Lease handover form signed/dated before delivery
Discussion
Hi all,
My dad recently took delivery of a new lease car. The car was physically delivered to him on Tuesday 30/06/2026.
However, the finance/leasing company has sent him a handover form from the supplying dealer showing the delivery date as 26/06/2026. The form also appears to include a signature in the “Received by Customer” section, dated/timestamped 26/06/2026.
My dad says he did not receive the car on 26/06/2026 and did not sign any handover paperwork on that date. The worrying part is that the signature on the form appears to be an attempt to replicate/forge his signature.
When queried, the leasing company basically said they cannot amend the delivery date because the handover form confirms 26/06/2026 — which feels circular, as that’s the document being disputed.
Has anyone seen this before?
Would you treat it as:
1. Admin error;
2. Formal complaint to dealer and funder;
3. Potential unauthorised signature / fraud issue;
4. Something to escalate to the Motor Ombudsman / Financial Ombudsman / Trading Standards?
Not looking to make accusations without evidence, but want to make sure my dad protects his position, especially if the earlier date affects liability, mileage, warranty, payments or cancellation rights.
Any thoughts appreciated
My dad recently took delivery of a new lease car. The car was physically delivered to him on Tuesday 30/06/2026.
However, the finance/leasing company has sent him a handover form from the supplying dealer showing the delivery date as 26/06/2026. The form also appears to include a signature in the “Received by Customer” section, dated/timestamped 26/06/2026.
My dad says he did not receive the car on 26/06/2026 and did not sign any handover paperwork on that date. The worrying part is that the signature on the form appears to be an attempt to replicate/forge his signature.
When queried, the leasing company basically said they cannot amend the delivery date because the handover form confirms 26/06/2026 — which feels circular, as that’s the document being disputed.
Has anyone seen this before?
Would you treat it as:
1. Admin error;
2. Formal complaint to dealer and funder;
3. Potential unauthorised signature / fraud issue;
4. Something to escalate to the Motor Ombudsman / Financial Ombudsman / Trading Standards?
Not looking to make accusations without evidence, but want to make sure my dad protects his position, especially if the earlier date affects liability, mileage, warranty, payments or cancellation rights.
Any thoughts appreciated
The legal owner of the car is the lease company, therefore I suspect that the dealer handover process is to the lease company and this maybe took place on 26th. From the view of the dealer, the "customer" is the lease company.
You father then received it from the lease company on the 30th, therefore there should then be a different handover form from the lease company to the lessee.
Is this what happened?
You father then received it from the lease company on the 30th, therefore there should then be a different handover form from the lease company to the lessee.
Is this what happened?
Matt_T said:
The legal owner of the car is the lease company, therefore I suspect that the dealer handover process is to the lease company and this maybe took place on 26th. From the view of the dealer, the "customer" is the lease company.
You father then received it from the lease company on the 30th, therefore there should then be a different handover form from the lease company to the lessee.
Is this what happened?
That’s a fair point, and it was one of the first things I considered.You father then received it from the lease company on the 30th, therefore there should then be a different handover form from the lease company to the lessee.
Is this what happened?
However, the handover form isn’t signed by or on behalf of the lease company. It’s a “Received by Customer” declaration containing what purports to be my dad’s signature, together with his name, and it’s dated 26/06/2026.
My dad didn’t receive the vehicle until 30/06/2026 and categorically didn’t sign any handover paperwork on 26/06. That’s the issue we’re disputing.
The leasing company has also confirmed that they’ve started the lease from 26/06/2026 because that’s the date they received this handover form from the dealer. So it’s not just an administrative discrepancy—it has directly affected the official start date of the agreement.
If this was simply a dealer-to-funder handover, I’d expect it to be signed by the dealer and/or lease company, not to contain a signature purporting to be my dad’s. At the moment, it appears a customer handover document was completed before the vehicle was actually handed over to him.
Matt_T said:
The legal owner of the car is the lease company, therefore I suspect that the dealer handover process is to the lease company and this maybe took place on 26th. From the view of the dealer, the "customer" is the lease company.
You father then received it from the lease company on the 30th, therefore there should then be a different handover form from the lease company to the lessee.
Is this what happened?
The lease company is true owner, but they never took possession of the car. Its journey was manufacturer --> transport/logistics firm --> local dealership --> dealership's delivery transport/logistics (possibly a separate company) --> customer. You father then received it from the lease company on the 30th, therefore there should then be a different handover form from the lease company to the lessee.
Is this what happened?
It sounds like what has happened is during one of the transport stages, the documentation had the customer's name, possibly pre-filled, and someone else just "signed for collection" or "signed for delivery" as proof of their vehicle movement. But at some point, the "customer handover form" was used instead of some intermediate/internal vehicle movement record. I'd not go down the fraud route, instead press the dealer to amend this record.
