Family member coming back for more cash after winning first court appearance

[DreamLover]

Ok, so a family member took me to court for a verbal agreement we made about buying their car as they were emigrating abroad. My lack of knowledge regarding the binding of verbal contracts was the downfall in this case, therefore I ended up paying for a car that was eventually crushed due to no road tax plus court fees. Problem is, they have returned demanding another payment for the private reg that was on it. There was never a conversation regarding the plate. I'm afraid that because they won the first case that this lie about a verbal agreement to hold on to it for them till a suitable car can be found or it was sold would be believed in the next court case. They have demanded over £2000 for a plate I know cost a tenth of that and I'm worried the court is just going to believe them again. If they win again will they just keep coming back for more and more? How can I defend this?

[MIKE770]

@Peridot

[Peridot]

Hi Dreamlover,

I assume that you admitted there was a verbal contract at the last hearing? I also assume that 'contract' was explored in Court. If there was genuinely a personal plate that was part of the discussions, would it not have come out at the hearing? What was the order that was made and did you comply with it and pay the amount ordered?

I suspect the Court would be pretty unsympathetic having already made an order that you pay for the car (I assume) in the last case. He would get short shrift bringing another claim concerning a number plate on a vehicle where he's already received the sum he claimed for it.

A little more info such as the order that was made would be helpful to point you in the right direction.

[Amethyst]

Private plate was their responsibility to file the forms to remove the plate and replace it with the original plate or generic plate issued by DVLA before they sold the vehicle. Their private plate could have been put on retention - in their ownership - there is no requirement to have the private plate ON a vehicle.
des8


With regards the court case this person brought against you and won - did you actually defend and go to a hearing ?

[des8]

I'm confused (easily!)

You admit you had an agreement to purchase the car from emigres.
They claimed you were to retain the car until a suitable car was found (for whom if they were emigrating?) or it was sold (but weren't you buying it?)

If they were emigrating why do they think you would be keeping the plate (or even the car) for them?
It would be of no value to you, and if they were abroad no value to them.
And as Ame says, their responsibility to put the plate on retention if they wanted to keep it.
If you were just looking after it for them, were you being paid or was there some other consideration?.
When a bailor receives the sole benefit from the bailment, the bailee is financially responsible only if he or she has been grossly negligent or has acted in bad faith in taking care of the property.


Also as per Peridot I don't see a court taking kindly to a party successfully issuing a claim for breach of contract and then returning for a second bite at the cherry. IMO the registration plate is as much part of this car as any other part. would the court allow a second claim for eg special alloy wheels

[DreamLover]

Hi all. Thank you very much for help. I did agree to but the car subject to it being roadworthy and certain things fixed, this didn’t happen so I thought I would be able to withdraw from the sale but the court said no. An order was made for me to pay for the car, his travel from overseas, his hire car, his hotel and his legal costs. I paid this in full so there is nothing owed. He is trying to claim that he had discussed the plate was to be ‘loaned” whilst we owned this car / which is not the case. The plate was never discussed at all. Thanks