car sold while still on finance with out consent

[bluebottle]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

Hi Fairy Dust,

Thanks for your quick response. Statements of evidence in criminal cases have to conform to certain protocols, statutes and statutory instruments. At the end of the day, it will be down to Lothian & Borders Police whether they accept the statement Mr Bod took from you. Don't be surprised if your local police ask you for a statement on behalf of Lothian & Borders Police. With the evidence to hand, Mr Bod wouldn't have had much choice but to report the car stolen. Keep in touch and let us know how you get on with this and Orange and T-Mobile, please.

BB

[Guest]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

HI

So in response to your orriginal question, you cannot reclaim the car because you have paid 2/3 ofthe purchase price.

It is quite correct that the title of the car cannot pass to the new purchaser if it was not been sold on your authority, but this has not been legally established yet i believe.

Not that anyone is doubting your word, but I am sure your son will have a different story, and if it cannot be legally established that the car was stollen prior to sale, the ownership of the car wil rest with the new purchaser as per the HP act 1965.

If the theft of the car is accepted as fact then the car may be re-posessed by the HP company and sold, the sum raised will be deducted from your ballance.

Personally i do not believe the police will do a thing, they will say that it is a" familly matter", i believe the financier will be quite happy just getting there repayments from you.

I may be wrong in this but either way you cannot reclaim the car.

Peter

[Sapphire]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

Hi Fairy Dust, I hope you don't mind but I'm copying part of your pm to myself as I hope this is relevant re the Orange problem.

Orange will not give me the information saying they don`t keep details of customers orders.

As far as I know that is absolute rollocks, they must keep records, its part and parcel of running a business, personally I think we need a very strongly worded letter to remind them of their obligations.

Anyone agree/disagree ?

[fairy dust 49]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

I know what you mean Mr Peterbard about conflicting statements and doubting my word ,but I have the the evidence that my son sold my car with out my consent as he put it in a email to me stating ( I can go and tell the finance company about the sale of the car ,it won`t affect his job as the car is my responsability and he doe`s not care what I do ).

That message came after I politely asked him to put payments in my account for the car as I only loaned him the car untill he sorted him self out and that I wanted the car returned in the same condition when he borrowed it .

I have printed out the emails and handed them over to the fraud investigor as proof that I was helping him out like most parents do .I have got the emails saved on file incase the police need a copy.

[bluebottle]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

Fairy Dust,

You need to speak to your local Law Centre about what BH have said. If they recover the car from the couple your son sold the car to, although it is the property of BH until the final payment is made, they have hired it to you under a legally-enforceable contract and if they are now saying they intend to sell it and apply proceeds to your account, that sounds highly irregular to me. If you have paid the requisite number of repayments to stop BH repossessing without a court order, they should restore the car to you. It sounds to me that they need a firm reminder of this.

BB

[fairy dust 49]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

Thank you Bluebottle for reply ,as mentioned earlier when I asked BH to retrieve car they told me it would not automaticaly be returned to me as they would sell it and take the sale off my ballance .

They then told me that they was leaving the car with new owners as they were un-aware that the car was on finance and it would not be fair on them to lose the car .

But what I am now concerned about is , if BH has reported the car stolen then won`t it be automaticly retrieved by the police as stolen property and returned to rightfull owner i.e BH, if so then surely they are not going to give it away back to the now new owners.

[Guest]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

Fairy Dust,

You need to speak to your local Law Centre about what BH have said. If they recover the car from the couple your son sold the car to, although it is the property of BH until the final payment is made, they have hired it to you under a legally-enforceable contract and if they are now saying they intend to sell it and apply proceeds to your account, that sounds highly irregular to me. If you have paid the requisite number of repayments to stop BH repossessing without a court order, they should restore the car to you. It sounds to me that they need a firm reminder of this.

BB

HI BB

I would be supprised if there was not a term in the agreement that enabled them to reposes the car in a case like this, i know that there is facility in the consumer credit act for security to be reposessed without the issuance of a default notice in specific cases.

Fairy Dust

I do hope that you are successful in your claim, time will tell i suppose.

Peter

[bluebottle]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

HI BB

I would be supprised if there was not a term in the agreement that enabled them to reposes the car in a case like this, i know that there is facility in the consumer credit act for security to be reposessed without the issuance of a default notice in specific cases.

Fairy Dust

I do hope that you are successful in your claim, time will tell i suppose.

Peter

In my experience, Peter, it's not that simple. If a motor vehicle is reported to the police as stolen, it is flagged on the Police National Computer (PNC) as "Suspect/Stolen", which means that any police officer running a check on such a vehicle's VRM would find it coming back as Suspect/Stolen. It is standard procedure to seize the vehicle and take it to a police compound for safe-keeping until the matter is resolved, i.e. the rightful owner/keeper retrieves it.

BH clearly cannot seem to get their story straight and, clearly, do not appear to have checked their position, legally, in such a situation as this. IMHO a court would have no hesitation in delivering a swift kick up the backside to BH and telling them to smarten their act up. OP certainly needs the advice of a legal professional in this respect.

BB

[Guest]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

In my experience, Peter, it's not that simple. If a motor vehicle is reported to the police as stolen, it is flagged on the Police National Computer (PNC) as "Suspect/Stolen", which means that any police officer running a check on such a vehicle's VRM would find it coming back as Suspect/Stolen. It is standard procedure to seize the vehicle and take it to a police compound for safe-keeping until the matter is resolved, i.e. the rightful owner/keeper retrieves it.

BH clearly cannot seem to get their story straight and, clearly, do not appear to have checked their position, legally, in such a situation as this. IMHO a court would have no hesitation in delivering a swift kick up the backside to BH and telling them to smarten their act up. OP certainly needs the advice of a legal professional in this respect.

BB

I think the police have yet to do anything at all from the sound of it.

I understand what you say anbout the technicalities of recovering the car, it all sounds very impressive, but it does not alter the fact that the creditor may have a right to the ownership of the car.

We dont really know what was in the agreement, so it is difficult to say if the creditor has mistated his position or not.

Also i think it is difficult to say if the OP would be better or worse off if they did reposess the car, it depends on many factors we do not know, value of the car amount remaining on the agreement etc.

I think, wait and see is what is required here.

Peter

[bluebottle]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

I think the police have yet to do anything at all from the sound of it.

I understand what you say anbout the technicalities of recovering the car, it all sounds very impressive, but it does not alter the fact that the creditor may have a right to the ownership of the car.

We dont really know what was in the agreement, so it is difficult to say if the creditor has mistated his position or not.

Also i think it is difficult to say if the OP would be better or worse off if they did reposess the car, it depends on many factors we do not know, value of the car amount remaining on the agreement etc.

I think, wait and see is what is required here.

Peter

Sorry, Peter, but I disagree with you. BH have changed their tack on two occasions and seem incapable of making a clear decision. From my own experience of HP, you pay the instalments you have contracted to pay, whatever. In this case, the residual value of the car, once recovered, is irrelevant, unless it is declared an insurance write-off, in which case BH would then have to make a decision after discussion with the OP and insurers. Whilst BH are the owners of the car until the OP pays the final payment, there are laws to protect the OP against unfair treatment and abuse by BH of the HP agreement.

In my considered judgement, BH are going about this in a ham-fisted and clumsy manner and cannot, in all honesty, see a court having much truck with their indecision or proposals.

[shell]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

Thank you Bluebottle for reply ,as mentioned earlier when I asked BH to retrieve car they told me it would not automaticaly be returned to me as they would sell it and take the sale off my ballance .

They then told me that they was leaving the car with new owners as they were un-aware that the car was on finance and it would not be fair on them to lose the car .

But what I am now concerned about is , if BH has reported the car stolen then won`t it be automaticly retrieved by the police as stolen property and returned to rightfull owner i.e BH, if so then surely they are not going to give it away back to the now new owners.

A few things bothering me here.

If they retrieve the car, surely it has to be returned to you, you are paying for it after all, then as you have paid over half of the balance you could return it to the seller with no comeback to you. So why would they be taking the sale value off your balance?

As for not retrieving the car, you have reported it stolen, if BH decide not to retrieve the car as it would be unfair to the new owners, then surely the onus is on them to sue the seller (the person who has stolen the car) for the monies owed.

[Guest]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

A few things bothering me here.

If they retrieve the car, surely it has to be returned to you, you are paying for it after all, then as you have paid over half of the balance you could return it to the seller with no comeback to you. So why would they be taking the sale value off your balance?

As for not retrieving the car, you have reported it stolen, if BH decide not to retrieve the car as it would be unfair to the new owners, then surely the onus is on them to sue the seller (the person who has stolen the car) for the monies owed.

HI

This is HP agreementn the car is the property of the creditor until the last payment.

The car as well as being the purpose of the loan is also security for it.

Should that security be stolen or distroyed the agreement would be teminated.
In the normal course of events all liabilities under the contract would be immediatley due and payable.

A point that has not been metioned in this thread is that in 100% of cases the HP company will ensure that the lender insures the vehicle as a provision of the agreement(it will be a term of the contract) this will be to protect its property.(the security)
Generally this insurance would be claimed and repay the creditor.(and lender)

For some reason this has not happened here.

When the contract is terminated, the car if discoverd will of course continue to be the propety of the creditor(or the insurance company if a pay out has been made). The car hs never been the property of the lender.

The issue of nothing being owed if 50% has been paid on the contract is not valid here.

This refers to section 99 and 100 of the consumer credit act, where a lender can volunarily termninate the contract and only pay 50% of the total credit on the agreement.
This only applies if the lender terminates in writing and returns the car, it does not apply if the creditor terminates.

If the lender termnates all sums under the contract ,including interest are due.

It may be that the creditor will decide to return the car to the lender and continue the arrangment, or he may not.
If he doesnt the creditor will sell the vehicle and the lender will be liable for the ballance due under the agreement less the amount raised by the sale.

As far as BH not deciding to recover the car, the fact is that they cannot recover it if no theft has been officialy recongnised, if it has they would have to collect the car after the police had recovered it.

Peter

[Guest]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

In this case, the residual value of the car, once recovered, is irrelevant, .

Sorry i do not understand this statement.

Surely the residual value of the car will offset what is owed under the contract.

Amount owed= anount due under contrac- sum raised on sale of car?

If the residual value of the car is very small it would be in the creditors interst to return the car and colect the ballance of the contractural payment.

In my considered opinion.
Peter

[Guest]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

Just as a final point and one that i think may be worth considering by the OP

I would not antaganise the lender to much.

The car has been stolen or sold, in both caes they are entitled to full immediate payment of sums due under the contract.

To me they sem to be treating this matter with admirable restraint.

Peter

[bluebottle]

Re: car sold while still on finance with out consent

HI

This is HP agreementn the car is the property of the creditor until the last payment.

The car as well as being the purpose of the loan is also security for it.

Should that security be stolen or distroyed the agreement would be teminated.
In the normal course of events all liabilities under the contract would be immediatley due and payable.

A point that has not been metioned in this thread is that in 100% of cases the HP company will ensure that the lender insures the vehicle as a provision of the agreement(it will be a term of the contract) this will be to protect its property.(the security)
Generally this insurance would be claimed and repay the creditor.(and lender)

For some reason this has not happened here.

When the contract is terminated, the car if discoverd will of course continue to be the propety of the creditor(or the insurance company if a pay out has been made). The car hs never been the property of the lender.

The issue of nothing being owed if 50% has been paid on the contract is not valid here.

This refers to section 99 and 100 of the consumer credit act, where a lender can volunarily termninate the contract and only pay 50% of the total credit on the agreement.
This only applies if the lender terminates in writing and returns the car, it does not apply if the creditor terminates.

If the lender termnates all sums under the contract ,including interest are due.

It may be that the creditor will decide to return the car to the lender and continue the arrangment, or he may not.
If he doesnt the creditor will sell the vehicle and the lender will be liable for the ballance due under the agreement less the amount raised by the sale.

As far as BH not deciding to recover the car, the fact is that they cannot recover it if no theft has been officialy recongnised, if it has they would have to collect the car after the police had recovered it.

Peter

Hi Peter,

If you refer to OP posts earlier in this thread, you will find that BH have informed the OP they are going to report the car as stolen. OP approached the police previously and was advised that BH must report the theft as they are the lawful owner, due to the vehicle being the subject of an HP agreement.

The law regarding stolen property was changed during the 1990s and this means that any innocent purchaser of stolen property never has proper title to such property; it is always vested in the lawful owner of the property. The "good faith" provision died with the change in the law.

As for the issues you highlight with regard to the CCA, finance companies, in my experience, have to tread a very careful path, as it is easy to wander into the legal minefield known as English Criminal Law. I am sure we all know abuses of the CCA by finance companies go on; it is just that very few cases come to the public's attention. All I can do is to re-iterate my cautionary note in a previous post.