Buyer has paid finance off but disappeared

[surveyor]

kevpip said:

Hey everyone, remember me.

So i thought i would fill you in with the outcome regarding my mysterious buyer.

As suspected by all of us, myself included, the buyer was dodgy and paid the finance off using a stolen card. He then claimed a refund from myself and thereby laundering the stolen money. He was caught a number of months ago and prosecuted. Apparently this was something himself and his mate had done several times.

As i told everyone at the time, including those who had little faith (you know who you are - people with specific vocabulary), i spoke to Nissan fraud team and got a letter confirming that i would not be held accountable should the transaction be fraudulent.

The police contacted me for a statement and i liaised with Nissan's lawyers for a number of weeks regarding this. Given the fact that i had all our correspondance recorded and a letter stating i would not be prosecuted, guess what...I was not prosecuted.

I hope people can learn from this and be as vigilant as myself. For those who were just abusive. Get a life.

Cheers

Did tNiisan come after you until they saw tat you covered yourself? Curious about the liase word.

[eltawater]

Glad it all worked out well for you in the end.

[gizlaroc]

kevpip said:

Hey everyone, remember me.

So i thought i would fill you in with the outcome regarding my mysterious buyer.

As suspected by all of us, myself included, the buyer was dodgy and paid the finance off using a stolen card. He then claimed a refund from myself and thereby laundering the stolen money. He was caught a number of months ago and prosecuted. Apparently this was something himself and his mate had done several times.

As i told everyone at the time, including those who had little faith (you know who you are - people with specific vocabulary), i spoke to Nissan fraud team and got a letter confirming that i would not be held accountable should the transaction be fraudulent.

The police contacted me for a statement and i liaised with Nissan's lawyers for a number of weeks regarding this. Given the fact that i had all our correspondance recorded and a letter stating i would not be prosecuted, guess what...I was not prosecuted.

I hope people can learn from this and be as vigilant as myself. For those who were just abusive. Get a life.

Cheers

Cheers for coming back and finishing the thread, it was a really interesting one.



The bit I was banging on about was that you definitely shouldn't pay the buyer back if he asks for a refund, which is what I thought would happen.

If you did that, then I don't think Nissan would have compensated you your loss. I am taking it you didn't do that?

[Fidgits]

Glad it worked out for you

[ging84]

I'm pretty sure it didn't work out because it was a complete work of fiction

somewhere back in the thread, someone found the facebook profile with pictures of the car and it's number plate and someone did a hpi check which was still showing the outstanding finance that the OP claimed had been paid off.

[gowmonster]

ging84 said:

I'm pretty sure it didn't work out because it was a complete work of fiction

somewhere back in the thread, someone found the facebook profile with pictures of the car and it's number plate and someone did a hpi check which was still showing the outstanding finance that the OP claimed had been paid off.

Why would he come back to post if people "found out".

[n_const]

ging84 said:

I'm pretty sure it didn't work out because it was a complete work of fiction

somewhere back in the thread, someone found the facebook profile with pictures of the car and it's number plate and someone did a hpi check which was still showing the outstanding finance that the OP claimed had been paid off.

I have seen many instances where a vehicle has been cleared of finance but still shows a financial interest on HPI. That alone cannot make this thread a "complete work of fiction".

[gizlaroc]

ging84 said:

I'm pretty sure it didn't work out because it was a complete work of fiction

somewhere back in the thread, someone found the facebook profile with pictures of the car and it's number plate and someone did a hpi check which was still showing the outstanding finance that the OP claimed had been paid off.

But the finance wasn't paid off.

He notified the finance house that the money paid into their account was suspected to be fraudulent, so they will have not assigned that money and it would have been paid back to the account it was stolen from.



We don't actually know what happened though, the buyer hasn't actually said, only he liaised with police and Nissan finance and wasn't prosecuted.
Prosecuted for what?

[andyps]

gizlaroc said:

But the finance wasn't paid off.

He notified the finance house that the money paid into their account was suspected to be fraudulent, so they will have not assigned that money and it would have been paid back to the account it was stolen from.



We don't actually know what happened though, the buyer hasn't actually said, only he liaised with police and Nissan finance and wasn't prosecuted.
Prosecuted for what?

