Author: Dennis Chapman
Published: August 5, 2010
Reading time: 2 minutes
This article is 11 years old.
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.
Vehicle repairers have a very useful tool in their armory which can allow them, in certain circumstances to withhold the release of a vehicle if payment for the repair is not made. This in legal jargon is called ‘exercising a lien’.
There are however, limitations.
a) The vehicle must have been improved or repaired. A simple diagnosis wouldn’t qualify but to charge a battery would. Storage charges would not qualify.
b) There must have been continuity of possession. If a vehicle is released and then returns for more work, a new lien from the previous work cannot be imposed.
Normally there is not a problem establishing the person who left the vehicle for repair has authority to create the lien. However, some complications can arise when a vehicle is owned by, say, a finance company. The finance company may attempt to exclude the creation of a lien by an express term in the agreement. However, there have been cases where, it is in the control of the driver under the finance agreement to have repairs carried out but any express clause prohibiting a lien is not brought to the attention of the repairer then the finance company cannot rely on that clause stopping the repairer creating a lien.