Help required - Bike repo

**festus** · 27th March 2007, 05:51

Again still have not read all comments, but (without debate about privacy acts yadda yadda) I'm suprised no-one here has not found this guy yet, i.e. cops, justice department, LTSA people who frequent this site??

or have you tracked down this liar?

Festus

**JimO** · 27th March 2007, 06:34

he is in aussie

**FROSTY:Me** · 27th March 2007, 08:23

Just a little point here
Theres 2 types of finance available to dealers nowadays
Recourse and Non recourse.
Recourse is how things used to be and the dealer was responsibble for the debtand have to organise getting the money from the customers.
NON recourse is the most common finance nowadays.
Basicly the bike shop acts as an agent for the finance company.
They are not responsible for the debt in any way once the bike has rolled off the showroom floor
Basicly folks if you are buying any motor vehicle privately do a security check on it BEFORE you hand over the cash.

**The_Dover** · 27th March 2007, 08:31

Originally Posted by FROSTY

Basicly folks if you are buying any motor vehicle privately do a security check on it BEFORE you hand over the cash.

especially if it's off a dodgy little irishman like frosty....

**mikey62** · 27th March 2007, 08:57

The rules (in laymans terms).The creditor (finance company) would have sent a notice to the last known address of the wanker. After 15 days they can instruct a repo agency. The Credit Repossession Act states the only times to carry out repo work is 6am-9pm Mon-Sat. Sunday and public holidays are out.

The repo guy probably found out the bike had been sold so he would have checked the motor registry centre, found Krustis name and address and went there. The repo agent would have had to produce a copy of the Pre-Repossession Notice as well as identification establishing he has authority to act on behalf of the creditor. The Privacy Act prohibits divulging too much info so the repo guy has a quandary as he either has to get the bike or the money from someone other than the wanker without giving away too much info.

Mrs Krusti could have told him to bugger off but the guy would have been back. I know you will all say that Krusti could have hidden the bike etc but in the end the bike would have been repo’d. And if you think you would have bullied the repo guy into getting off your property then your mistaken. Anyone who wilfully and forcibly obstructs an agent can be up for a fine of up to $10,000. The repo guy could also have gone to the cop shop, produced his paperwork and had them assist (we’ve done this before). It all sounds like the creditor or the repo agent are the bad guys but that’s why you have to do a VIR or check the Personal Property Security Register. Turn your thinking around. If you sold something and weren’t paid for it what would you do ?

Also, don’t think that as it’s a finance company (or bank) they can afford it. This kind of things happens quite a bit. What do you think would happen if companies wrote off hundreds of thousands of dollars for this type of thing ? No one could afford to buy things on H.P. cause the interest rates would be huge.

If the bike wasn’t worth fifteen grand ($7500 to the wanker plus another $7500 to the creditor) I would have enjoyed the bike (absolutely ferken thrashed it) while I had it and then given it back.

My 2 cents

**ManDownUnder** · 27th March 2007, 09:03

Originally Posted by The_Dover

especially if it's off a dodgy little irishman like frosty....

or a frosty little dodgyman like Dover?

**Mrs Busa Pete** · 27th March 2007, 09:06

Originally Posted by jimjim

he is in aussie

Check electrol rolls in Aussie if you know what part he is in.

**ManDownUnder** · 27th March 2007, 09:06

So... Krusti's immediate issue aside... who was this masked man that showed up on the doorstep, demanding money?

Who did he work for and was he operating on the fringes of his authority? Krusti - I fully expect you want to put this all behind you (shit I would!) but I'd love to know who the repo guy is, get an understanding of exactly what they did wrong and make sure they are held responsible for any strongarm BS they use.

Debt colection is fine - no problems at all.

Mafia collection techniques however...

**davereid** · 27th March 2007, 09:31

Originally Posted by mikey62

And if you think you would have bullied the repo guy into getting off your property then your mistaken. Anyone who wilfully and forcibly obstructs an agent can be up for a fine of up to $10,000.

Are you saying that if a repo agent shows up at my place snooping around looking for a vehicle to repo that I cant turf him off ?

**crazybigal** · 27th March 2007, 09:47

no they cant! only if it is the same bank. ie, national-national
it is up to you to get the money back from the person you paid it to.

Originally Posted by Forest

Sounds like you got a call-centre monkey.

They can definitely reverse a direct deposit. I have had to do this once before (through the National Bank).

Do you have an account manager you can speak to?

**vifferman** · 27th March 2007, 09:52

Originally Posted by mikey62

What do you think would happen if companies wrote off hundreds of thousands of dollars for this type of thing ? No one could afford to buy things on H.P. cause the interest rates would be huge.

Ha ha ha ha!!!

Good one, Dude!

News for you - a lot of the interest rates ALREADY huge! Credit card rates are what? 19 - 23%? And we made the mistake of enjoying interest free courtesy of GE Finance, paying only slightly more than the minimum payments each time, and are now getting hit with $100/month interest as a result. The way they went about it was really dodgy, as it wasn't evident that this was going to happen: no mention of interest rates, what our debt was, etc. Pricks. Yes, it was OUR responsibility to find this stuff out, but they made it very hard to do so.
If we continued with the minimum payments now, I have a suspicion that our debt to GE would actually GROW each month.

**Jantar** · 27th March 2007, 10:10

Originally Posted by mikey62

.... The repo agent would have had to produce a copy of the Pre-Repossession Notice as well as identification establishing he has authority to act on behalf of the creditor. The Privacy Act prohibits divulging too much info so the repo guy has a quandary as he either has to get the bike or the money from someone other than the wanker without giving away too much info....

The point here is that got Mrs Krusti to pay the entire amount outstanding on the bike, plus interest, plus collection charges. I do believe that legally the interest and collection charges can only be enforced against the person who signed the origional contract, and therefore the repo agent overstepped the mark on the amount he got Mrs Krusti to pay.

Originally Posted by mikey62

Mrs Krusti could have told him to bugger off but the guy would have been back. I know you will all say that Krusti could have hidden the bike etc but in the end the bike would have been repo’d. And if you think you would have bullied the repo guy into getting off your property then your mistaken. Anyone who wilfully and forcibly obstructs an agent can be up for a fine of up to $10,000. The repo guy could also have gone to the cop shop, produced his paperwork and had them assist (we’ve done this before).

Fine, but the bike wasn't on the property, so Mrs Krusti could have told him to bugger off without obstructing him in any way. Sure he could have come back with the cops, but the bike still wouldn't have been there.

Originally Posted by mikey62

It all sounds like the creditor or the repo agent are the bad guys ...

The manner in which this repo guy stood over Mrs Krusti does make him the bad guy. That is duress, and New Zealand law does make it illegal to get money through duress. Its considered the same as theft. There are legal methods, including repossession, but once again, THE BIKE WASN'T THERE.

**Patrick** · 27th March 2007, 12:05

Originally Posted by vifferman

Ha ha ha ha!!!

Good one, Dude!

News for you - a lot of the interest rates ALREADY huge! Credit card rates are what? 19 - 23%? And we made the mistake of enjoying interest free courtesy of GE Finance, paying only slightly more than the minimum payments each time, and are now getting hit with $100/month interest as a result. The way they went about it was really dodgy, as it wasn't evident that this was going to happen: no mention of interest rates, what our debt was, etc. Pricks. Yes, it was OUR responsibility to find this stuff out, but they made it very hard to do so.
If we continued with the minimum payments now, I have a suspicion that our debt to GE would actually GROW each month.

Simple math really... amount of loan divided by xx months on interest free equals the amount you need to pay monthly, interest free. Any less, or the minimum recommended amount, yep, you will be paying interest...

**vifferman** · 27th March 2007, 12:11

Originally Posted by Patrick

Simple math really... amount of loan divided by xx months on interest free equals the amount you need to pay monthly, interest free. Any less, or the minimum recommended amount, yep, you will be paying interest...

I guess that made me sound thick - I am actually reasonably good at maths (96% in School Cert. maths....). It was more a case of them not letting us know what the true interest rate was, and while we were paying during the interest-free period, they did not let us know things like what the principal / amount outstanding were. Also, we had two separate interest-free periods for different items, so it was a little complicated from our point of view when they were compounded on one statement.

But (however!) the most telling item is "Mechanic's Car Syndrome" - I'm married to an accountant, so our finances will naturally gravitate towards the chaotic...

I guess my point is this: GE (and I would imagine, many other financiers) seem to be deliberately obfuscating; they hook people into credit deals with offers of interest free and/or no deposit, and make the real details quite difficult to ascertain. Plus because most of these companies are overseas-owned, they have no real competition here, and charge very high interest rates compared to what you'd pay in Murka, Pomgolia, etc.
But I admit the bottom line is caveat emptor. I don't blame them for our financial position, but compared to other financial dealings we've entered into, GE seem very very good at smokescreens, when I thought the intent of the laws regarding disclosure were supposed to prevent this.

**imdying** · 27th March 2007, 13:13

Bahahahaahh, rubbish... you must have been able to work out weekly payments times the number of interest free weeks you were given??? Can't have a whole lot of sympathy for ya

Of course they're not going to help you work out what's best for you... they don't make money that way! At least you'll not get stung again