Used car ownership dispute with log book loan shark
SoWrong
Hi
I bought a V reg Mondeo from a dealer for around �600. It is high
mileage & ropy condition. But it came with a few months tax, 11.5
months MOT & the V5C registration certificate that had 2 private
addresses for the "previous registered keeper/s".
The dealer just gave me the logbook, presumably in the same state he
acquired it in, i.e. theres nothing on it to say he ever was the
registered keeper of the car. This is no doubt common practise amongst
dealers.
But there is a a section (9, in yellow) "Notification of sale or
transfer to the motor industry" that should be filled in & signed by
both parties & the seller sends, this slip to DVLA, & the motor trader
keeps the rest of the certificate.
This obviously didnt happen, as the log book was fully intact, with no
missing slip when i acquired it. But anyway, this is probably common
proceedure with dealers, and so not anything to worry about.
I also have a receipts from the dealer for the vehicle with details on
it, for the deposit & then the remaining amount that i paid.
In hindsight, I was naive in not getting a car data check, but -
1. Felt more secure buying it through a dealer.
2. Thought data checks were more expensive than they actually are now.
Some are �3.95, though im not certain what info this includes.
3. Wasn't fully aware of what a car data check/hpi was for. This is
only my third car (& third used car). I got one done on the 1st car 10
years ago cos there were dodgy signs - i.e. no logbook, a vehicle
modification. But as of this month, i thought HPI data checks were only
done/needed for when there is reason to believe the car might be
stolen.
4. The value of the vehicle made me think that getting a hpi/car data
check was not necessary.
5. I was not even aware of the issue of "outstanding finance" being
left on a used car, and the possible consequences of this. I know about
HP car agreements, but not in detail as i've never had one, so dont
fully know how they work. I have never even heard of a "log book
loan."
I've had the car for about a month. I have the new V5C with me as the
new registered keeper from DVLA.
This week, men come to my home address while I'm at work. Spoke to my
housemate/s, who'd seen their car go up & down the street slowly b4
they knocked.
These men asked for me. My housemate said im not in. They asked where i
was, without explaining who they were. My housemate/s asked who they are
& what it is regarding, and the men were reluctant to answer or provide
info, rephrasing the question as "how could they contact me." My
housemates thankfully & quite rightly remained firm insisting they say
who they were, where they were from, and what it was about.
The men gave the name of their "log book loans" type company, and said
the car (my car) belongs to them as there is outstanding finance on it.
But i might be able to buy it back off them!
My housemates explained I'd bought it recently, with a registration
document & MOT from a dealer.
The men said a log book doesnt mean anything as you can buy them for
�25 (legally from DVLA. But probably illegally from a crook is probably
what he meant). But yet he waved this logbook for the vehicle claiming
it to be theres. Though my housemates didnt look at the details on it.
They asked the men if they could provide documentation on the car to
prove they are the owners, to which they reluctantly indicated - yes if
needs be.
My housemates took their details but refused to say anything else or
explain my whereabouts.
The men asked for me to give them a call, but they'd be in touch
anyway.
1. The men were employees of this log book loan shark, not
partners/shareholders in it.
2. This log book loan shark with typical apr around 400%, gives loans
to people based on the value of the car, retaining the log book & MOT
certificate until it is paid off. So how can they say the logbook is
worth nothing if this is what they are retaining themselves until the
loan is paid off.
3. When they came they were presumably wanting to speak to me and for
me to hand over the car. No questions asked. They were professional &
authoritative in their appearance & manner, like the police would be,
and its easy to see how people fall for this.
SO -
As far as im concerned, i bought it legally with any necessary
documentation - road tax, MOT, V5H registration certificate. I acquired
"good title" as i bought the car in good "faith" without notice of the
hire purchase or credit sales agreement taken out buy a previous holder
of the car. Hire purchase Act 1964
They have no right to try & claim it as theirs. The person they need to
chase up is the person who took the loan out with them. This could have
been 1-3 people back who held the car before me. If the loan sharks
cant find this person, then tough, that is the risk they took in
offering a loan against the car, they know this. This is why they
charge extortionate interest rates because of this risk.
I havent taken legal advice yet or told the police.
But i want to know HOW this log book loan shark got my name & address??
how can this be? DVLA will not have passed it onto them, surely?
Have they got a bent copper on their team who runs number plates
through his computer to provide name & contact details.
How the hell did they know my details??
But i feel violated & threatened/intimidated by this data protection
breach, & the possibility remains that they will simply turn up & take
my car for themselves without my permission.
I've just I read an article from last year stating that 30% of used
cars have outstanding finance on them.
Surely this issue crops up a lot??
My bottom line/s is -
I bought the car outright in cash legally through a used car dealer
with the supporting documents. I therefore acquired good title as i
bought it in good faith with no knowledge of the loan shark finance on
the car (Hire Purchase Act 1964).
I am now the DVLA registered keeper.
I have invested money in the car to sort mechanical problems.
AS far as i am concerned i am the legal owner.
I will not surrender it to anyone.
If someone else takes it, that is theft.
I expect to hear back from these chancers. They are probably gangsters,
behind this type of racket, and you dont know what they are capable
of....
I will not contact this log books loans company, as i have no reason
to. Their issue isnt with me but with the person who took the loan out,
whoever that is. But they are making an issue with me. So surely they
have to legally prove that they are the legalowners & that i am not the
real legal owner? and not the other way round?
I will speak to a solicitor on Monday & will probably speak to the
police due to the data protection issue & the intimidatory undertone
thereafter.
But as of yet i have done nothing.
Has this happened to you or anyone you know of?
If so, what happened?
Many thanks.
--
SoWrong
Walt
news:SoWrong...@legalbanter.co.uk:
SNIP
> But i want to know HOW this log book loan shark got my name & address??
> how can this be? DVLA will not have passed it onto them, surely?
> Have they got a bent copper on their team who runs number plates
> through his computer to provide name & contact details.
> How the hell did they know my details??
>
END SNIP
The DVLA will provide anyone with the registered keeper's details "if they
have good cause" for requiring it.
I will not raise again the ethics of this as it has been discussed ad
nauseum.
Walt
steve robinson
This is becomming a common problem , the registered keeper and owner is not the same
thing ,
If you bought the car off a dealer you can sue to get your money back
Usenet Nutter
<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
snipped
>>
>> Has this happened to you or anyone you know of?
>>
>> If so, what happened?
>>
>> Many thanks.
>
>This is becomming a common problem , the registered keeper and owner is not the same
>thing ,
>
>If you bought the car off a dealer you can sue to get your money back
No need to sue if he is the rightful owner .
Dr Zoidberg
news:SoWrong...@legalbanter.co.uk...
>
> Hi
>
> I bought a V reg Mondeo from a dealer for around £600. It is high
> mileage & ropy condition. But it came with a few months tax, 11.5
> months MOT & the V5C registration certificate that had 2 private
> addresses for the "previous registered keeper/s".
>
<snip>
I suggest that it might be worth asking the dealer about this to see what
they say
--
Alex
"I laugh in the face of danger , then I hide until it goes away"
Ste
So let's summarise the position. You purchased a car fom a dealer
(what kind of dealer?). There were irregularities with the logbook, in
that the dealer had not registered his own interest in the car. You
now have enforcers visiting your house looking for you, on account
that they claim to have a charge/title against the car in respect of
outstanding credit.
> SO -
>
> As far as im concerned, i bought it legally with any necessary
> documentation - road tax, MOT, V5H registration certificate. I acquired
> "good title" as i bought the car in good "faith" without notice of the
> hire purchase or credit sales agreement taken out buy a previous holder
> of the car. Hire purchase Act 1964
Not necessarily. You need to find out what kind of credit was being
supplied, and whether the "loanshark" had a licence to do so, and also
what sort of contract was signed between borrower and loanshark.
Certainly, the rules on HP are as you describe if I remember
correctly, but this was almost certainly not a HP agreement.
> They have no right to try & claim it as theirs. The person they need to
> chase up is the person who took the loan out with them. This could have
> been 1-3 people back who held the car before me. If the loan sharks
> cant find this person, then tough, that is the risk they took in
> offering a loan against the car, they know this. This is why they
> charge extortionate interest rates because of this risk.
>
> I havent taken legal advice yet or told the police.
It may well be worth ringing the police and asking them to make a note
of this situation. As for legal advice, we can probably help you with
that, but you'll need to supply more information (and contact the
enforcers to find out, if necessary).
> But i want to know HOW this log book loan shark got my name & address??
> how can this be? DVLA will not have passed it onto them, surely?
> Have they got a bent copper on their team who runs number plates
> through his computer to provide name & contact details.
> How the hell did they know my details??
No, they simply ask the DVLA. If they arguably have an interest in the
car, then they are entitled to do this.
> But i feel violated & threatened/intimidated by this data protection
> breach, & the possibility remains that they will simply turn up & take
> my car for themselves without my permission.
If they do that, they will be breaking the law, and unless the car is
very expensive it would almost certainly not be worth their while to
change its identity. Incidentally, it is for this reason though that I
suggest you notify the police of the situation. That way, if the car
is taken, then the police have prior notice of the situation.
> I've just I read an article from last year stating that 30% of used
> cars have outstanding finance on them.
> Surely this issue crops up a lot??
Again, the rules about who gets title are complex. We need more
information of what interest the loanshark claims to have in the car.
The mere fact that he has a logbook is neither here nor there.
> My bottom line/s is -
> I bought the car outright in cash legally through a used car dealer
> with the supporting documents. I therefore acquired good title as i
> bought it in good faith with no knowledge of the loan shark finance on
> the car (Hire Purchase Act 1964).
The loanshark's interest is not necessarily as a party to a hire-
purchase contract, though if it is then, as you say, you are protected
because you bought it in good faith and without notice.
> I am now the DVLA registered keeper.
> I have invested money in the car to sort mechanical problems.
If you do not have title to the car, then you can still set up a claim
of unjust enrichment against the loanshark in respect of repairs made/
work done.
> AS far as i am concerned i am the legal owner.
> I will not surrender it to anyone.
> If someone else takes it, that is theft.
That depends on whether the car belongs to you.
> I expect to hear back from these chancers. They are probably gangsters,
> behind this type of racket, and you dont know what they are capable
> of....
They probably are gangsters. After all, the whole point of loansharks
is that it requires the menace of bodily injury in order to have
debtors repay. On the other hand, gangsters may often leverage fear,
but smart gangsters (and I think you'll find most are fairly smart)
are unlikely to go beyond that with you in this case. After all, what
they want is money (specifically, they want the loan repaid), and it
is pointless to wage wars of attrition against random third parties,
because they do not build a reputation in that way, they attract
unnecessary attention from the authorities, and ultimately they
probably lose money in the process.
> I will not contact this log books loans company, as i have no reason
> to. Their issue isnt with me but with the person who took the loan out,
> whoever that is. But they are making an issue with me. So surely they
> have to legally prove that they are the legalowners & that i am not the
> real legal owner? and not the other way round?
Yes, they must prove that they are legal owners. But I do suggest that
you contact them and explain your situation - if you feel able to do
so. You'll find many gangsters value honesty and will view your
situation sympathetically, bearing in mind that you have no personal
connection at all with the debtor. As I've said, their business is
making money, not intimidation for its own sake, and harassing random
third parties is not good for business. And bear in mind that they
will not know how you came into possession of this car unless and
until you tell them; for all they presently know, you may be a
relation of the debtor.
> I will speak to a solicitor on Monday & will probably speak to the
> police due to the data protection issue & the intimidatory undertone
> thereafter.
Listen, it is not an offence in itself for a large man in a dark suit
to call at an address looking for someone in relation to legitimate
business. Nor is it an offence for the DVLA to disclose the registered
keeper's details in response to a reasonable and legitimate request.
Surely you can have some degree of sympathy with the loanshark in that
he lent money on the value of the car, and all he knows now is that
the debtor has disappeared and the car is in your possession.
steve robinson
He is not the rightful owner the car was secured against a loan by a.n.other who
sold it or traded it in when it wasnt thiers to do so .
They are legally entitled to take the car away
SoWrong
Right, ive spoken to another couple of independent dealers today.
The second one said that if the log book loan business is a legitimate
loan shark, then if they have registered an interest in the car it will
show up on a car data check.
Because i bought it from a dealer (retail), you get a bit of extra
protection.
Before accepting a car in part exchange or just traded in, a dealer has
to prove that the car is OK, clear of finance etc. and that it is ok for
them to sell the car on to me. By definition it may not be exactly the
case that this will need to be done through a car data check through,
HPI, experian etc, but in reality this is the only way the dealer can
ensure the car is clean - unless of course it is their ownb car that
they've had from new, perhaps.
Even if there are issues with the car, a dealer CAN accept the car, and
sell it on, IF the purchaser is made aware of this beforehand, and this
should be done in the form of an itemised receipt.
I was not made aware of any 3rd party financial interest in the car
when i bought it. I therefore bought it as it is, in good faith, thus
gaining good/clear title on/for the goods.
The dealer told me i should contact the CAB first, which i will do on
Monday and see what they say. But as far as he is concerned, the dealer
i bought it off is at fault, as he never had the right to sell the car
on to me in the first place, & broke the law by not personally ensuring
that there was no outstanding finance on it, and not informing me of the
outstanding finance - which if he had, i obviously wouldnt have bought
it.
So for him it was an open& shut case realluy, the dealer needs to
either refund me, or settle the outstanding finance on the car.
This is how loan sharks can operate legally, they have to register
their interest (ownership?) of the car, so it shows up on the car data
check. To do this they must be a legal consumer credit provider. If
they are, and if it does appear on the car data check, they by law have
the ownership right, so it would seem.
So it seems that while the loan shark does actually have the right to
my car, my issue is not with the loan shark, it is with the dealer who
sold it to me without telling me the truth about the car, or putting
this in writing.
If they are an illegal (or unregistered) loan shark of a consumer
credit provider, they cannot register their ownership on the car data
check database, and so this "outstanding finance owing" issue would not
show up on a car data check. And so they have no right to try & claim
the car back from you. They would have to track down the person who
took the loan out with them, and not trytaking my car off me.
Like the good dealer said today - people buy from a dealer as they feel
a bit more safe & secure than buying privately, due to the bit of extra
comeback to the retailer in the eyes of the law. The retailer is
legally obliged to ensure the car is clear before accpeting it himself,
or trying to pass it on. This did not happen. And customers feel less
reason to get a HPI done on a vehicle bought from a dealer for this
reason.
Had i bought it privately, i would be a lot more screwed, as i should
have got the HPI data check done & didn't. Getting a refund from a
private seller would be a lot more difficult.
I am learning that there are good dealers & bad dealers. The two today
both offer a 1 month parts & labour warranty on all cars they sell.
The 1st dealer said he doesnt even accept cars from the public, as the
public are bas*****, in that they'll try & offload all sorts of crap on
the motor trade - 2 cars cut in half & welded together etc.
I'm learning a lot about the warning signs as well. For example, the
last 2 registered keepers had it for less than a year between them.
Why....
I'll confirm what happens after I've spoken to CAB, and decide a course
of action.
But from what i have been told today, the dealer should basically be
clearing the outstanding debt, or giving me a refund.
Whether this is done smoothly or not is another manner.
Whether he will refund the charges on the parts & labour is another
matter. He should do, as the labour was done at his (or next door
neighbour/associates), and he will be keeping the parts.
Cheers.
--
SoWrong
Chris R
> mileage & ropy condition. But it came with a few months tax, 11.5
> months MOT & the V5C registration certificate that had 2 private
> addresses for the "previous registered keeper/s".
>
> The dealer just gave me the logbook, presumably in the same state he
> acquired it in, i.e. theres nothing on it to say he ever was the
> registered keeper of the car. This is no doubt common practise amongst
> dealers.
> But there is a a section (9, in yellow) "Notification of sale or
> transfer to the motor industry" that should be filled in & signed by
> both parties & the seller sends, this slip to DVLA, & the motor trader
> keeps the rest of the certificate.
> This obviously didnt happen, as the log book was fully intact, with no
> missing slip when i acquired it. But anyway, this is probably common
> proceedure with dealers, and so not anything to worry about.
> I also have a receipts from the dealer for the vehicle with details on
> it, for the deposit & then the remaining amount that i paid.
>
> new registered keeper from DVLA.
Who signed the transfer to you?
>
> The men gave the name of their "log book loans" type company, and said
> the car (my car) belongs to them as there is outstanding finance on
> it. But i might be able to buy it back off them!
>
> My housemates explained I'd bought it recently, with a registration
> document & MOT from a dealer.
> The men said a log book doesnt mean anything as you can buy them for
> �25 (legally from DVLA. But probably illegally from a crook is
> probably what he meant). But yet he waved this logbook for the
> vehicle claiming it to be theres. Though my housemates didnt look at
> the details on it.
Possession of the V5 doesn't mean anything in terms of ownership. They could
not have registered themselves as registered dkeepers because they did not
have possession of he car.
>
> They asked the men if they could provide documentation on the car to
> prove they are the owners, to which they reluctantly indicated - yes
> if needs be.
As I understand it log book loan companies rely on bills of sale as
security, not hire-purchase. They have to be registered with the High Court
under the Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act 1882. At a later stage you
may need to check that it has been registered - they sometimes aren't - and
if it's not registered it's void. You probably need a copy of the bill of
sale to check if it's been registered. Records are at the High Court in
London and the local county court of the person giving the bill of sale.
>
> 1. The men were employees of this log book loan shark, not
> partners/shareholders in it.
> 2. This log book loan shark with typical apr around 400%, gives loans
> to people based on the value of the car, retaining the log book & MOT
> certificate until it is paid off. So how can they say the logbook is
> worth nothing if this is what they are retaining themselves until the
> loan is paid off.
They keep the V5 just to make it more difficult to sell, but the bill of
sale is their real security.
>
> 3. When they came they were presumably wanting to speak to me and for
> me to hand over the car. No questions asked. They were professional &
> authoritative in their appearance & manner, like the police would be,
> and its easy to see how people fall for this.
>
>
> SO -
>
> As far as im concerned, i bought it legally with any necessary
> documentation - road tax, MOT, V5H registration certificate. I
> acquired "good title" as i bought the car in good "faith" without
> notice of the hire purchase or credit sales agreement taken out buy a
> previous holder of the car. Hire purchase Act 1964
You're on the right track. If it's a bill of sale case the HPA doesn't
apply, but section 25 Sale of Goods Act does, which has a similar effect -
except ther's no exclusion for sales to non-consumers, which helps you. The
crucial transaction is the sale from the owner to the dealer, assuming
that's what happened. If the dealer got good title from the "owner", he can
pass good title to you. If he didn't, he can't.
>
> They have no right to try & claim it as theirs. The person they need
> to chase up is the person who took the loan out with them. This could
> have been 1-3 people back who held the car before me. If the loan
> sharks cant find this person, then tough, that is the risk they took
> in offering a loan against the car, they know this. This is why they
> charge extortionate interest rates because of this risk.
Indeed.
>
> I havent taken legal advice yet or told the police.
>
> But i want to know HOW this log book loan shark got my name &
> address?? how can this be? DVLA will not have passed it onto them,
> surely?
Anyone asserting a good reason can get details from DVLA.
> Have they got a bent copper on their team who runs number plates
> through his computer to provide name & contact details.
> How the hell did they know my details??
>
> But i feel violated & threatened/intimidated by this data protection
> breach, & the possibility remains that they will simply turn up & take
> my car for themselves without my permission.
>
>
> I've just I read an article from last year stating that 30% of used
> cars have outstanding finance on them.
> Surely this issue crops up a lot??
HP, certainly. Logbook loans are pretty recent. I'm surprised that the
dealer didn't do an HPI check, though.
>
> My bottom line/s is -
> I bought the car outright in cash legally through a used car dealer
> with the supporting documents. I therefore acquired good title as i
> bought it in good faith with no knowledge of the loan shark finance on
> the car (Hire Purchase Act 1964).
If they can produce a bill of sale, you need evidence that it was
registered. If it was, it's for you to prove that the title passed to you
via the dealer, eg because the borrower sold the car within the section 25
exception.
> I am now the DVLA registered keeper.
> I have invested money in the car to sort mechanical problems.
> AS far as i am concerned i am the legal owner.
> I will not surrender it to anyone.
> If someone else takes it, that is theft.
If they are not the owner, and take it dishonestly.
>
> I expect to hear back from these chancers. They are probably
> gangsters, behind this type of racket, and you dont know what they
> are capable of....
That's a big assumption to jump to. Some of these companies are big
businesses. They should all have consumer credit licences.
>
> I will not contact this log books loans company, as i have no reason
> to. Their issue isnt with me but with the person who took the loan
> out, whoever that is. But they are making an issue with me. So surely
> they have to legally prove that they are the legalowners & that i am
> not the real legal owner? and not the other way round?
If they can show that they have a registered bill of sale from the owner at
the time, the car is theirs unless you can show how title passed to the
dealer.
>
> I will speak to a solicitor on Monday
You might like to take a copy of this along - not many solicitors will be
immediately familiar with the Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act 1882
> & will probably speak to the
> police due to the data protection issue & the intimidatory undertone
> thereafter.
>
It doesn't sound as if there has been any actionable harassment as yet.
You haven't mentioned claiming against the dealer. You have a cast-iron
claim against him if it turns out that you didn't get title to the car. So
long as he doesn't disappear or go bust, you should look to him for all your
losses. You might like to involve him in any discussions with the loans
company.
Chris R
Usenet Nutter
<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
snipped
>>
>> No need to sue if he is the rightful owner .
>
>He is not the rightful owner the car was secured against a loan by a.n.other who
>sold it or traded it in when it wasnt thiers to do so .
That is by no means the case .
>They are legally entitled to take the car away
See my comment above and others coments
Road_Hog
> --
> SoWrong
Can I suggest you do a search on Google so you get an idea of what the
company you are dealing with is like.
May I suggest "log book loans complaints" as a search string.
And my other suggestion is that you make yourself a tea/coffe or get a cold
beer and pull up a comfy chair, there is plenty to read.
Petert
<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
He bought the vehicle in good faith from a dealer. A member of the
public is not supposed to have to make enquiries as to the status of
the car thus purchased. A dealer, however, is expected to make the
necessary enquiries into the status of a vehicle they purchase.
The OP therefore has good title to the vehicle.
The debt is owed to the loan company by the person who initially took
out the loan. The fact that the loan company's collateral is no more,
i.e. no longer available to them, is a problem that the loan company
needs to pursue their debtor about.
The fact that the loan company retained the V5 does not give them
title to the vehicle, i.e. they have never, and do not now, own the
vehicle
--
Cheers
Peter
steve robinson
The op called the company a loan shark operation , most of these pay day loan
companies / secured loans against vehicles are legit setups many subsideries of
large finance corperations .
The crook here is the man or woman who sold something (s)he did not own or had
finance secured against it to the dealer who probably didnt do an hpi check (who
would on a car with that sought of value ).
A company local to me who 'loans' money in this manner effectively buys the car off
you and leases it back to you until you repay the 'loan' as apposed to securing the
debt against it .
They are quite open about this policy as they say it allows them to collect the car
if the 'loan 'is not repaid as they are the legal owners as apposed to a debt being
secured against the property .
The op really needs to see a copy of thier terms and conditions because ownership
will ultimatly be decided by any agreement between the loan company and the person
who used the vehicle to obtain a loan
As a side issue the op should check with his insurance company to make sure whilst
this mess is soughted out that the vehicle still has cover in place as many
insurance companies will not cover you if you do not own or fail to declare you do
not own the vehicle
Chris R
>>>>>
>>>>> If so, what happened?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks.
>>>>
>>>> This is becomming a common problem , the registered keeper and
>>>> owner is not the same thing ,
>>>>
>>>> If you bought the car off a dealer you can sue to get your money
>>>> back
>>>
>>> No need to sue if he is the rightful owner .
>>
>> He is not the rightful owner the car was secured against a loan by
>> a.n.other who sold it or traded it in when it wasnt thiers to do so .
>>
>> They are legally entitled to take the car away
>
> He bought the vehicle in good faith from a dealer. A member of the
> public is not supposed to have to make enquiries as to the status of
> the car thus purchased. A dealer, however, is expected to make the
> necessary enquiries into the status of a vehicle they purchase.
>
> The OP therefore has good title to the vehicle.
Searing legal analysis. I hadn't realised that the law of personal property
and security had been changed so radically in the lst few hours. Care to
cite authority for this statement?
>
> The debt is owed to the loan company by the person who initially took
> out the loan. The fact that the loan company's collateral is no more,
> i.e. no longer available to them, is a problem that the loan company
> needs to pursue their debtor about.
Er - isn't that rather the point of taking security?
>
> The fact that the loan company retained the V5 does not give them
> title to the vehicle,
true
> i.e. they have never, and do not now, own the
> vehicle
how do you draw that conclusion?
Chris R
Peter Parry
<SoWrong...@legalbanter.co.uk> wrote:
>I was not made aware of any 3rd party financial interest in the car
>when i bought it. I therefore bought it as it is, in good faith, thus
>gaining good/clear title on/for the goods.
Whether or not you bought in good faith is (with some exceptions
linked with hire purchase) irrelevant. What matters is whether the
person you bought the car from had good title to it at the time of
sale. If they did not then you do not.
If the previous owner had passed title to the loan company then it was
no longer their car to sell, the dealer did not acquire title to it
when they paid for it and neither did you.
You do of course have a case to claim back the money you paid from the
dealer.
Chris R
>> when i bought it. I therefore bought it as it is, in good faith, thus
>> gaining good/clear title on/for the goods.
>
> Whether or not you bought in good faith is (with some exceptions
> linked with hire purchase) irrelevant. What matters is whether the
> person you bought the car from had good title to it at the time of
> sale. If they did not then you do not.
>
> If the previous owner had passed title to the loan company then it was
> no longer their car to sell, the dealer did not acquire title to it
> when they paid for it and neither did you.
What about section 24 of the Sale of Goods Act? (not section 25 as I
mistakenly said in a previous post)
http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=Act+(UK+Public+General)&title=sale+of+goods+act&Year=1979&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=1837068&ActiveTextDocId=1837110&filesize=698
>
> You do of course have a case to claim back the money you paid from the
> dealer.
Agreed, if you didn't get good title to the car, plus any other financial
losses.
Chris R
Peter Parry
<inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:
>
>What about section 24 of the Sale of Goods Act? (not section 25 as I
>mistakenly said in a previous post)
It is completely irrelevant. That refers to a legitimate title holder
trying to sell the same goods twice and says which of the two people
the same goods were sold to will acquire the title.
S21(1) is the bit you are after
"21 Sale by person not the owner
(1) Subject to this Act, where goods are sold by a person who is not
their owner, and who does not sell them under the authority or with
the consent of the owner, the buyer acquires no better title to the
goods than the seller had..."
(as a matter of interest that is one the parts of the original 1893
Act which have survived unchanged).
The seller was not the owner because the person who sold the car to
him in the first place was (apparently) not the owner either, having
previously given ownership to the loan company.
In Latin "Nemo dat quod non habet " if you are not the legitimate
owner of an item you cannot give title in it to anybody else as you
cannot give something that does not belong to you.
It means that if a thief steals your TV and it later appears in the
local second hand shop you are entitled to recover it. The shop
cannot have acquired title no matter who they bought it from nor how
pure their intentions. If they had sold it to a customer you could
equally recover it from their entirely innocent customer. The
customer would have a claim against the seller of course, but they
cannot acquire title if it isn't the sellers to give in the first
place.
Peter Parry
wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 13:15:12 +0100, "Chris R"
><inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>>What about section 24 of the Sale of Goods Act? (not section 25 as I
>>mistakenly said in a previous post)
>
>It is completely irrelevant. That refers to a legitimate title holder
>trying to sell the same goods twice and says which of the two people
>the same goods were sold to will acquire the title.
Talking to myself but I've just realised the point I think you were
making which was that if the original owner had sold the car to the
car to the loan company under a bill of sale but continued in
possession of it the subsequent sale to the garage would have passed
title to the garage under S24. The garage would therefore have
acquired title and subsequently the present purchaser would have
acquired title?
..
the Omrud
AIUI here is an override for this provision, relating to cars (? other
items) which are being financed through HP. If the purchaser did not
know that the seller had effectively stolen the car from the finance
company, then he does acquire good title. I don't know how to look up
the statute, sorry.
--
David
Path: 53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: the Omrud <usenet...@gEXPUNGEmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: uk.legal.moderated
Subject: Re: Used car ownership dispute with log book loan shark
References: <SoWrong...@legalbanter.co.uk> <SoWrong...@legalbanter.co.uk> <Ukblonde...@legalbanter.co.uk> <SoWrong...@legalbanter.co.uk> <ggjub5tjcncu2q7k6...@4ax.com> <VcadnSbuf_YUyyLX...@brightview.co.uk> <4qoub5djljvtonao5...@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <nnLvm.98956$OO7....@text.news.virginmedia.com>
X-Posted-Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 15:18:43 GMT
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 16:20:15 +0100
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.99.32.225
X-Original-Trace: text.news.virginmedia.com 1254064723 81.99.32.225 (Sun, 27 Sep 2009 16:18:43 BST)
X-Ulm-Charter: http://www.usenet.org.uk/uk.legal.moderated.html
X-Ulm-Info-1: Submissions uk-legal-...@usenet.org.uk
X-Ulm-Info-2: Technical complaints only sysadmin (at) moderation.org.uk
X-Ulm-Info-3: Human moderators uk-legal-mode...@usenet.org.uk
X-Comment: The moderators express no opinion about this article.
X-Robomod: {R}UUM �2003 Richard Ashton richard (at) moderation.org.uk
X-Robomod-Trace: 7889920090927162017auto
Approved: uk-legal-moderated moderators <uk-legal-...@moderation.org.uk>
AIUI here is an override for this provision, relating to cars (? other
items) which are being financed through HP. If the purchaser did not
know that the seller had effectively stolen the car from the finance
company, then he does acquire good title. I don't know how to look up
the statute, sorry.
--
David
QUIT
steve robinson
Hire purchase is different to financeing the purchase through a loan
the Omrud
Of course, but it is possible that the OP does not know the exact nature
of the finance arrangement which exists on the car.
--
David
Peter Parry
<usenet...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote:
>
>AIUI here is an override for this provision, relating to cars (? other
>items) which are being financed through HP. If the purchaser did not
>know that the seller had effectively stolen the car from the finance
>company, then he does acquire good title. I don't know how to look up
>the statute, sorry.
I don't think these agreements count as HP. However,
<http://www.getwokingham.co.uk/news/s/2026861_ebay_buyers_court_victory_as_24000_car_is_returned>
might be of interest as it is a similar case with a garage selling a
car with a logbook loan unknowingly attached to it. Admittedly it is
only a newspaper report but the bit at the bottom :-
"Tim Bradbury, defending, said: “It was as a result of LogBook Loans
wrongfully asserting ownership and interest in the vehicle, which made
it unlawful.
“To their discredit, at the early stages, they said they had ‘good
title’ for the car.”
The firm eventually admitted its mistake, the court heard. "
steve robinson
The op said its a log book loan , it depends how this has been set up , some secure
against the car others buy the car off you for penuts and you lease it back over x
amount of years at silly rates
The apr on these loans is astronomical some as high as 500% , they deliberatly
target that section of society who can not get credit anywhere else and by the very
nature of thier circumstances are likely to be a very high risk borrower
Chris R
Peter Parry opined:
In that case it appears that the person who took out the loan did not own
the car at the time, so the lender didn't get good title.
Chris R
Peter Parry
<inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:
>
>In that case it appears that the person who took out the loan did not own
>the car at the time, so the lender didn't get good title.
Hmm...There don't seem to be many reported cases of people who have
inadvertently bought cars with log book loans on them managing to
retain them. Of course this may be due to the grabem and run antics
of various recovery firms rather than what the law is.
S
wrote:
If you take out a secured loan, you remain owner of the security,
e.g., if you have a mortgage on your house, you are the owner, not the
bank or building society. Hire purchase is different, the finance
company remains the owner, until you make the last payment.
Chris R
S opined:
That depends on the form of security. A bill of sale transfers ownership to
the buyer/lender.
Chris R
Roland Perry
on Sun, 27 Sep 2009, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
remarked:
>A company local to me who 'loans' money in this manner effectively buys the car off
>you and leases it back to you until you repay the 'loan' as apposed to securing the
>debt against it .
>
>They are quite open about this policy as they say it allows them to collect the car
>if the 'loan 'is not repaid as they are the legal owners as apposed to a debt being
>secured against the property .
Does this kind of arrangement show up on an HPI search? The loan "shark"
would presumably have to be a subscriber to the HPI system, and the
'loan' to the driver would have to qualify as "HP" (within whatever the
HPI scheme regards as HP).
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 2009, SoWrong <SoWrong...@legalbanter.co.uk> remarked:
>If they are an illegal (or unregistered) loan shark of a consumer
>credit provider, they cannot register their ownership on the car data
>check database, and so this "outstanding finance owing" issue would not
>show up on a car data check. And so they have no right to try & claim
>the car back from you. They would have to track down the person who
>took the loan out with them, and not trytaking my car off me.
What does an HPI check on the car, done *today* say?
--
Roland Perry
Chris R
Roland Perry opined:
I believe so, if the lender registers it with HPI; I don't think HPI is
limited to HP. registration by lenders is voluntary, of course. The register
of bills of sale at the High Court is the one that matters for legal
purposes, and I don't suppose that feeds through to HPI automatically.
Chris R
steve robinson
Is there a legal requirement to declare loans made to individuals
Roland Perry
on Tue, 29 Sep 2009, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
remarked:
>> Does this kind of arrangement show up on an HPI search? The loan "shark" would
>> presumably have to be a subscriber to the HPI system, and the 'loan' to the driver
>> would have to qualify as "HP" (within whatever the HPI scheme regards as HP).
>
>Is there a legal requirement to declare loans made to individuals
It appears to be a private sector initiative, and their website doesn't
mention any legislative framework (for their work).
Which makes it a bit odd that they appear to claim that you can rely on
a car coming back as a "negative".
And I'm struggling to find much on their website that is "aftercare"
compared to "preventative" (in the context of buying a car that's got
outstanding HP, rather than one that's of unmerchantable quality).
And although they talk about a guarantee, if the information they give
you is wrong (maybe a false negative because the loan wasn't registered
with them), viz:
"In the case where HPI provides incorrect data affecting vehicle
title (such as theft or outstanding finance), the HPI Guarantee
will cover up to £30,000, either in compensation or the costs
needed to obtain good title to the vehicle (at HPI's
discretion)."
This clause seems to have a fairly comprehensive get-out if there can
ever be circumstances where a car wasn't registered with them (and
therefore looks clear) and is subsequently traded on fraudulently:
"The HPI Guarantee does not cover the vehicle's descriptive
information (including import status), mileage, value, V5
registration document checks, or if the loss has arisen as a
result of a fraudulent transaction."
--
Roland Perry
Chris R
SoWrong
My case has been sorted now.
After discussing it with trading standards, i was advised to contact
the dealer. I did this, he said he contacted the log book loan company
& was waiting to hear back. 10 days past, still no reply. So my trading
standards contact advised me to contact the log book loan co. I did
this. The dealer hadn't been in contact with the loan co. he had lied
to me in a bid to buy himself time.
LBL spoke to ther dealer, to inform if of the seriousness of the case,
who wasnt interested, he claims it wasnt his problem, he had done a HPI
check & it was clear.
But the fact was, as confirmed by trading standards & LBL, he had only
doen the HPI check AFTER i had contacted himn with this problem.
The log book loan co. was actually very civilised. They said they own
the car, & need to collect it. I said theres no way i'm handing it
over
1) I bought it legally in good faith & have good title - in my
opinion.
2) Not without a refund from the dealer.
LBL co. said in that case theyd have no choice but to contact the
police, as there was a stolen car. LBL said the police are now taking a
dim view of dealers committing "fraud" like this - selling a car that
they have no right to sell, & so the dealer could be in trounle.
I was waiting to hear back from my trading standards advisor & LBL said
the best thing was for me to get trading standards to contact LBL.
Before this could happen & LBL phoned me back saying the delaer had
contacted them & agreed to make a contribution towards the outastanding
debt on the car (around 40% of the less than �500 still owed by a former
registered keeper.
Once this payment was made, LBL agreed to end their interest in the
car, remove their interest from HPI register & confirm to me in writing
that they have no interest in the car anymore.
Had the dealer not got back to LBL co. worst case scenario, i could
have proved that i bought the car in good faith & had clear title - i
think. But in the meantime, i could not sell it easily & was unsure of
the insurance situation.
Through experian the basic prices for dealers to get full data checks
are a once off �60 registration fee & �3.75 per data check. �3.75 is
the basic price, depending on how many checks they do, they can
negotiate a price much lower than this. Some dealers do many thousands
of data checks per year.
So regardless of the value of the car, a dealer has no excuse for not
doing a data check. They are obliged by law, to prove they have the
right to sell each & every car on.
--
SoWrong
steve robinson
>
> My case has been sorted now.
>
> After discussing it with trading standards, i was advised to contact
> the dealer. I did this, he said he contacted the log book loan company
> & was waiting to hear back. 10 days past, still no reply. So my trading
> standards contact advised me to contact the log book loan co. I did
> this. The dealer hadn't been in contact with the loan co. he had lied
> to me in a bid to buy himself time.
>
> LBL spoke to ther dealer, to inform if of the seriousness of the case,
> who wasnt interested, he claims it wasnt his problem, he had done a HPI
> check & it was clear.
> But the fact was, as confirmed by trading standards & LBL, he had only
> doen the HPI check AFTER i had contacted himn with this problem.
>
> The log book loan co. was actually very civilised. They said they own
> the car, & need to collect it. I said theres no way i'm handing it
> over
> 1) I bought it legally in good faith & have good title - in my
> opinion.
> 2) Not without a refund from the dealer.
>
Even though you bought the car in good faith as the car was 'stolen'
you would never have had good title to the vehicle .
Realistically both you and the dealer are victims here , he bought a car in good
faith and sold it to you in good faith .
What you went through is becoming a common problem
> LBL co. said in that case theyd have no choice but to contact the
> police, as there was a stolen car. LBL said the police are now taking a
> dim view of dealers committing "fraud" like this - selling a car that
> they have no right to sell, & so the dealer could be in trounle.
Its unlikely the dealer would have got into trouble , the person who sold t to the
dealer would be the one that needs chasing
>
> I was waiting to hear back from my trading standards advisor & LBL said
> the best thing was for me to get trading standards to contact LBL.
> Before this could happen & LBL phoned me back saying the delaer had
> contacted them & agreed to make a contribution towards the outastanding
> debt on the car (around 40% of the less than £500 still owed by a former
> registered keeper.
> Once this payment was made, LBL agreed to end their interest in the
> car, remove their interest from HPI register & confirm to me in writing
> that they have no interest in the car anymore.
Have they confirmed that you now own the vehicle
>
> Had the dealer not got back to LBL co. worst case scenario, i could
> have proved that i bought the car in good faith & had clear title - i
> think. But in the meantime, i could not sell it easily & was unsure of
> the insurance situation.
>
No you wouldn't , the car did not belong to the original seller it belonged to the
LBL company
> Through experian the basic prices for dealers to get full data checks
> are a once off £60 registration fee & £3.75 per data check. £3.75 is
> the basic price, depending on how many checks they do, they can
> negotiate a price much lower than this. Some dealers do many thousands
> of data checks per year.
> So regardless of the value of the car, a dealer has no excuse for not
> doing a data check. They are obliged by law
The dealer is not obliged by law to do a data check , its only commercial common
sense
Infact its common sense for the buyer to perform their own checks to make sure the
vehicle is sold without any form a loan secured on it and if its ever been written
off
Steve Firth
> > The log book loan co. was actually very civilised. They said they own
> > the car, & need to collect it. I said theres no way i'm handing it
> > over
> > 1) I bought it legally in good faith & have good title - in my
> > opinion.
> > 2) Not without a refund from the dealer.
> >
>
> Even though you bought the car in good faith as the car was 'stolen' you
> would never have had good title to the vehicle .
>
> Realistically both you and the dealer are victims here , he bought a car
> in good faith and sold it to you in good faith .
This "in good faith" statement is being made increasingly even by people
who know it won't wash as an excuse. The most recent example I can think
of is the French government who made the excuse that the Louvre was
acting "in good faith" when it purchased stolen Egyptian Antiquities.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091009/lf_afp/egyptfrancearchaeologylouvre
Similar statements have been made by other governments (including the
British government) about stolen national art treasures.
I think it's this trotting out of the "in good faith" argument by people
perceived to be in authority which helps to confuse individuals who then
consider that buying something "in good faith" should ensure that they
have title to the goods they paid for.
Chris R
steve robinson opined:
See my posts earlier in the thread - I think section 25 SOGA probably
applies, depending on the facts, in which case the OP may well have good
title.
Chris R
steve robinson
You can never have good title to stolen property , the car was stolen
It was taken without the owners consent and sold .
The owner will always have the right to recover the vehicle
Old Codger
> steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> The log book loan co. was actually very civilised. They said they own
>>> the car, & need to collect it. I said theres no way i'm handing it
>>> over
>>> 1) I bought it legally in good faith & have good title - in my
>>> opinion.
>>> 2) Not without a refund from the dealer.
>>>
>> Even though you bought the car in good faith as the car was 'stolen' you
>> would never have had good title to the vehicle .
>>
>> Realistically both you and the dealer are victims here , he bought a car
>> in good faith and sold it to you in good faith .
>
> This "in good faith" statement is being made increasingly even by people
> who know it won't wash as an excuse.
Including, IIRC, MPs trying to justify their expenses claims. :-)
--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field
What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]
Mark Goodge
keyboard and typed:
>Chris R wrote:
>
>>
>> See my posts earlier in the thread - I think section 25 SOGA probably
>> applies, depending on the facts, in which case the OP may well have good
>> title.
>
>You can never have good title to stolen property , the car was stolen
>
>It was taken without the owners consent and sold .
>
>
>The owner will always have the right to recover the vehicle
That's not necessarily true. It is true in most cases, but there are a
few exceptions. One of the specific exceptions is where an item, such
as a car, legally belongs to a lender who has title to the item as
security against a loan (eg, hire purchase or a "log book loan"
arrangement). In such a case, if the item is sold without permission
from the lender to a purchaser who does not know (and has no reason to
suspect) that the seller is not permitted to sell it, then the
purchaser does acquire good title. The lender's recourse is solely
against their own customer, and they would have to sue their customer
for repayment of the loan as the borrower is now in breach of their
contract. The seller might also be guilty of a criminal offence as
well as being subject to civil action, but the buyer would not have to
return the car.
Mark
--
Blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk
Stuff: http://www.good-stuff.co.uk