VT problems

[Yadman]

We think we’re applying the rules correctly – but we were happy to make a compromise offer to get you moving on. As you are not willing to accept the offer, I have processed the voluntary termination for you as per your request.

As you have not returned the vehicle, the full CAP valuation of £780 has been applied as your liabilities.

Failure to deal with this liability will result in the necessary statutory notices being issued to yourself and potential legal action

I like their first sentence. "we think" so they clearly don't know

[R0b]

I've not seen your terms and conditions but presumably the obligation to return the car only matures upon termination of the contract. Therefore it was not an obligation on your part at the time because they refused to accept your VT notice until the car was either returned or you paid a sum of money.

In my view they haven't followed the rules and now it looks like they are trying to back track. You've already claimed repudiation and explained that the effect is that you are discharged from your obligations, they cannot now process the voluntary termination.

There is some case law to back up your position. In a recent case, Sanderson v Simtom Foods the judge confirmed the following:

... a contracting party is to be treated as having refused to perform its obligations if it ... refuses to perform unless the innocent party complies with conditions not required by the Contract, BV Oliehandel Jorgkind v Coastal International Ltd [1983] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 463.

They can't issue statutory notices because the contract has already come to an end. How can you issue a statutory notice for an agreement that no longer exists? I mean come on, common sense here - any notice they send would be invalid and not applicable. That said, I'd love to see them argue that they've taken steps to terminate an agreement that's already been terminated because any reasonable person would know that's ridiculous.

Anyhow, I think you have a few options:

1. Maintain your position for repudiatory breach and if they take legal action, consider counter-claiming for damages.

2. If repudiatory breach isn't accepted, alternatively argue that you exercised the VT right and that what they are recovering is inaccurate They would have to mitigate their losses and that would include taking reasonable steps to sell the vehicle in its current condition to offset the supposed CAP value. They are not entitled to the CAP value and the car as that means they would be benefitting more than they should.

3. As an extra thing, if in any way they affect your credit file as a result, you'll have an extra claim for damages for breach of data protection and at a minimum you would probably get £750 but I reckon as the have deliberately damaged your credit file, you could knock that up between £1,000 to £1,500 quite easily.

4. Agree to pay them the £750 and be done with it.

In summary, you are right, they don't have a clue and clearly haven't taken legal advice or if they did, their lawyer is useless.

[Yadman]

My understanding as well, of the CCA, and correct me if I'm wrong, but if they claim further liability under s100 ss4, that only increases the 50% of liability and as Ive actually paid over £1000 more than the 50% figure, this Cap amount they've mentioned would already have been covered.
At least that's how I'm interpreting s100

[R0b]

That's one interpretation yes but the other is that it is in addition to any instalments paid to the finance company.

Only a judge could decide that but still worth arguing since they would have otherwise benefitted from an additional £1,000 beyond your liability in the CCA and that additional sum as you say covers the costs they are seeking to recover.