Part 2 in the case of the dealer who bought a car which was not HPI finance clear

legal updates

We were able to fight the case on 2 technicalities and come to a deal with the finance company reducing the liability down from £12,000 to £5000.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

Last year we reported on a case where our client was taken to court by a finance company. Our client had bought a car from a consumer and then sold it on without realising there was outstanding HP:

https://www.lawgistics.co.uk/legal_updates/court-wins-sometimes-come-down-to-a-technicality-or-two/

As the above link explains, we were able to fight the case on 2 technicalities and come to a deal with the finance company reducing the liability down from £12,000 to £5000. This still left our client out of pocket and so we helped our client bring a claim for that amount against the consumer who sold the car to him claiming it to be finance free. Our case was based on the fact that the consumer did not have title to the car (it was still owned by the finance company) and so he had created a breach under The Sale Of Goods Act 1979.

The consumer did not want to hand over any money and so we had to issue a court claim to get the matter resolved. This action resulted in a deal meaning that for the price of a Lawgistics membership and one court issue fee of £185, he was able to substantially reduce his initial potential loss of £12,000 to just £1000. If the matter had ended up in a hearing, our client would have probably clawed back the lot but they took a commercial decision to get it resolved early and put the matter to bed.  Job done.

Wearewood Services LtdMotor Trade Web Specialists

We offer an all-encompassing web, digital & design service specially tailored to the Motor Industry.

Nona BowkisHead of Legal Services / SolicitorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Don’t Get Soaked: The Habitation Checks That Stop Motorhome Rejections

Buyers are rejecting motorhomes for damp, leaks and unsafe cabins. Here’s what to inspect in the habitation area and why a simple pre-sale check can save you a costly Consumer Rights Act dispute.

Can You Claim What You Haven’t Lost? The ‘No Loss’ Principle Meets s19 CRA 2015

A live claim against a member raises a sharp question: if no money has changed hands and only deductions are in dispute, has the claimant suffered a recoverable loss?

To Repair or Not to Repair: that is the question

A customer drops off a car three months after purchase and asks for a refund. You might have a right to repair, but touch a spanner without clear permission and you could turn a winnable case into an unwanted rejection.

Winter Is Coming: Stop Seasonal Complaints Before They Start

Winter faults spark a spike in consumer complaints. A few extra pre-sale checks now can save you a world of hassle when the temperature drops.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015: Bête noire or useful tool?

Section 19(14) isn’t a magic wand for consumers, and Sections 23 and 24 give traders real leverage. Here’s how to use repairs, disproportionality and usage deductions to keep disputes under control.

Motor Traders have protection under s.27 of the Hire Purchase Act

Told that s.27 offers Motor Traders no protection at all? Not so. A private purchaser’s good title can flow through the chain to protect dealers, and we map out when it does and when it doesn’t.

Proving the ‘chain of custody’ can be a challenge

Conflicting interests on a used car can turn a simple purchase into a legal minefield. Here’s how to evidence the chain, challenge a finance claim, and spot the red flags before you hand over the cash.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

Phone
01480 455500
Address

Vinpenta House
High Causeway
Whittlesey
Peterborough
PE7 1AE

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.