Potential to loose £10k from the sale of my car! HELP! SCAM
Discussion
JustinP1 said:
No. However, if the car has been sold, the car does not belong to the OP.
The agreement between the OP and the dealer is that the dealer becomes the OP's agent - effectively and extension to the OP himself in order to sell the car to the third party.
If the dealer has acted lawfully in his obligation to sell the car, then the car belongs to someone else. The only thing that remains is a debt between the OP and the dealer due to their agency contract.
The only time where the OP could consider taking the car back would be IF the car has not yet been sold, as then, as you say, you cannot steal something which is yours.
That doesn't seem to be the case though, the agreement was that the Op needed to personally authorise the transfer of title on the day of sale, and it does not appear to have happened.The agreement between the OP and the dealer is that the dealer becomes the OP's agent - effectively and extension to the OP himself in order to sell the car to the third party.
If the dealer has acted lawfully in his obligation to sell the car, then the car belongs to someone else. The only thing that remains is a debt between the OP and the dealer due to their agency contract.
The only time where the OP could consider taking the car back would be IF the car has not yet been sold, as then, as you say, you cannot steal something which is yours.
JustinP1 said:
richie99 said:
But if you bought, in good faith, a car which turned out to be stolen, wouldn't the old bill be round PDQ to take it and tell you it wasn't yours?
They might do yes.However, there's no evidence that the dealer has stolen the OP's car. All that has happened to date is that the dealer owes the OP a sum relating to an agency contract.
As I said, without every last detail, who is to say the dealer wasn't operating a cam where the cars weren't sold at all - just offloaded to mates or to settle debts and the 'sales receipt' was no more than a fig leaf?
ging84 said:
JustinP1 said:
No. However, if the car has been sold, the car does not belong to the OP.
The agreement between the OP and the dealer is that the dealer becomes the OP's agent - effectively and extension to the OP himself in order to sell the car to the third party.
If the dealer has acted lawfully in his obligation to sell the car, then the car belongs to someone else. The only thing that remains is a debt between the OP and the dealer due to their agency contract.
The only time where the OP could consider taking the car back would be IF the car has not yet been sold, as then, as you say, you cannot steal something which is yours.
That doesn't seem to be the case though, the agreement was that the Op needed to personally authorise the transfer of title on the day of sale, and it does not appear to have happened.The agreement between the OP and the dealer is that the dealer becomes the OP's agent - effectively and extension to the OP himself in order to sell the car to the third party.
If the dealer has acted lawfully in his obligation to sell the car, then the car belongs to someone else. The only thing that remains is a debt between the OP and the dealer due to their agency contract.
The only time where the OP could consider taking the car back would be IF the car has not yet been sold, as then, as you say, you cannot steal something which is yours.
If the written contract says that, then the OP is laughing.
My strong guess though is that the contract of agency gives the dealer the right to sell the car. Playing out the endgame of that, the dealer denies saying that, and refers to signed contract to cover his behind.
9mm said:
JustinP1 said:
richie99 said:
But if you bought, in good faith, a car which turned out to be stolen, wouldn't the old bill be round PDQ to take it and tell you it wasn't yours?
They might do yes.However, there's no evidence that the dealer has stolen the OP's car. All that has happened to date is that the dealer owes the OP a sum relating to an agency contract.
As I said, without every last detail, who is to say the dealer wasn't operating a cam where the cars weren't sold at all - just offloaded to mates or to settle debts and the 'sales receipt' was no more than a fig leaf?
However, potentially committing a crime in the hope that the dealer has shoddy paperwork either takes balls or foolishness - depending on how lucky you end up!
JustinP1 said:
I totally agree.
However, potentially committing a crime in the hope that the dealer has shoddy paperwork either takes balls or foolishness - depending on how lucky you end up!
The new owner has bought the car legitimately as the seller has allowed the dealer to sell it. The fact the dealer didn't pass the £20k on doesn't change that. However, potentially committing a crime in the hope that the dealer has shoddy paperwork either takes balls or foolishness - depending on how lucky you end up!
Why not just knock over a post office for £20k and get your money back that way? As it has about the same legitimacy as fraudulently taking the car back from the guy who paid for it.
KFC said:
JustinP1 said:
I totally agree.
However, potentially committing a crime in the hope that the dealer has shoddy paperwork either takes balls or foolishness - depending on how lucky you end up!
The new owner has bought the car legitimately as the seller has allowed the dealer to sell it. The fact the dealer didn't pass the £20k on doesn't change that. However, potentially committing a crime in the hope that the dealer has shoddy paperwork either takes balls or foolishness - depending on how lucky you end up!
Why not just knock over a post office for £20k and get your money back that way? As it has about the same legitimacy as fraudulently taking the car back from the guy who paid for it.
JustinP1 said:
ging84 said:
JustinP1 said:
No. However, if the car has been sold, the car does not belong to the OP.
The agreement between the OP and the dealer is that the dealer becomes the OP's agent - effectively and extension to the OP himself in order to sell the car to the third party.
If the dealer has acted lawfully in his obligation to sell the car, then the car belongs to someone else. The only thing that remains is a debt between the OP and the dealer due to their agency contract.
The only time where the OP could consider taking the car back would be IF the car has not yet been sold, as then, as you say, you cannot steal something which is yours.
