Hire Purchase – do finance companies actually know the law?

legal updates

The customer called upon the so called “reversed burden of proof” concept found in the Sale of Goods Act. We totally disagreed and challenged this.

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.

The writer has noticed this several times and was recently challenged on a finance companies’ interpretation of a consumer’s rights when receiving a car on hire purchase (and this article should be restricted only to hire purchase).

The Finance Company (FC) were advancing the argument that,  for the first 6 months , it was our client  (a car dealer) who was responsible for proving that the alleged defect was not present at the point of handing the vehicle over. 

It was submitted by the FC that their customer could call upon the so called “reversed burden of proof” concept found in the Sale of Goods Act.  We totally disagreed and challenged this on two grounds:

a)    Being a contract of hire-purchase, the FC were, until in receipt of their customer’s final payment, only hiring the vehicle on an ongoing basis.  They had not sold the car to their customer because they had legal ownership (title).  As there was no sale to their customer that contract between them and their customer was not a “sale” as required by the Sale of Goods Act and therefore the burden of proving defect or otherwise could not move away from their customer and onto our client.

b)    Whilst there was a contract of sale under the Sale of Goods Act between our client and the FC, the FC themselves could not benefit from this 6 month reversed burden of proof rule either.  Simply because such an additional right is available only to private consumers who buy and not to those buyers, such as FC’s, who buy cars from garages in the course of their trade or business.  

Something tells me that this is the start and not the end of this particular legal argument however!

Profit BoxDevelop your people like your business depends on it

What most people don’t know is that talent development doesn’t have to be complicated, high risk or expensive. Once they integrate key development stages, the results can be remarkable. Empower your team. Lead your industry. We’re your strategic learning partner, driving performance by moving skills forward.

Jason WilliamsLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Customer reneges on agreed not distance sale

Our member explained they do not offer a delivery service and do not engage in distance selling.

Consumer “Handcuffed” by Deduction for Use Settlement

Don’t sign any contract unless you are fully aware of its terms!

Double or nothing – Consumer’s claim dismissed!

The Claimant countered with a request for more than double the amount that our member had offered.

Non-refundable deposits – Where do you stand?

Relevant paperwork should be provided before payment is taken.

Used car warranties – What are you liable for?

If a fault is found to have been developing at the time of sale, this could become the trader’s responsibility to provide a remedy.

Distance Selling Regulations – A thing of the past?

The regulations only apply to consumer contracts, not business-to-business sales, and only apply to sales conducted at a distance.

Accepting Lowball Offers 

What are your legal obligations when a customer makes a significantly low offer which you ”jokingly” accept? Will it be legally binding?

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.