HELP - sold a car and it was repossessed from the buyer
Discussion
R8Steve said:
How much finance is actually on it?
No one will tell me this. I need to start legal proceedings to even get this information. If the finance outstanding was £1000, I'd pay it off and get the car back. If it's £15k, then everyone is in a bad place.Lawyers estimate that if they help, it'll cost £5k+. This was a local law firm, in particular a specialist on motoring law.
The other option is to start small claims proceedings myself.
I cancelled my insurance policy when the car was sold, haven't looked into legal cover on that. But called my current insurers and they said they can't help even though I have legal cover.
The Spruce goose said:
I would definitely get a 2nd option. Maybe Breadvan might help worth a PM.
I know I wouldn't be paying out 12 grand without visiting the seller. As they should be paying it out. The thing is you pay 12 grand out but the finance is still outstanding.
Visiting the seller would likely cause a confrontation - he was less than cooperative on the phone yesterday when I called him. I know I wouldn't be paying out 12 grand without visiting the seller. As they should be paying it out. The thing is you pay 12 grand out but the finance is still outstanding.
Breadvan the PH user? Is he a lawyer?
It was the Audi TT mk2, it had some work done on it so wasn't fully stock. Worth a bit more than others for sale.
I called Barclays this evening, they are adamant they are in the right here. I told them my solicitor has advised they do not own the title, they said have your lawyers speak to us.
The PH advice so far - don't refund. I'm holding ground until more information surfaces from Barclays or my lawyers. I really don't know the ins and outs here, other than that I made a mistake in accidentally going for a cheaper HPI check which didn't include finance. That's my only error on the purchase side.
I see lots of messages here about the phone call between me and Barclays. Haven't had time to go through all this in detail as I hope you can all understand I'm working a full time job and have also spent nearly 3 hours on the phone to lawyers, financiers and CAB today.
The missing information you've all been waiting for (didn't make this part clear in earlier messages and particularly the first one because the guys were <10 minutes from my house). Phone call summary: one day I got a call from Barclays, dismissed it. Went to sell the car, and a trader who saw my ad called and said "this car has finance on it, call Barclays and sort it out and I'll buy it". I called barclays, they wouldn't confirm or deny anything to do with the car and finance as I'm not the account holder, data protection act etc. (which is the stance they still take with me now). This is (I would guess) why the lawyer recommends I refund - I knew something about finance, even though I still had (and even to this day still have) no details of it.
Summary: mistake 1 accidentally doing wrong level of HPI check (I was slightly blinded by the deal being "quite good" but didn't think "I'm getting £12k for free"). Mistake 2: selling the car on, still unaware of finance and not getting any answers.
The conclusion I'm beginning to draw is that if I were to go and buy a car on HP and sell it on, some unsuspecting sod would buy it and be none the wiser until it gets repossessed, and they're unlikely to then ever see a penny back. Unless they are miraculously a lawyer, but then they'd HPI it.
Bloody hell, the kind of things people do for money. This must happen on a daily basis across the country.
Does that answer all the questions?
d who sold me the car.
I called Barclays this evening, they are adamant they are in the right here. I told them my solicitor has advised they do not own the title, they said have your lawyers speak to us.
The PH advice so far - don't refund. I'm holding ground until more information surfaces from Barclays or my lawyers. I really don't know the ins and outs here, other than that I made a mistake in accidentally going for a cheaper HPI check which didn't include finance. That's my only error on the purchase side.
I see lots of messages here about the phone call between me and Barclays. Haven't had time to go through all this in detail as I hope you can all understand I'm working a full time job and have also spent nearly 3 hours on the phone to lawyers, financiers and CAB today.
The missing information you've all been waiting for (didn't make this part clear in earlier messages and particularly the first one because the guys were <10 minutes from my house). Phone call summary: one day I got a call from Barclays, dismissed it. Went to sell the car, and a trader who saw my ad called and said "this car has finance on it, call Barclays and sort it out and I'll buy it". I called barclays, they wouldn't confirm or deny anything to do with the car and finance as I'm not the account holder, data protection act etc. (which is the stance they still take with me now). This is (I would guess) why the lawyer recommends I refund - I knew something about finance, even though I still had (and even to this day still have) no details of it.
Summary: mistake 1 accidentally doing wrong level of HPI check (I was slightly blinded by the deal being "quite good" but didn't think "I'm getting £12k for free"). Mistake 2: selling the car on, still unaware of finance and not getting any answers.
The conclusion I'm beginning to draw is that if I were to go and buy a car on HP and sell it on, some unsuspecting sod would buy it and be none the wiser until it gets repossessed, and they're unlikely to then ever see a penny back. Unless they are miraculously a lawyer, but then they'd HPI it.
Bloody hell, the kind of things people do for money. This must happen on a daily basis across the country.
Does that answer all the questions?
KevinCamaroSS said:
Given that we do not have the full information and with what we have the OP is probably in the clear I am going to throw in a curve ball here.
Could the new owners be of a similar ilk to the original seller (to the OP)? Barclays have spoken to them, they have bought in good faith therefore Barclays cannot take possession. Owner now says 'Hmm, perhaps I can get the car for free by frightening the OP into refunding the money?'
Or am I being too cynical?
In any event the OP should be looking at a solicitor who is well versed in the 1974 Consumer Credit Act, not motoring law, this is finance and contract.
I had a brief moment of cynicism today too. But Barclays seemed to confirm it had been repossessed.Could the new owners be of a similar ilk to the original seller (to the OP)? Barclays have spoken to them, they have bought in good faith therefore Barclays cannot take possession. Owner now says 'Hmm, perhaps I can get the car for free by frightening the OP into refunding the money?'
Or am I being too cynical?
In any event the OP should be looking at a solicitor who is well versed in the 1974 Consumer Credit Act, not motoring law, this is finance and contract.
swisstoni said:
Out of the 1000s of questions that spring to mind - the main one for me is why Barclays appear to be doing all sorts of odd things like calling the OP and repossessing cars. Their issue is entirely with Scrote 1. He's defaulted on the loan.
As far as I can make out, Barclays don't do loans secured on cars. They do personal loans that can be used to buy a car or pissed up the wall.
They won't be scouring the country for any car.
Barclays personal finance must do some kind of hire purchase loans? Even then - Barclays are making even less sense than the bAs far as I can make out, Barclays don't do loans secured on cars. They do personal loans that can be used to buy a car or pissed up the wall.
They won't be scouring the country for any car.
Edited by swisstoni on Wednesday 16th November 19:42
d who sold me the car.Edited by motoroller on Wednesday 16th November 19:56
swisstoni said:
They do personal loans. Not sure what a hire purchase loan would be from Barclays.
Then I'm back to square 1 with Barclays. They should have gone and repossessed this guys house contents for the loan, not the car. They are not giving me any answers. Do I start small claims proceedings against both parties for £10k each way and see which wins? The Spruce goose said:
if it was me i would.
log an issue with the police for seller. re selling unlawfully (criminal offence)
log a compliant with Barclays for repossession of car unlawfully, or ombudsman if they are not forthcoming.
speak to solicitor, will cost you but look to claim from seller.
inform seller of your actions.
in any order.
the seller is trying to stitch you up, you need to turn the tables of them. he sold you the car, took 12k, stopped repayments and laughing to the bank.
This would need to be combined with refunding the buyer and getting agreements in place that the title now belongs to me, they will cooperate in investigations etc. etc.log an issue with the police for seller. re selling unlawfully (criminal offence)
log a compliant with Barclays for repossession of car unlawfully, or ombudsman if they are not forthcoming.
speak to solicitor, will cost you but look to claim from seller.
inform seller of your actions.
in any order.
the seller is trying to stitch you up, you need to turn the tables of them. he sold you the car, took 12k, stopped repayments and laughing to the bank.
But yes, excellent list. Police won't help here as others have said - it's a civil dispute. He's broken the law but for some reason police won't get involved.
Welshbeef said:
He may be but clearly he is broke - unloaded it to you clearly didn't bother paying off the debt. Why he did that who knows maybe deliberate win the view of them taking the car off you and getting the cash back that way /to fk you over.
Seems a bit random to screw someone anonymous over. Anyway, a CCJ or two and some legal proceedings should set him straight.k you over. pork911 said:
A dealer calls you saying there is finance on it, he will buy it if that is cleared.
You phone barclays but get nowhere.
You presumably don't then return to the dealer and tell him there can't be finance on it as barclays wouldn't tell you anything. Since you know he wouldn't fall for that bks. You also don't try harder on the phone with Barclays, write to them or hpi it properly, because you don't want to hear the answer.
Instead you decide not to do anything other than try to sell it on to someone else.
You do so and are now clinging to your having originally bought it in good faith.
(As an aside the purchase was actually a swap which on the face off was a good deal for you. I hope you and your seller aren't friends
).
You still shouldn't just refund now or buy the car at auction if that was what you were thinking (?).
You now say you are starting legal action against the seller. No you are not. What's your loss? You can't claim against him on the basis of a mere threat of claim against you by your buyer.
You should as stated earlier check for legal expenses cover, take proper advice (and not be as full of st with them as you have been here) and wait and see.
Your buyer will likely be making a claim. In the unlikely event it is just against you then you join in your seller and Barclays. If he doesn't include you, that's fine. Most likely his claim will be against you, your seller and Barclays as three defendants.
Please keep us all updated, without being full of st.
I'm definitely not buying the car at auction. I want to know where the car ends up, as that's important. Barclays have done wrong here by repossessing as they don't own the car, it's been sold in good faith (to me) and they should be the ones pursuing the scrote legally.You phone barclays but get nowhere.
You presumably don't then return to the dealer and tell him there can't be finance on it as barclays wouldn't tell you anything. Since you know he wouldn't fall for that b
ks. You also don't try harder on the phone with Barclays, write to them or hpi it properly, because you don't want to hear the answer.Instead you decide not to do anything other than try to sell it on to someone else.
You do so and are now clinging to your having originally bought it in good faith.
(As an aside the purchase was actually a swap which on the face off was a good deal for you. I hope you and your seller aren't friends
).You still shouldn't just refund now or buy the car at auction if that was what you were thinking (?).
You now say you are starting legal action against the seller. No you are not. What's your loss? You can't claim against him on the basis of a mere threat of claim against you by your buyer.
You should as stated earlier check for legal expenses cover, take proper advice (and not be as full of s
t with them as you have been here) and wait and see.Your buyer will likely be making a claim. In the unlikely event it is just against you then you join in your seller and Barclays. If he doesn't include you, that's fine. Most likely his claim will be against you, your seller and Barclays as three defendants.
Please keep us all updated, without being full of s
t.I have tried very hard with Barclays - they have had a very blase attitude today. I admit I did wrong by selling the car, which is what I'm trying to put right by giving the refund. I'm not in this to short change anyone, and if I don't refund the buyer their only course of action is to pursue me legally, which I also avoid by refunding.
The facts would be (after refund):
I bought a car without knowing there is finance
The car was repossessed
I pursue the buyer legally. My loss is one of three things: his valuation of the car at the time of sale to me, my car, or his car. The return of any of these three sees the case closed.
Hope that's all clear.
Nezquick said:
Good summary.
I love these threads. OP comes on making out he's holier than holy and done nothing wrong. 4 pages in and someone calls BS, OP drip feeds the story and then bang.....actually he's the one doing the shafting.
Good luck OP. You'll need it.
Put yourself in the buyers shoes.....what would you do?
I'm not the one doing the shafting here, I'm putting the situation right. The subsequent transaction (and its reversal) doesn't change anything between me and the seller.I love these threads. OP comes on making out he's holier than holy and done nothing wrong. 4 pages in and someone calls BS, OP drip feeds the story and then bang.....actually he's the one doing the shafting.
Good luck OP. You'll need it.
Put yourself in the buyers shoes.....what would you do?
pork911 said:
OP Why would you refund and then incur legal costs in trying to recoup if you are hesitant to incur legal costs in just defending yourself against any claim your buyer may make that may include you (but may not)?
Other than feeling guilty about what you know you did or some misguided idea about avoiding criminal proceedings.
As it may (or may not) be proven that I knew about the finance. I'd rather take my chances directly with the seller. The buyer could pursue me and I'd still have to pursue the seller. Other than feeling guilty about what you know you did or some misguided idea about avoiding criminal proceedings.
The idea of the "chain" of proceedings is what is making me lean towards the refund and pursue idea. It saves half of the chain (the half that is against me) - either way I'll have to pursue the seller.
pork911 said:
Your seller shafted you (maybe, if you aren't friends / otherwise knew), you definitely shafted your buyer.