That doesn't seem to be the case though, the agreement was that the Op needed to personally authorise the transfer of title on the day of sale, and it does not appear to have happened.The agreement between the OP and the dealer is that the dealer becomes the OP's agent - effectively and extension to the OP himself in order to sell the car to the third party.
If the dealer has acted lawfully in his obligation to sell the car, then the car belongs to someone else. The only thing that remains is a debt between the OP and the dealer due to their agency contract.
The only time where the OP could consider taking the car back would be IF the car has not yet been sold, as then, as you say, you cannot steal something which is yours.
If the written contract says that, then the OP is laughing.
My strong guess though is that the contract of agency gives the dealer the right to sell the car. Playing out the endgame of that, the dealer denies saying that, and refers to signed contract to cover his behind.
Purchaser of car is, absent anything to the contrary, Equity's Darling. Does your contract for Sale or Return state that you retain title until you expressly transfer it, or anything similar?
If not, course of action would be to head on over to the dealer now and serve a claim on him for your money.
If it does however, you have two approaches!
If not, course of action would be to head on over to the dealer now and serve a claim on him for your money.
If it does however, you have two approaches!
I've been on the other side of this. I bought a car from someone who had in turn bought it from a Sale or Return dealer. The money (£25k) was not passed on to the original owner by the SoR dealer, I knew nothing about this until a call from the Police a few weeks after I picked the car up.
To cut a long story short, the original owner had left the V5 with the SOR dealer and lost both the car and the money, Police very quickly backed off when presented with sales invoices from the SoR dealer to the person I bought from and from him to me.
Left a very bad taste and I no longer own the car.
To cut a long story short, the original owner had left the V5 with the SOR dealer and lost both the car and the money, Police very quickly backed off when presented with sales invoices from the SoR dealer to the person I bought from and from him to me.
Left a very bad taste and I no longer own the car.
Mk3Spitfire said:
JustinP1 said:
you cannot steal something which is yours.
Actually, this is not strictly true. There are circumstances where you can commit the offence of theft on your own car.http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=126...
pinseeker said:
This sounds like a nightmare and my thoughts are with the real owner. Proof of ownership keeps popping up here and it astounds me that the v5c is not this, tbh what actually is? The v5c should be a legal document for ownership and responsibility for the car (taxing, insuring and mot'ing), which the dvla manage tightly and not in the washy washy manner they do. Ie transfers being done without accurate signatures or even signatures, and should perhaps even include signed proofs/receipts of sale.
Far too many grey and 'what if' areas popping up with this story, surely it should so much more black and white!?
Strangely if you build a kit car using a donor vehicle the DVLA want sight of the V5 for said donor vehicle (though not the purchase invoice it seems). They also want the purchase invoices for all the parts put on the vehicle - Going through this procedure certainly gave me a feeling of 'I'm being treated like a thief'. Yet again logic doesn't seem to be a trait of the DVLAFar too many grey and 'what if' areas popping up with this story, surely it should so much more black and white!?
Thanks for the comments, i've spoken to the dealer today and I mentioned id seen reviews, depicting my situation exactly. He denies them of course, shortly after i spoke to him a new review appeared on review centre showing a positive light...i wonder who posted that!? I don't know how he can really deny they are inaccurate because they are telling exactly the same story as i am experiencing!
ANYWAY...he has given me his word (unsure of the value of that yet) that i will have a cheque on Friday morning in the post. We'll see!
I've spent a good few hours working through his companies and his previous companies today. He's been in the same spot selling cars for 20 years so he has history but less you might think.
I think i may have found something which i could latch onto in the fact that he incorporated himself under a new name at the end of September 2014, i had done the deal with him in late August 2014 but the car didn't get sold, according to the DVLA, until November 2014. My thought on this is that therefore the company that actually ended up selling the car was not authorised to do so as my contract was with the old incorporated company name?
What do you think?
ANYWAY...he has given me his word (unsure of the value of that yet) that i will have a cheque on Friday morning in the post. We'll see!
I've spent a good few hours working through his companies and his previous companies today. He's been in the same spot selling cars for 20 years so he has history but less you might think.
I think i may have found something which i could latch onto in the fact that he incorporated himself under a new name at the end of September 2014, i had done the deal with him in late August 2014 but the car didn't get sold, according to the DVLA, until November 2014. My thought on this is that therefore the company that actually ended up selling the car was not authorised to do so as my contract was with the old incorporated company name?
What do you think?
TVR1 said:
And as if by magic, one of the first search results when googling R v Turner is......
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=126...
Thanks. Couldnt think of the case name. Should have known it would be on here somewhere!http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=126...
alwoodman said:
Thanks for the comments, i've spoken to the dealer today and I mentioned id seen reviews, depicting my situation exactly. He denies them of course, shortly after i spoke to him a new review appeared on review centre showing a positive light...i wonder who posted that!? I don't know how he can really deny they are inaccurate because they are telling exactly the same story as i am experiencing!
ANYWAY...he has given me his word (unsure of the value of that yet) that i will have a cheque on Friday morning in the post. We'll see!
That is excuse number 1.ANYWAY...he has given me his word (unsure of the value of that yet) that i will have a cheque on Friday morning in the post. We'll see!
Friday will be "another cheque didn't clear, a customer passed me a bad cheque - I didn't want to send you one"... "next Friday latest, I'm out of pocket here, it was £30k!"
Rinse / repeat. etc
Jasandjules said:
alwoodman said:
What do you think?
Drive over there tomorrow. Do not leave until the money has been transferred into your account.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff