did not even register it in your name. Given registration does not prove ownership, if a non registered person tries to sell a car it would raise questions in the mind of a would be purchaser

If you trace the car, and just try to recover it without a court order, be prepared to face a charge of theft yourself.

You might have a money claim against the seller, but be aware that if you initiate one they might well counter claim for the money which you admit you owe.

Hi, the thing is I was going to pay for everything. The money they gave me towards it was just something they offered in the last minute to be 'kind' (when I said I was transferring the money they just said ok just send this amount instead which was a roundish number so they paid the rest) so it was in no way to own any part of it and was just a gift that actually was less than the amount for road tax (it wasn't as much as you think as the car isn't that valuable but there aren't that many around now - they sold it for the same total amount but sometimes they go for a lot more so I'd rather have the same one as it is in good condition). They often try to be helpful but seems like it is a control thing so they can complain later (the instigator was basically the one offering the money but in the background triangulating people). Similarly with insurance etc I was willing to pay it all even though it was not my responsibility. They never even drove the car, btw, and nor did I as they had it for less than a year (the reason for the registration was two-fold btw but the obvious reason was I wasn't there at the time but secondly I was only going to be the secondary driver anyway for a while and that was why I was insured as additional driver but it turned out they didn't drive it in any case either). They knew I didn't want it sold and that is why the instigator sold it to upset me (I already had offered to store it elsewhere even though that wasn't even the issue as there was no issue that made any sense). I actually was the one who arranged the insurance and called all the insurance companies but the cheapest happened to be the same company they had their household insurance on so they added it on (it was cheap to insure).

Finally, even though I had thought I made it clear it couldn't be sold (which maybe they didn't realise was illegal due to the registration) they have no excuse now they know it was my car (I was the one who bought it on ebay and the confirmation of the purchase is in my name etc and I can show where the money left my bank account to put up the cash - that they gifted some at the last minute I don't think is that relevant and even so they still needed my permission to sell it which they didn't have). They know now they shouldn't have sold it but have made no efforts to get it returned and even claim they don't have the person's address (which may be further dishonesty as it is clear in the DVLA documents they would have looked at that they are supposed to keep a record) so she will not return the car, so her intention is to permanently deprive the owner of the vehicle. I can see why they may claim it wasn't dishonest to sell it at the start (due to the registration - they thought they had a hold on me as they knew I didn't want it sold) if they claim I didn't make it clear it would be illegal (although I kept saying they couldn't) but since it happened they will know it was my car (or even you would agree mostly mine but I say it is totally mine as isn't it obvious that they didn't expect any of this money back that they gifted towards it just when I was about to send them all the money?) but have made no efforts since to prevent the crime. Incidentally, it is not the only thing of mine they threatened to sell once they knew I was attached to it but I always thought it was said as a joke to annoy me as they know I'm not currently in the area and they are looking after certain things (so I know the reason she sold the car was not done innocently). Also there were relatives staying there at the time of the illegal sale who told me she told them not to tell me about it which says it all, really.

BTW, someone on here quoted 'Taking Control Of Goods Act 2013' to state something was stolen as they weren't authorised to take control (so as to not just rely on the theft act which required dishonesty??) but tbh I don't really think that would apply would it to normal people ?

[des8]

Your main aim is recovery of the vehicle.
I was just pointing out that for various reasons IMO you would not succeed

The 'Taking Control Of Goods Regulations 2013' made under powers bestowed by " Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007"
have no application to your situation

[Sirius1001]

Your main aim is recovery of the vehicle.
I was just pointing out that for various reasons IMO you would not succeed
The 'Taking Control Of Goods Regulations 2013' made under powers bestowed by " Schedule 12 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007"
have no application to your situation

I didn't think it had any application but I wonder why someone mentioned it relating to a car being 'stolen' by someone's ex-partner who thought they had the right to it? Is it because it defines theft there which would apply to other situations?

I don't think it should matter that the money I sent them was not the full amount as when I was calling just to let them know I was transferring all the money they said they would let me off for a small amount (since the car was quite a bit under £1k it still was just over 28% of the total it was reduced by). If I thought this would create some doubt as to whether it was all my vehicle I obviously wouldn't have let them and the only reason they thought they could sell it was that it 'was in' their 'name'. They knew the car was going to be for me as it was basically going to be my first car and the person it was named in decided not to drive it anyway (he hadn't had a car for over a decade and didn't feel confident - I was basically doing them a favour allowing them to use the car as they wouldn't have bought a car and never requested one but they didn't mind keeping it there and they knew it was going to be for me). The instigator is a bit negative and hard to talk to and likes to control conversations much of the time etc but most of the time they are fine it is just they tend to argue the opposite of anything I say etc so it gets a bit draining. I think she was was also getting the registered keeper annoyed about the situation as I was willing to pay for everything but not sure he knew or was told as I hardly ever spoke to him until the day after I found out about the illegal sale - he even denied he sold it at first as it was obviously not his idea. So they knew I didn't want it sold and they thought they would do it to annoy me I suppose?

I don't really think your point about "estoppel by negligence" is correct as I was always talking about the car to them on the phone and they were always moaning about things such as MOTs etc (it had to have a repair that was already mentioned in a less serious way on the previous MOT but then passed with no advisories after a neighbour helped get the MOT done) and seemingly jokingly saying they would sell it as they knew it would annoy me. I would have got it picked up by a storage company if I had any idea they would actually do it and I told them that I could put it in a garage if they didn't want it there (it could also have been SORNd but they don't seem to want to listen). I understand her just putting the 'for sale' sign on it would be classed as theft. I would tell them they can't sell it but they could see I got a bit annoyed when they mentioned that. Similarly there was another item of mine I talked about that they had and also again they would joke about selling it. They probably didn't even know the basic law about that either or did they (they may just have thought they could sell anything in their possession in some strange way but at least now they know they can't)? I just assumed they were joking.