There have been several suggestions that I'm either friends with the seller (nope, never had contact with him before), or that I knew about the finance (where has this idea come from, why would I conduct a swap with an unknown amount of finance on a car?!?)The advice from solicitors is that Barclays have acted legally. I'm quite shocked, but these are the experts. The whole "Section 27 of HP act 1964" doesn't seem to hold - and I'm not sure why.
That's what they are basing their advice on - to refund the buyer and pursue the seller. This is also because the buyer has no contract with the seller - it has to go through me.
That's what they are basing their advice on - to refund the buyer and pursue the seller. This is also because the buyer has no contract with the seller - it has to go through me.
herewego said:
Well can you please ask them why because we've reached a consensus here. 
AFAIK, it's because Barclays own the car and the seller is the one who's acted illegally here. Which makes sense - plenty of trolling here about the whole "bought in good faith" malarky. If it's not yours to sell, don't sell it. It's like me selling my work laptop. That would come on to me - work can have the laptop repossessed if they can find it. The buyer would then pursue me.
The difficulty is that I sold the car in light of existing finance which didn't have anything to do with me, and I can't even get a copy of the contract as I'm not the original seller. That contract would make it clear whether Section 27 applies, or if Barclays own the car. Without that, it's best to assume Barclays own the car.
Swole said:
15 pages and I don't think this thread had progressed since the OP.
If you are to refund your buyer, then prepare NEVER to see your cash again. If you find your seller, they'll likely have no money, and at best will sign up to a repayment plan of £15pw, which they'll default on in 8wks. The buck is rather with you I'd say for not checking out the car you "swapped" for in the first place.
I admit that the mistake I made is not getting the finance HPI (bought some "Silver" kind of crap instead, was unaware at the time). Still - there must be plenty of people who don't do the full HPI who could end up in the same situation. Lesson learnt, but it's hardly the biggest mistake that EVERYONE knows about and has experienced before.If you are to refund your buyer, then prepare NEVER to see your cash again. If you find your seller, they'll likely have no money, and at best will sign up to a repayment plan of £15pw, which they'll default on in 8wks. The buck is rather with you I'd say for not checking out the car you "swapped" for in the first place.
herewego said:
Okay well I'm going to guess that you want to do right by the guy who bought the car from you because you know you should have sorted it out with Barclays before selling it. So good on you for that and I hope you can sort it with Barclays and the swapper and get something back in the end.
Pretty much this. It's a hard pill to swallow, but I'm acting morally and sorting things out legally. For some reason, despite what common sense and my solicitors are suggesting, most of the comments on here are suggesting "you'd be stupid to refund". "IANAL" -> apparently everyone here is a lawyer. Waiting for legal documents to show up is burying my head in the sand.
I'll be writing formal letters to the seller and to Barclays next week.
Jefferson Steelflex said:
In my limited knowledge, I don't see how you have anything to lose by just waiting for the court papers to arrive?
I can't see that costing you any more than splashing out £12k will do already, and if you did settle you won't end up with any 'record' as such. I assume this is correct? You could also then use this to pursue the original seller as you now have a (potential) loss.
Secondly, although it's now on here in writing, I would try and dispense with the phone call from the dealer bit, as this is the most incriminating. If you don't mention this, I think the solution changes a little. This all presumes you are telling the truth regarding everything else.
Those letters would be on my desk in a matter of weeks, along with additional damages and hire car bills from the buyer. I can't see that costing you any more than splashing out £12k will do already, and if you did settle you won't end up with any 'record' as such. I assume this is correct? You could also then use this to pursue the original seller as you now have a (potential) loss.
Secondly, although it's now on here in writing, I would try and dispense with the phone call from the dealer bit, as this is the most incriminating. If you don't mention this, I think the solution changes a little. This all presumes you are telling the truth regarding everything else.
You're suggesting I lie about receiving the call or about talking to Barclays? This isn't an option - everything here is the truth and the whole truth, but dispensing with that fact would land me in even bigger trouble.
RacingPete said:
What I don't get from all the advice is that most are saying that if you buy a car with finance on without knowing it has finance then you have good title on the car.
So why would you do an HPI check for finance?
(I know it is peace of mind), but seems from here it doesn't matter.
Due diligence. That's where my Silver HPI check doesn't quite cut it - or at least it's questionable whether that's enough DD.So why would you do an HPI check for finance?
(I know it is peace of mind), but seems from here it doesn't matter.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff