Car purchased via HP - marked as stolen 8 months prior

[R0b]

Hi Rob,

To clarify the outstanding Oodle finance is my son's HP on the vehicle.

As the issue is the "stolen" marker on the vehicle can you clarify which sections of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 below are still relevant. I don't want to undermine the complaint by quoting incorrectly from the legislations

The relevant provisions as I see it are:

17 Trader to have right to supply the goods etc

(1) Every contract to supply goods .... is to be treated as including a term—

(a) in the case of a contract for the hire of goods, that at the beginning of the period of hire the trader must have the right to transfer possession of the goods by way of hire for that period

and

19 Consumer’s rights to enforce terms about goods

(6) If the trader is in breach of the term that section 17(1) (right to supply etc) requires to be treated as included in the contract, the consumer has a right to reject (see section 20 for provisions about that right and when it is available).

and

20 Right to reject

...

(14) If the contract is a hire-purchase agreement or a conditional sales contract and the contract is treated as at an end before the whole of the price has been paid, the entitlement to a refund extends only to the part of the price paid.

(15) A refund under this section must be given without undue delay, and in any event within 14 days beginning with the day on which the trader agrees that the consumer is entitled to a refund.

(16) If the consumer paid money under the contract, the trader must give the refund using the same means of payment as the consumer used, unless the consumer expressly agrees otherwise.

(17) The trader must not impose any fee on the consumer in respect of the refund.

Personally, if your son has all of the paperwork, I'm not sure if a subject access request is really needed at this stage. How and when your son should exercise that right should be done with careful consideration. If your son exercises it now, and then wants to exerciser it at a later date to see what information between the dealer and finance company might birng up, it could be argued that the SAR is malicious or excessive since the right was only exercised recently and therefore they may try to charge for their time.