Legal advice needed!

[mynameis]

I wondered that too - if I had to guess, probably sending the Overdue Notices, then the Final Notices, then the "Don't make us break your legs" Notices, and then putting to their baliffs. Then tracking down the car.

Yeap probably.

Another thing is why would a finance company use the car they are financing as a security when they know cars can be sold.

Frosty might be able to throw some light on this.

[Mully]

Also, does it actually have money owing or does it just have a security against it? .

Would they have repo'd it if there'd only been a security on it, and no money owing?

Doesn't sound right.

[neels]

Would they have repo'd it if there'd only been a security on it, and no money owing?

Doesn't sound right.

Didn't see anything in the first post about it being repo'ed, just that he'd found out there was money owing which is how it looks on a carjam report if the paperwork hasn't been done.

If there's money owed, then he's fucked, if it's just an old security then it can be cleared with a phone call.

[Mully]

Didn't see anything in the first post about it being repo'ed, just that he'd found out there was money owing which is how it looks on a carjam report if the paperwork hasn't been done.

If there's money owed, then he's fucked, if it's just an old security then it can be cleared with a phone call.

Oh yeah, didn't see that. Well spotted.

I figured out the angry phone call came when they repo'd it.

Good point.

[FJRider]

I wouldn't give him the finger, a tad bit over the top. It's a moral delima as well. If I was the seller I'd somewhat feel slightly responsible for his problem and try and help him out as much as possible.

People cock up, shit happens you never know what brick wall you'd hit someday.

Why would YOU feel slightly responsible ... the car was sold "in good faith" ... The buyer should have made the appropiate checks {as should have the seller when HE bought it} and the problem would not have arisen {for him}

The problem was avoidable ... just too lazy to check... and his ass gets bitten ...

May this be a warning to OTHERS ... check ...

[mynameis]

Why would YOU feel slightly responsible ... the car was sold "in good faith" ... The buyer should have made the appropiate checks {as should have the seller when HE bought it} and the problem would not have arisen {for him}

The problem was avoidable ... just too lazy to check... and his ass gets bitten ...

May this be a warning to OTHERS ... check ...

Exactly, you answered your own question. I assume the original poster didn't check himself hence he wasn't aware of it. If he would have he either wouldn't have bought the car or sorted it out before buying it.

But he got it, used it and sold it after x months.

But if someone responsible did the check and made him aware of it then it would be his problem today not the new owners aye. Personal thing I wouldn't shaft him and say pee off nothing to do with me I'd help. Simple.

[onearmedbandit]

Yeap probably.

Another thing is why would a finance company use the car they are financing as a security when they know cars can be sold.

Frosty might be able to throw some light on this.

Other than getting a lein on a home what other security could you offer that couldn't be sold? I was in car sales for 11yrs, the car is always the security, and when dealing with first tier lenders you typically don't get problems, as the criteria is higher. However, the lower end finance companies are not beyond employing gang members etc to prompt slow payments, or track down a missing car. And despite the car being sold, you can guarantee the finance company is either seeking redress from the person on the finance form or the dealer (recourse or non-recourse finance. One means the it isn't the dealers responsibility, the other means the dealer owes the money). I know of one dealership (no longer operating afaik) who had ignition killers in their vehicles that were financed to extremely high risk payers, along with GPS. If any payment was missed the cars ignition was remotely disabled and the repo agent sent to collect it. He found cars (that were sold in ChCh) all over NZ.

[Lucy]

There are still finance companies?

[YellowDog]

As has been said, he was a mug to buy it without checking. You were a mug too

One point, whenever I uy a car or bike or anything I get two copies of the receipt signed by both parties which allways states that the seller is the lawful owner and it is free of any financial liability to third any parties.

Provided you haven't signed something similar just give the guy the utmost sympathy and gratitude for taking it off your hands. "I didn't know guv. Honest!"

[Mully]

Just out of curiousity (cos I'm only a bush lawyer, so I need more information) - if the OP had been asked specifically by the buyer whether there was a security on the vehicle and said no, would be be liable for punishment for misrepresentation?

[Tank]

money is in the bank, money is in the bank, money is in the baaaaaaaaaaaaank, money is in the bank, oooooooo, money is in the baaaaaaaank....

Steve

Are you retarded? I don't see anything funny about it.

It just shows the morals of the guy (unless it happens to him of course). Yet another warning to anyone who ever deals with DB.

[Little Miss Trouble]

Asuming for a moment that the reason that he's pissed of is that he's now trying to on sell the car himself & a potential buyer is the one who's discovered the security registered on the car...

First port of call is to ring the company who holds the security interest. As someone has already said it may just be a residual 'I'm too lazy to fill in the forms properly & release the security' thing on the part of someone within the company (As was the case with the bike I've just bought) in which case it can all be sorted withing 24hrs.

Or, they may not even know the vehicle has been on sold & will then go through the process of tracking down the previous owner to get their payment so they can release it.

However, if the company have tracked the car down & repo'd it then its a case of, too bad, so sad & buyer beware etc

[dave_a]

car has not been repod, he is trying to sell it and someone has done a check on it.

I called GE but they couldnt tell me anything about it. who,how much owing etc etc

[EJK]

Bring him to the forum. Let us be the judge.

[onearmedbandit]

Just out of curiousity (cos I'm only a bush lawyer, so I need more information) - if the OP had been asked specifically by the buyer whether there was a security on the vehicle and said no, would be be liable for punishment for misrepresentation?

It is up to the buyer to establish whether there is money owing or not. I remember one example where a major franchise down here traded a vehicle, salesperson only asked if there was money owing. It wasn't until they went to sell the car to another dealer that they discovered a major security on it, that they now owned.

car has not been repod, he is trying to sell it and someone has done a check on it.

I called GE but they couldnt tell me anything about it. who,how much owing etc etc

They won't unfortunately, they will only release that info to anyone listed on the original agreement. Nothing to do with you anyway, your responsibility ended when you sold the car, and at the time the worst they could do is repo the vehicle.

I don't mean to sound harsh, but it is ultimately the buyers responsibiity to be careful, you sold the vehicle in good faith, he should've checked before buying.