Regarding me mentioning this thread two times on other threads, they were just old ones (over 6 months old) that had a similar theme (stolen cars) that I searched for. I didn't want to hijack any and they weren't current topics.

So the question is should I report the car stolen (would be the only way I can get the info of the current keeprr from the DVLA)? I think the police are then obliged to get the car? So not sure how I would not get it back unless the police don't want to give me a crime number? You may wonder why I'm bothering with such an old car (around 20 years old) that isn't yet even a 'classic' but probably will be. They are becoming increasingly rare and are very reliable so it would be hard to find another in almost perfect condition (mileage was low too at around 50k). Funnily enough the person I bought it from was in law enforcement but from a different area so he just advised me to contact the local force to where it was delivered at (he didn't know about the law, anyway, funnily enough but I did contact him for advice about the situation which he wasn't really happy about lol). Before selling it to me he used to commute 100 miles each day with it and probably did 20k miles in the year he had it.

[des8]

You can try reporting the car as stolen, but under the circumstances the police will probably say it is a civil matter.
Even if you do obtain a crime number, and then trace the new keeper, how do you expect to recover the car?
You cannot just go and pick it up>
The police won't recover it for you as the present keeper will produce a receipt showing he purchased it
you will need to initiate a court claim, and it is possible the court would not find in your favour.

[Sirius1001]

You can try reporting the car as stolen, but under the circumstances the police will probably say it is a civil matter.
Even if you do obtain a crime number, and then trace the new keeper, how do you expect to recover the car?
You cannot just go and pick it up>
The police won't recover it for you as the present keeper will produce a receipt showing he purchased it
you will need to initiate a court claim, and it is possible the court would not find in your favour.

Hi, thanks for the reply again. I'm not sure the person who has it would have got a receipt for the sale but obviously he would be the registered keeper. Does it matter or not if he has a receipt once it is established the previous keeper didn't have a right to even attempt to sell it to him without my permission? I thought it just needed to be recorded as stolen for the police to be obliged to return it so once there is a crime number wouldn't they already believe it was mine?

I know about civil court claims but this wouldn't really get my vehicle back would it? Can I make a claim against the current keeper or not? It is obvious that I didn't want it sold so not sure how he can argue he could buy it once he realises this?

The police tend not to investigate a lot of crimes so when they say it's a civil claim do you mean they can't be bothered with the criminal side of it? They even get annoyed if anyone reports certain types of new crimes they think are a waste of time (apparently they now get a lot of reports about online harassment etc which are new crimes they don't really want to take seriously).

[MIKE770]

The basic rule of law is that you cannot sell what you do not own. That means, of course, that you cannot buy from a non-owner either.

There is always a loser when goods are sold by a person who does not have the authority to sell. It is either the original owner, who loses his property, or, more often, the good faith buyer, who loses his money when the items are returned.

The law in this area can be confusing and hard to understand. This article briefly explains the legal position where goods are sold by a non-owner and how that position can differ depending on the situation.

An example of items that might be sold by someone other than the owner, is stolen goods, but there are many other examples, including a landlord selling possessions of a tenant who has vacated, a parent selling the possessions of a child, or a non-licensed reseller of electronically downloaded products. The general rule: protecting the original owner

The general rule where goods are sold by a non-owner is that the eventual purchaser does not gain good title. This means that if B wrongly sells goods belonging to A to a buyer called C, the items remain the property of A. The fact that C has entirely innocently purchased items that he believed were owned by B is irrelevant. It is logical to protect the original owner's title.

Despite this, there are numerous exceptions that have arisen as a result of the obvious unfairness the general rule might create where innocent buyers lose their money in difficult circumstances.

[des8]

You can try all sorts of approaches, but I doubt you will be successful in recovering the vehicle.

The person who purchased it did so in good faith.
To regain the vehicle you would need to prove in court that the seller did not have the right to sell it.
Even if you prove it the court could rule that you should be indemnified by the person who sold the vehicle, not that you recover the vehicle

I could of course be wrong in trying to guess the outcome of a court case... no one can be certain.

What is certain is that it will be stressful and do no good to your family relationships

[DE DOGS]

You can try all sorts of approaches, but I doubt you will be successful in recovering the vehicle.

The person who purchased it did so in good faith.
To regain the vehicle you would need to prove in court that the seller did not have the right to sell it.
Even if you prove it the court could rule that you should be indemnified by the person who sold the vehicle, not that you recover the vehicle

I could of course be wrong in trying to guess the outcome of a court case... no one can be certain.

What is certain is that it will be stressful and do no good to your family relationships

Family relationship,I guess that's gone already.

[Sirius1001]

Hi,

The seller now knows they shouldn't have sold it so can I report it stolen and then pick it up from the police? Why would the court have to rule if the seller now realises it was illegal to attempt the sale? A lot of people won't know the law about cars in particular due to thinking the registration says who owns it (like I think in some countries and even the policeman who sold me the car thought that too until I told him and then he got annoyed saying he didn't know the law about everything and why am I asking him if I already know). They are claiming they don't know the new person's details which I'm not sure is true or not.

[des8]

You can report it stolen, but when the police hear the circumstances, and interview the current keeper and see his receipt, I bet they will say it is a civil matter.
Even if the police took the car into custody, i doubt they will easily release it to you

The trouble is that when a car is stolen and sold on there are two victims, the owner and the purchaser.
The court has to decide who will be the loser, and I think the circumstances surrounding this incident are such that it is not possible to guess how that decision will go.

[Sirius1001]

OOPS just found out after HPI check that the price has doubled in the last year (corrected the mileage as it was giving figures for 100k more miles than it's done)!