Is the signature simply an unrecognisable squiggle, or a clear attempt to try copy/replicate your Dad's signature?
The problem is that this isn’t an internal transport or stock movement form. It’s a “Received by Customer” handover document in my dad’s name, showing him as having accepted the vehicle on 26/06. The leasing company has relied on that document to start the lease four days early.
As for the signature, it’s not just an unrecognisable squiggle. It appears to be a clear attempt to replicate my dad’s signature rather than someone simply initialling or signing their own name. That’s why we’re questioning how the document came to be completed in that way.
At the moment, there are more questions than answers, and we’re trying to establish exactly how a customer handover document came to be completed before my dad had even received the vehicle.
As for the signature, it’s not just an unrecognisable squiggle. It appears to be a clear attempt to replicate my dad’s signature rather than someone simply initialling or signing their own name. That’s why we’re questioning how the document came to be completed in that way.
At the moment, there are more questions than answers, and we’re trying to establish exactly how a customer handover document came to be completed before my dad had even received the vehicle.
This is a nonsense story, a waste of time even, unless the op is looking for a way out of the whole thing, buyers remorse, blah blah.
You received the car on the 30th, it says the 26th, so what!? It is just 3/4 days. And no, they will not have forged your signature.
If your dad doesn’t want the car anymore say so and try and find a way out - it’ll be very expensive, but he willingly accepted the car when it was delivered, so best to crack on.
If he’d refused delivery he’d be in a much better position to unravel the deal. Not now, though. Sorry.
You received the car on the 30th, it says the 26th, so what!? It is just 3/4 days. And no, they will not have forged your signature.
If your dad doesn’t want the car anymore say so and try and find a way out - it’ll be very expensive, but he willingly accepted the car when it was delivered, so best to crack on.
If he’d refused delivery he’d be in a much better position to unravel the deal. Not now, though. Sorry.
Just to answer a few of the points raised…
My dad isn’t trying to reject the car or get out of the lease. He’s happy with the vehicle.
He did sign paperwork on the day the vehicle was actually delivered on 30/06, but it was a different document to the one the leasing company has since sent him.
The issue isn’t simply that one document says the 26th and another says the 30th, or that it’s only four days. The leasing company has confirmed they’ve started the lease from 26/06 because they received a “Received by Customer” handover form dated 26/06, containing what appears to be my dad’s signature.
If it had simply been an internal dealer or transport document, there wouldn’t have been an issue. Instead, it’s a customer handover document that has been relied upon to determine the contractual start date.
For me, it’s less about the four days and more about the principle. If the paperwork records that the customer accepted the vehicle on a particular date, I’d expect that to match when the customer actually accepted it. Otherwise, what is the purpose of having a customer handover document in the first place?
I’m genuinely interested in hearing people’s opinions and whether anyone has come across something similar before, rather than trying to argue the point. We’re simply trying to establish how that document came to be completed and why it records my dad as having accepted the vehicle four days before he actually took delivery.
My dad isn’t trying to reject the car or get out of the lease. He’s happy with the vehicle.
He did sign paperwork on the day the vehicle was actually delivered on 30/06, but it was a different document to the one the leasing company has since sent him.
The issue isn’t simply that one document says the 26th and another says the 30th, or that it’s only four days. The leasing company has confirmed they’ve started the lease from 26/06 because they received a “Received by Customer” handover form dated 26/06, containing what appears to be my dad’s signature.
If it had simply been an internal dealer or transport document, there wouldn’t have been an issue. Instead, it’s a customer handover document that has been relied upon to determine the contractual start date.
For me, it’s less about the four days and more about the principle. If the paperwork records that the customer accepted the vehicle on a particular date, I’d expect that to match when the customer actually accepted it. Otherwise, what is the purpose of having a customer handover document in the first place?
I’m genuinely interested in hearing people’s opinions and whether anyone has come across something similar before, rather than trying to argue the point. We’re simply trying to establish how that document came to be completed and why it records my dad as having accepted the vehicle four days before he actually took delivery.
jrp96 said:
He did sign paperwork on the day the vehicle was actually delivered on 30/06, but it was a different document to the one the leasing company has since sent him.
Please can you provide (suitably redacted) pics of the paperwork signed on the day; and the "customer handover" document the lease company subsequently sent. Whatever was signed on the day, is de-facto the "customer handover" document since it was a document, and it was presented/signed at the point of customer handover. I am scratching my head why there are two different variations of this.Wacky Racer said:
fflump said:
Setting aside all other issues, does it actually matter in the grand scheme of things?
Well yes, because he will have to hand the car back a few days early than he needs to, at the end of the contract.fflump said:
Wacky Racer said:
fflump said:
Setting aside all other issues, does it actually matter in the grand scheme of things?
Well yes, because he will have to hand the car back a few days early than he needs to, at the end of the contract.I would push for a full answer and threaten them with the FCA etc.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff