Scoob99

iTrader: (1)

Turns out that the guy who owned it before my son payed with a rubber cheque, and he thought he could just come and take the car back, yeah right, on your bike pal, phoned the police whilst he was here who told me that he cannot take the car because the deal was between the previous owner and not my son, what a **** letting a car go before the cheque had cleared, anyways turns out the police told him if he takes my sons car he will be arrested for theft
Cheers
Colin

Wish

iTrader: (2)

I cant belive the dealer thought he could do that !!!

What an Idiot.
Merry Christmas Mr Motor Trader ! Ha,

McMiata Man

I could be wrong here, but in Scotland I believe the motor trader will be entitled to the car back.

Basically, your son has taken posession of a stolen car (unknowingly of course) but since the initial cost was not paid by the previous owner, the car was not legally his to sell.

The police would have no idea about that part of the law and would have told the guy to bugger off, but I would look into the situation just in case.

Hope that's all crap, I only did a wee bit of Contract Law at College.

Scoob99

iTrader: (1)

Spoke to the Police and they said because the guy who owned it before my son, the debt lies with him, poor little sod didn't know although we did have the car HPI checked first and it came up clear so everything checked out OK, but apprantly the guy has done this 3 or 4 times, it is now in the hands of the police who said my son has nothing to worry about, I hope the police get to him before my other son or the car dealer does.
Cheers
Colin

yoza

Not in direct responce to the oringal thread.

But can someone correct me if Im wrong.

If you purchase a car in good faith, pay up with the cash, and then find out it has outstanding finance. You are the new owner of the debt. Hence the popularity of a HPI check.

Therefore if the dealer in this case sold the car to whoever, who payed with a rubber cheque, then the rubber cheque man sold the car on to Colins son, is dealer the new owner of the debt?

My next port of call if I was the dealer would be to the rubber cheque man. To relieve him of Colins lads cash.

Hope your lad isnt going to get grief over this.

Later Yoza

Edited to say that 3 posts appeared before I sent this one, and now makes more sence.

[Edited by yoza - 12/24/2003 9:30:38 AM]

NotoriousREV

I think the only time the car can be repossessed from the new owner is if finance is outstanding because the car belongs to the finance company until the finance is cleared.

If it's just a case of a rubber cheque then it's no dice for the dealer.

hixton

you all know nothing!
I suggest you go to some night class`s in law

Scoob99

iTrader: (1)

No outstanding finace on the car, it's just the previous owner paid with a rubber cheque, My question is the dealer should have not let the car go until the cheque had cleard, but he let him drive it away their and then, As I said before we had the car HPI checked and it came back clear, and my son done the deal with the owner of the car not knowing any of this.
Cheers
Colin

RS2 JIM

iTrader: (5)

The car in that case should belong to your son.
The legal title of the vehicle passes from the dealer to the first buyer even tho he paid with a bouncy cheque as, no doubt, he received an invoice or receipt from the dealer. The dealer now has to take the first buyer to court for the value of the cheque and try to get the cash. The sale between your son and the first buyer should stand.

This is all from my law classes a few years ago so could be a little shady but i'm pretty sure that's the case.

HTH

James

Scooby96

Depends if there was intent by the first buyer to obtain the car by deception (ie theft).

It could be argued that whoever sold it to your son was not entitled to do so as he/she wasnt the owner due to the theft.

BTW it is an offence to knowingly issue a cheque that will bounce however its rarely used.

Scoob99

iTrader: (1)

Thanks James, thats pretty much what the Police said on the phone, don't get me wrong I feel sorry for the guy, but at the end of the day he should have waited for the cheque to clear.
Cheers
Colin

RS2 JIM

iTrader: (5)

Yeah, it was a tad short-sighted of the dealer not to wait for the cheque to clear. I do hope the 1st buyer is prevented from doing this again as he can't really be prosecuted by the police as such and will most likely get away scot free. I presume he gave false details to both your son and the dealer? He may well also ensure he has no assets in his name incase he ever does find himself in court as, that way, he'll not have to repay the debt fully and will not have anything seized by bailiffs.

James

Scoob99

iTrader: (1)

James, the stupid thing is we know where he lives and so does the dealer, I just hope the police get him first for his own safety.
Cheers
Colin

RS2 JIM

iTrader: (5)

Haha!!! what a fool! Oh well, hope he enjoys a spot of traction over the crimbo preiod.....let's just hope the casualty dept takes care of the hundreds of festive drinking related injuries first......

James

Sub97

Hi,

I dont know how much your son paid for the car, but when I bought mine in the summer and had it HPI checked, I was told part of the HPI check was insurance for up to 6 months (I think) that if the car turned out to be stolen, write off etc then the HPI company would pay me what Id paid for the car. Just thought your son might want to look into this mate.

Cheers

Steve

47 NAT

Out of curiosty how did he find out where your son was? Surely the guy that bounced the cheque with the trader told him, so they must of spoke to him?

The trader must of been daft to let it go without cleared funds ....what a ****

Nath