HELP - sold a car and it was repossessed from the buyer
Discussion
motoroller said:
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.
You need to find out why then because it is applicable here unless there is more to the story we are not hearing.I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but do you have a receipt for the car/swap and if so what does it say?
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.
R8Steve said:
You need to find out why then because it is applicable here unless there is more to the story we are not hearing.
I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but do you have a receipt for the car/swap and if so what does it say?
Apparently it's not applicable on PCP/HP kind of deals, or something like that. I will find more details on a call later.I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but do you have a receipt for the car/swap and if so what does it say?
I have a receipt, it says both cars swapped as seen. Sellers and my name and address, along with details of both cars. No mention of the finance (obviously - as I didn't know).
motoroller said:
R8Steve said:
You need to find out why then because it is applicable here unless there is more to the story we are not hearing.
I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but do you have a receipt for the car/swap and if so what does it say?
Apparently it's not applicable on PCP/HP kind of deals, or something like that. I will find more details on a call later.I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but do you have a receipt for the car/swap and if so what does it say?
I have a receipt, it says both cars swapped as seen. Sellers and my name and address, along with details of both cars. No mention of the finance (obviously - as I didn't know).
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/schedu...
Have Barclays (or more likely their partner Clydesdale Bank) actually repossessed the car?
I'd be a bit surprised if they have as the poor muppet at the end of the chain can claim to be unaware of the debt.
Our man was aware and tried to escape by selling it on, however, Barclays would struggle to prove this if they cannot conclusively prove that their phone call (or other comms) got the message across.
Buying in good faith is key despite what has been claimed, the OP should have engaged with Barclays when he had the chance, punting the car on to some innocent party stinks and will always come back to haunt which is now the position.
I'd be a bit surprised if they have as the poor muppet at the end of the chain can claim to be unaware of the debt.
Our man was aware and tried to escape by selling it on, however, Barclays would struggle to prove this if they cannot conclusively prove that their phone call (or other comms) got the message across.
Buying in good faith is key despite what has been claimed, the OP should have engaged with Barclays when he had the chance, punting the car on to some innocent party stinks and will always come back to haunt which is now the position.
The longer this thread goes on, the more and more I'm wondering whether the situation is a scam, or this event hasn't even happened.
So many things don't add up. As has been mentioned plenty of times, there are so many gaps in the information the OP is giving, or the OP is massaging the truth.
Either the car hasn't been repossessed and the seller and buyer and in cahoots, or this is something that is being made up as the OP goes along.
So many things don't add up. As has been mentioned plenty of times, there are so many gaps in the information the OP is giving, or the OP is massaging the truth.
Either the car hasn't been repossessed and the seller and buyer and in cahoots, or this is something that is being made up as the OP goes along.
Sharted said:
Have Barclays (or more likely their partner Clydesdale Bank) actually repossessed the car?
I'd be a bit surprised if they have as the poor muppet at the end of the chain can claim to be unaware of the debt.
Our man was aware and tried to escape by selling it on, however, Barclays would struggle to prove this if they cannot conclusively prove that their phone call (or other comms) got the message across.
Buying in good faith is key despite what has been claimed, the OP should have engaged with Barclays when he had the chance, punting the car on to some innocent party stinks and will always come back to haunt which is now the position.
Engaging with Barclays now, I can see that wouldn't have got me anywhere. They are in hiding - "Data Protection Act" etc. and when I try escalating I can't get through to anyone. I'd be a bit surprised if they have as the poor muppet at the end of the chain can claim to be unaware of the debt.
Our man was aware and tried to escape by selling it on, however, Barclays would struggle to prove this if they cannot conclusively prove that their phone call (or other comms) got the message across.
Buying in good faith is key despite what has been claimed, the OP should have engaged with Barclays when he had the chance, punting the car on to some innocent party stinks and will always come back to haunt which is now the position.
funkyrobot said:
The longer this thread goes on, the more and more I'm wondering whether the situation is a scam, or this event hasn't even happened.
So many things don't add up. As has been mentioned plenty of times, there are so many gaps in the information the OP is giving, or the OP is massaging the truth.
Either the car hasn't been repossessed and the seller and buyer and in cahoots, or this is something that is being made up as the OP goes along.
Excuse me? After the legal disputes have taken place I'll gladly scan all documents and post them here. So many things don't add up. As has been mentioned plenty of times, there are so many gaps in the information the OP is giving, or the OP is massaging the truth.
Either the car hasn't been repossessed and the seller and buyer and in cahoots, or this is something that is being made up as the OP goes along.
Which parts don't add up?
motoroller said:
Engaging with Barclays now, I can see that wouldn't have got me anywhere. They are in hiding - "Data Protection Act" etc. and when I try escalating I can't get through to anyone.
You're too late, when you owned the car they would have been more than happy to speak to you. They tried, remember?motoroller said:
Sharted said:
Have Barclays (or more likely their partner Clydesdale Bank) actually repossessed the car?
I'd be a bit surprised if they have as the poor muppet at the end of the chain can claim to be unaware of the debt.
Our man was aware and tried to escape by selling it on, however, Barclays would struggle to prove this if they cannot conclusively prove that their phone call (or other comms) got the message across.
Buying in good faith is key despite what has been claimed, the OP should have engaged with Barclays when he had the chance, punting the car on to some innocent party stinks and will always come back to haunt which is now the position.
Engaging with Barclays now, I can see that wouldn't have got me anywhere. They are in hiding - "Data Protection Act" etc. and when I try escalating I can't get through to anyone. I'd be a bit surprised if they have as the poor muppet at the end of the chain can claim to be unaware of the debt.
Our man was aware and tried to escape by selling it on, however, Barclays would struggle to prove this if they cannot conclusively prove that their phone call (or other comms) got the message across.
Buying in good faith is key despite what has been claimed, the OP should have engaged with Barclays when he had the chance, punting the car on to some innocent party stinks and will always come back to haunt which is now the position.
You made a mistake, actually two mistakes failing to do a finance check and ignoring the dealer, but it's a high price to pay.
herewego said:
They would have engaged with you if you still had the car, but now they don't have any reason to. You want to do the right thing now by refunding your buyer but if you do he will have no reason to engage with Barclays as he will have his money, Barclays already have their money, the swapper has your money. Your lawyers will make money from you trying to recover from the swapper but I doubt you'll get anything back.
You made a mistake, actually two mistakes failing to do a finance check and ignoring the dealer, but it's a high price to pay.
Plus the other, more significant, mistake - punting the car on when he realised that there was a loan recorded against it.You made a mistake, actually two mistakes failing to do a finance check and ignoring the dealer, but it's a high price to pay.
motoroller said:
Excuse me? After the legal disputes have taken place I'll gladly scan all documents and post them here.
Which parts don't add up?
You didn't tell us you knew about the finance (and then still sold the car, which is really stupid), you seem to say that Barclay's are doing things that others have said they shouldn't do, and you still haven't cleared up whether or not the car has actually been repossessed.Which parts don't add up?
You drip feed information to the thread and keep missing out important things.
It just seems to me that this situation is either a scam that you need to get on top of, you are actually the perp here, or you aren't telling us everything.
Also, the legal advice seems to be a blanket 'give 'em a refund' thing that you aren't even questioning either.
Sorry if I have missed anything and the above makes no sense, but I don't think we have the full picture here.
Sharted said:
herewego said:
They would have engaged with you if you still had the car, but now they don't have any reason to. You want to do the right thing now by refunding your buyer but if you do he will have no reason to engage with Barclays as he will have his money, Barclays already have their money, the swapper has your money. Your lawyers will make money from you trying to recover from the swapper but I doubt you'll get anything back.
You made a mistake, actually two mistakes failing to do a finance check and ignoring the dealer, but it's a high price to pay.
Plus the other, more significant, mistake - punting the car on when he realised that there was a loan recorded against it.You made a mistake, actually two mistakes failing to do a finance check and ignoring the dealer, but it's a high price to pay.
funkyrobot said:
You didn't tell us you knew about the finance (and then still sold the car, which is really stupid), you seem to say that Barclay's are doing things that others have said they shouldn't do, and you still haven't cleared up whether or not the car has actually been repossessed.
You drip feed information to the thread and keep missing out important things.
It just seems to me that this situation is either a scam that you need to get on top of, you are actually the perp here, or you aren't telling us everything.
Also, the legal advice seems to be a blanket 'give 'em a refund' thing that you aren't even questioning either.
Sorry if I have missed anything and the above makes no sense, but I don't think we have the full picture here.
The car has been repossessed - as I said it was towed away from the buyer with the handbrake on and their possessions in the car. I have no reason to disbelieve that.You drip feed information to the thread and keep missing out important things.
It just seems to me that this situation is either a scam that you need to get on top of, you are actually the perp here, or you aren't telling us everything.
Also, the legal advice seems to be a blanket 'give 'em a refund' thing that you aren't even questioning either.
Sorry if I have missed anything and the above makes no sense, but I don't think we have the full picture here.
The legal advice isn't a blanket - those are professionals. Who am I going to believe, some anonymous posters on a forum or a professional I've consulted? Let me think...
I really, really don't think you should just refund the 12k in £20 notes/bank transfer etc. It has been said before, but doing this without a trail could end up costing you when they start claiming that you haven't refunded them a penny. Surely it is better to wait for the court papers - you don't necessarily need to contest it if you are happy, but at least it is then paid in a well documented manner.
Or do it through your solicitors at least.
Or do it through your solicitors at least.
RedSwede said:
I really, really don't think you should just refund the 12k in £20 notes/bank transfer etc. It has been said before, but doing this without a trail could end up costing you when they start claiming that you haven't refunded them a penny. Surely it is better to wait for the court papers - you don't necessarily need to contest it if you are happy, but at least it is then paid in a well documented manner.
Or do it through your solicitors at least.
This. Or do it through your solicitors at least.
It's not even known how much is owed on the car so the full situation of refunding 12k to anyone at this stage is ridiculous from my point of view.
That's before we get to the point of the buyer having used the car for half a year or even whether Barclays have actually repossessed the car (ok, we have the buyers word for it...)
motoroller said:
The car has been repossessed - as I said it was towed away from the buyer with the handbrake on and their possessions in the car. I have no reason to disbelieve that.
The legal advice isn't a blanket - those are professionals. Who am I going to believe, some anonymous posters on a forum or a professional I've consulted? Let me think...
Why bother posting on here then? Why not just go straight to the professionals?The legal advice isn't a blanket - those are professionals. Who am I going to believe, some anonymous posters on a forum or a professional I've consulted? Let me think...
If you are honest, you can get some very good advice from this forum. The problem is, I don't think you are being honest on here, so it's hard to advise.
I think you have shifted the car on knowing full well it had outstanding finance and have been caught out. I hope that it gets sorted, but if you have knowingly done this, then you deserve to lose out.
motoroller said:
The car has been repossessed - as I said it was towed away from the buyer with the handbrake on and their possessions in the car. I have no reason to disbelieve that.
The legal advice isn't a blanket - those are professionals. Who am I going to believe, some anonymous posters on a forum or a professional I've consulted? Let me think...
Towed away with the handbrake on? Really?The legal advice isn't a blanket - those are professionals. Who am I going to believe, some anonymous posters on a forum or a professional I've consulted? Let me think...
Surely if would have been put on a low loader?
And if the owner was present and didn't cause any issues, most debt recovery agents would permit the removal of personal possessions.
OP
I am a solicitor and were I in your shoes, there is not a chance in hell that I would be paying any amount of money to the person who bought the car off you. This is really very easy:
1. Let the buyer pursue you BEFORE you pay out anything. Whilst you may feel morally obliged to pay him back, at this stage you are not legally obliged to do so.
2. If (and only if) the buyer does pursue you, via a county court claim, at that stage you then need to consider what to do for the best. Personally, I still wouldn't pay out a penny to the buyer. What I would do is:
3. Apply to the Court to bring in the original seller/swapper of the car as an Additional Third Party (or Part 20 Defendant - Google Part 20 CPR for the details).
4. Your defence is that you swapped the car with the original seller in good faith and had no clue there was any finance outstanding on it. The seller did not give you this information.
5. Only when the COURT has decided who is at fault would I then be willing to pay anyone anything, if you are deemed to be responsible at all that is.
If you pay back the buyer before any of the above, you will never see your £12k again.
In my view, a Judge would take a very dim view of the original seller clearly trying to wriggle out of his obligations and it will give you a formal route with which to pursue him should you be found liable to the buyer.
I am a solicitor and were I in your shoes, there is not a chance in hell that I would be paying any amount of money to the person who bought the car off you. This is really very easy:
1. Let the buyer pursue you BEFORE you pay out anything. Whilst you may feel morally obliged to pay him back, at this stage you are not legally obliged to do so.
2. If (and only if) the buyer does pursue you, via a county court claim, at that stage you then need to consider what to do for the best. Personally, I still wouldn't pay out a penny to the buyer. What I would do is:
3. Apply to the Court to bring in the original seller/swapper of the car as an Additional Third Party (or Part 20 Defendant - Google Part 20 CPR for the details).
4. Your defence is that you swapped the car with the original seller in good faith and had no clue there was any finance outstanding on it. The seller did not give you this information.
5. Only when the COURT has decided who is at fault would I then be willing to pay anyone anything, if you are deemed to be responsible at all that is.
If you pay back the buyer before any of the above, you will never see your £12k again.
In my view, a Judge would take a very dim view of the original seller clearly trying to wriggle out of his obligations and it will give you a formal route with which to pursue him should you be found liable to the buyer.
Quick question.
When you swapped the cars originally did you get the original V5C or was it a duplicate (shown on face of V5C)?
If a copy then it is likely the 'seller' never owned the car in the first place, and therefore not his to sell. It would likely be a lease car owned by Barclays which he is using, he then applied for a duplicate V5C to carry out this scam.
When you swapped the cars originally did you get the original V5C or was it a duplicate (shown on face of V5C)?
If a copy then it is likely the 'seller' never owned the car in the first place, and therefore not his to sell. It would likely be a lease car owned by Barclays which he is using, he then applied for a duplicate V5C to carry out this scam.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff