MotoNovo repossession (unlawful?)

[orfoster]

Hello,

there are two issues to the thread I need help with and whether they are separate issues or all the same thing?

1. No default notice received or on file following SAR.
2. Unlawful repossession?

1. In July 12 before I met my GF she had a car on HP, had issues with one contract ending and another beginning so called MotoNovo to see if they would assist her with payments, they wouldn't and she missed payments, the issued her with a "notice of default sums" but never issued and nor do they have anything on file following a SAR of an actual default notice they have confirmed they don't have anything else and nor do they have any record of issuing one on their system notes. Can we challenge to get it removed? And compensation as its the only default on credit file?

2. Repossession of vehicle, essentially one day while she was out at work they came to take the vehicle, their collection report where they added loads of charges which she disputes says "nobody to sign". She knew they were coming but they took the car from private property without her consent. Now the issue about paying a 1/3rd of the total, the key issue here is they added "option to purchase (optional)" on the day she bought the car, this wasn't optional and she didn't want it, if this wasn't there she would have been over 1/3rd of her payments.

i thought its important we clarify the outcome we are seeking, ultimately is the default removed and compensation for the damage that's done. A secondary is to clarify if there's anything on the 2nd point to get back?

Hopefully someone can assist.

Thanks

[TUTTSI]

Re: MotoNovo repossession (unlawful?)

As far as I know that taking a car from a private drive is unlawful even if a third has not been paid. Do I take it it was the HP company that took the car back for payments missed?

I cannot help you on the other issue but no doubt someone with more knowledge will be along to give you some great advice.

[orfoster]

Re: MotoNovo repossession (unlawful?)

Here is a draft letter I was proposing to send, I don't know if its too detailed? Any suggestions? But also for more background.....

Dear Sirs,
Thank you for your letters and emails in relation to my recent Subject access request, as you will be aware this account has been in dispute for some time now and you have failed to respond to my complaint.
I now write to make a formal complaint in relation to the unlawful repossession of the vehicle in question and the unfair processing of personal data.
Unlawful repossession
The Agreement supplied recently makes reference to “option to purchase fee (optional)”, within the balance statement this shows that this fee was added to the agreement on 14 November 2009, the day the agreement commenced. I believe this to be an unfair fee which prejudices my position had I wished to exercise my right to terminate under the Consumer Credit Act, this fee was not advised to me as being optional at the time nor was this something I opted for, I was not aware at the time that this fee had been added to my agreement already and should have in any event been added to the end of the agreement.
As you will be aware that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 s90, it is unlawful to recover items after payments have been made up to 1/3rd, I believe it to be the case that I had made payments exceeding 1/3rd of the total cost and that therefore my goods were “protected goods”.
The vehicle was repossessed from private property without my consent, you will note from the Inspection Report dated 15 June 2011, only recently supplied, it states “no one to sign”. In your letter dated 17 June 2011 you state “From the inspection report that you signed to agree to the damages and the items returned to us” You will note that I did not sign the inspection report. I subsequently complained and entered into a dispute with MotoNovo, you failed to respond at all.
You will be aware that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 s91 is quite clear in this matter and outlines the rights of the debtor in cases where the creditor has breached s90 of the act.
In addition you failed to seek my “informed consent” in relation to the termination of this agreement, more specifically MotoNovo did not inform me of my statutory rights in relation to this matter.
Unfair Processing of data
As you will be aware, this account has been in dispute since 12 June 2011 when I wrote outlining my complaint and again on 27 June 2011, I didn’t receive either an acknowledgement or a response to my complaint raised and therefore the dispute is still outstanding.
Since raising this dispute, which has not been resolved, you have filed default notices with Credit Reference Agencies, you will be aware that the Information Commissioner in August 2007 (Data Protection Technical Guidance – Filing defaults with credit reference agencies) stated that “If we conclude that there is a genuine, reasonable and unresolved dispute between the borrower and lender, then we are likely to find that personal data has been processed unfairly if a default has been filed”
You will note following disclosure of information provided in response to my Subject access request a copy default notice was provided dated 1 February 2010, clearly from the agreement notes it is clear that this default notice was served in error.
I have not at any point received a default notice regarding this account which is in direct breach of s87 of the Consumer Credit Act, it is clear that a default notice served under s88 is “necessary” before the owner or creditor can become entitled to, among other key points, “recover possession of any goods or land”.
A default notice has been registered on my credit file along with other errors previously admitted which have seriously damaged my financial reputation.




Outcome Sought
1. Full repayments of payments made as required under Consumer Credit Act 1974.
2. Compensation that the unfair processing of personal information has caused to my credit file - £1,000
3. Full removal of any entries made to my credit file relating to MotoNovo.


It is clear that on a number of occasions MotoNovo have breached clear pieces of legislation and I am taking this matter extremely seriously.
Failure to respond to my complaint may result in court action where I would look to apply interest and costs.
I look forward to your response within 14 days.
Yours faithfully

[orfoster]

Re: MotoNovo repossession (unlawful?)

As far as I know that taking a car from a private drive is unlawful even if a third has not been paid. Do I take it it was the HP company that took the car back for payments missed?

I cannot help you on the other issue but no doubt someone with more knowledge will be along to give you some great advice.

Thanks, the above draft provides a bit more background. She did tell them she would give up the car if they couldn't help her with payments for 3 months, so she did know they were coming but they just took it, she signed nothing and they've even said it in their inspection report. Company that repo was called Manheim.

[orfoster]

Re: MotoNovo repossession (unlawful?)

Anyone?