But what more do we need to know than this from the OP:

kevpip said:

As i told everyone at the time, including those who had little faith (you know who you are - people with specific vocabulary), i spoke to Nissan fraud team and got a letter confirming that i would not be held accountable should the transaction be fraudulent.

The police contacted me for a statement and i liaised with Nissan's lawyers for a number of weeks regarding this. Given the fact that i had all our correspondance recorded and a letter stating i would not be prosecuted, guess what...I was not prosecuted.

He had successfully covered himself from liability with the letter obtained from Nissan finance. The police presumably would want to get as much information as possible to solve the crime but as the OP wasn't prosecuted they believed his story. Is there anything else to say?

[sealtt]

I'd be interested to know if the finance company automatically held themselves responsible for sorting out the issue with the stolen funds, or if it was only after proving that they had confirmed to you in writing that they would take responsibility that they did so.

In other words, in your experience, if a person hadn't taken the precautions you did, could that person have ended up on the hook for the balance that presumably the finance co had to return to the credit card?

[gizlaroc]

andyps said:

But what more do we need to know than this from the OP:

kevpip said:

As i told everyone at the time, including those who had little faith (you know who you are - people with specific vocabulary), i spoke to Nissan fraud team and got a letter confirming that i would not be held accountable should the transaction be fraudulent.

The police contacted me for a statement and i liaised with Nissan's lawyers for a number of weeks regarding this. Given the fact that i had all our correspondance recorded and a letter stating i would not be prosecuted, guess what...I was not prosecuted.

He had successfully covered himself from liability with the letter obtained from Nissan finance. The police presumably would want to get as much information as possible to solve the crime but as the OP wasn't prosecuted they believed his story. Is there anything else to say?

But was the finance cleared and Nissan said, if it was fraudulent he would not be held accountable, so he would walk away with his financed cleared?

Or was it simply a case that, Nissan were notified that a payment made was thought not to be legit and so nothing more was done with that payment?

There is a massive difference.


My guess is, the OP, told Nissan, the account was not cleared, no refund given to buyer, police were informed, funds were returned to hacked account.

Why would the OP be prosecuted for that?

If the account was cleared, and the op got away with having his financed cleared and Nissan Finance wrote it off as a loss it starts to get very interesting.

[andyps]

I'm not reading through 32 pages again but as I remember it the so called buyer paid off the finance, eventually came back and said would the buyer sell the car elsewhere and there was a balancing figure paid. Didn't WBAC buy the car? The OP got assurance from the finance co that it was paid off and he was clear before selling to WBAC and sorting the balance.

If anyone remembers more clearly please correct me.

[80sMatchbox]

andyps said:

I'm not reading through 32 pages again but as I remember it the so called buyer paid off the finance, eventually came back and said would the buyer sell the car elsewhere and there was a balancing figure paid. Didn't WBAC buy the car? The OP got assurance from the finance co that it was paid off and he was clear before selling to WBAC and sorting the balance.

If anyone remembers more clearly please correct me.

I read it all last night for the first time and that's spot on.

It reeked of a scam from the off, it just took longer than usually to be proved so.

[gowmonster]

what about the caveat of if it gets sold to a dealer (WBAC) with outstanding finance, the person that buys it, does so in god faith and therefore can't have the car repoed by the original owner (the finance company) so like everyone else, who picks up the bill?

the person that had their account hacked will get their money back.
the person that paid the money to buy the car with dodgy money must be going to jail and won't be paying any money!
the person that originally was selling the car doesn't have the car anymore, but I guess has some money from WBAC so I assume would have handed this over to the Finance company in good faith.
WBAC don't have the car but have more money than they paid for it (assuming they make a profit on this particular car)

So the question would be, if there is a shortfall between the WBAC buy price and the outstanding finance, who paid?

[dvs_dave]

• So car was for sale for 22k with 15k finance on it.
• Fraudster agrees to pay 22k and pays off 15k finance with stolen credit card.
• Fraudster pulls out of deal and asks OP for refund less 3.5k to cover agreed price vs WBAC price.
• OP sells car to WBAC for 18.5k
• OP sends fraudster 11.5k "refund"
• OP has the same amount of cash in his pocket as though he'd sold the car for the original asking price.

So in that case, the only entity out of pocket is the credit card company? As the fraudster was nicked, one presumes they will attempt to recover what they can from him, or more likely just claim it from their own insurance.

So as always, we all ended up paying for it. fkers.