Car Dealer Gave False Information - Sued Innocent Person
Discussion
Du1point8 said:
But if you bought from X&Y, you have their details.
So why you believed them when they said they are actually person A is a little strange, surely the sales notice had X&Y on it or was it cash in hand and you have nothing?
Thats what is confusing with your first message on the thread, Person A had nothing to do with it, but you didn't just go after X&Y and listened to their lies about it... you paid X&Y, so therefore they are responsible, yet you were led to believe someone else was and that is the confusing part.
I don't think it's confusing at all. So why you believed them when they said they are actually person A is a little strange, surely the sales notice had X&Y on it or was it cash in hand and you have nothing?
Thats what is confusing with your first message on the thread, Person A had nothing to do with it, but you didn't just go after X&Y and listened to their lies about it... you paid X&Y, so therefore they are responsible, yet you were led to believe someone else was and that is the confusing part.
He bought from someone who has supplied him with false information with regard to their identity.
His question is: How does he go about identifying them.
anothernameitist said:
I'll bet X and Y are related to A
Possibly. Mr A was apparently not a lot better than Mr X & Y.I'm not 100% sure, but it sounds like Mr A pee'd some people off in the trade.
If Mr X & Y moved in and letters were at the premises addressed to "Company 1, Mr A" it wouldn't take much for Mr X & Y to start using those details if they were that way inclined.
Is the info on the V5 any use re. the previous owner?
It may have the details of Mr X & Mr Y (unlikely), but it should at least have the details of the last person that actually owned it so it may be worth trying to get hold of them and asking if they have any idea who they sold it to?
It may have the details of Mr X & Mr Y (unlikely), but it should at least have the details of the last person that actually owned it so it may be worth trying to get hold of them and asking if they have any idea who they sold it to?
In summary:
You've got a bit of paper which says Company ABC sold you the car
Company ABC don't exist so that line of inquiry is dead.
Some time ago X & Y who you actually dealt with told you its Person A that owns the company
Person A has since denied (and proved?) that he's nothing to do with it
This line of inquiry is dead.
So you're back to X & Y but you don't know who they are or where they live.
Have you been back to the premises to see if X & Y are still there?
Good luck.
You've got a bit of paper which says Company ABC sold you the car
Company ABC don't exist so that line of inquiry is dead.
Some time ago X & Y who you actually dealt with told you its Person A that owns the company
Person A has since denied (and proved?) that he's nothing to do with it
This line of inquiry is dead.
So you're back to X & Y but you don't know who they are or where they live.
Have you been back to the premises to see if X & Y are still there?
Good luck.
Centurion07 said:
Is the info on the V5 any use re. the previous owner?
It may have the details of Mr X & Mr Y (unlikely), but it should at least have the details of the last person that actually owned it so it may be worth trying to get hold of them and asking if they have any idea who they sold it to?
It doesn't no, but the previous owner may well be worth a try It may have the details of Mr X & Mr Y (unlikely), but it should at least have the details of the last person that actually owned it so it may be worth trying to get hold of them and asking if they have any idea who they sold it to?
waterwonder said:
In summary:
You've got a bit of paper which says Company ABC sold you the car
Company ABC don't exist so that line of inquiry is dead.
Some time ago X & Y who you actually dealt with told you its Person A that owns the company
Person A has since denied (and proved?) that he's nothing to do with it
This line of inquiry is dead.
So you're back to X & Y but you don't know who they are or where they live.
Have you been back to the premises to see if X & Y are still there?
Good luck.
Exactly right You've got a bit of paper which says Company ABC sold you the car
Company ABC don't exist so that line of inquiry is dead.
Some time ago X & Y who you actually dealt with told you its Person A that owns the company
Person A has since denied (and proved?) that he's nothing to do with it
This line of inquiry is dead.
So you're back to X & Y but you don't know who they are or where they live.
Have you been back to the premises to see if X & Y are still there?
Good luck.
They are still there, but I work away a lot and they're never there for the few weekends I'm actually around...
They're pretending that they've only been there a month and that the last guys were "cowboys".
It's definitely the same people though - we've finally traced the landlord and he's confirmed they've been there for ~2 years. He either won't divulge or doesn't know their full names.
waterwonder said:
Sounds like one for the PH bloodhounds.
Have you tried CAB or anything? This must be reasonably common.
We tried Trading Standards, they seemed interested initially but when I emailed them 3 weeks ago to see if they'd found out anything I got no reply.Have you tried CAB or anything? This must be reasonably common.
They probably phoned up, got told the same rubbish and also swallowed it.
The answer is you name X and Y as joint defendants, trading as COMPANY.
As part of the claim you include the costs of them conning you.
You need to jump over two hurdles though:
I would contact the landlord and formally ask for the names of X and Y. If he refuses, I would suggest that he would be named as the de facto trader on the court papers. When it all comes out in the wash, he'll let you have the names, or even if he's obstructive, to mount a defence he'll have to put something substantial like the fact he is letting the garage and to whom.
The second hurdle winding forward 8 months and you get to a hearing and you get a judgment, then what are you going to do?
If the debt is less than £600 then you can't escalate the debt to the High Court and the county court bailiffs are a waste of time and money to someone who is willing to duck and dive, which clearly they are.
The other option is Trading Standards. Years ago I reported something to them expecting nothing to come from it, and they reported back to me the full details of someone and gave me all the ammo I needed for a court claim.
As part of the claim you include the costs of them conning you.
You need to jump over two hurdles though:
I would contact the landlord and formally ask for the names of X and Y. If he refuses, I would suggest that he would be named as the de facto trader on the court papers. When it all comes out in the wash, he'll let you have the names, or even if he's obstructive, to mount a defence he'll have to put something substantial like the fact he is letting the garage and to whom.
The second hurdle winding forward 8 months and you get to a hearing and you get a judgment, then what are you going to do?
If the debt is less than £600 then you can't escalate the debt to the High Court and the county court bailiffs are a waste of time and money to someone who is willing to duck and dive, which clearly they are.
The other option is Trading Standards. Years ago I reported something to them expecting nothing to come from it, and they reported back to me the full details of someone and gave me all the ammo I needed for a court claim.
So basically X and Y sold you a dodgy car and then pretendended to work for A when infact X and Y are trading as a partnership. Good news for you that as it means that they are liable personally.
Make a new MCOL against X and Y, take your evidence from case against Mr A to prove that he is nobody and then use 192.com or facebook to find the addresses of the 2 individuals.
If you don't actually know their names at all then do a bit of digging round facebook/192.com, or ask around here - i'm frequently amazed the amount of information the PH detectives can find out.
Make a new MCOL against X and Y, take your evidence from case against Mr A to prove that he is nobody and then use 192.com or facebook to find the addresses of the 2 individuals.
If you don't actually know their names at all then do a bit of digging round facebook/192.com, or ask around here - i'm frequently amazed the amount of information the PH detectives can find out.
Bluebarge said:
NobleGuy said:
It quite clearly says "sole trader" on my post.
It also quite clearly says "the owner of the company" when it appears there is no effing company, so stop referring to "company" when you mean "business name".This is only complicated because you are making it so.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff