I’m looking for some advice urgently please..

jd87

Chippy Minton says don't bother with the small claims court, but if there is no other option then it must be worth a try. County court judges come up with all kinds of decisions and I'm sure if the ruling is in your favour then you will get something.

Quentin

Don't waste money on a solicitor over this. If you think the vendor has the funds to pay you, then you can use the small claim court yourself.

The fees (which the defendant would be ordered to pay you on top of your claim if you win the case) will be £340 to issue the claim, plus a further £335 if there is a defence submitted and the matter goes to court. But note that if the defendant cannot pay, even if you win, your fees are non refundable from the court.

Herr_Schmitt

When you HPi'd the car, did you put the serial number and date of issue from the V5 in?

Premier_2

longy79 wrote: »

advice on whether any solicitors or someone who specialises in this problem who could maybe help me on whether i should pursue a claim

thanks

Almost any solicitor should be able to help you with this matter.

Be aware that if you try and pursue this in small claims, you won't be able to recover legal costs but I don't think you can as the claim is well above the normal £5000 limit.

Definitely get a solicitor who will advise the best way to make a claim which will also allow you to get costs awarded should you win.

The first question you need to ask yourself is even if you win judgement, can the defendant afford to pay you? If they can't, then there really is no point wasting more money obtaining a judgement you can't enforce.

shown73

In theory, the defendant should have at least £15,500.....

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

I think the OP first of all needs to find out whether the police think the vendor was an unwitting victim or is the culprit.

If its the latter then he should wait until he is convicted of the crime as getting money back will be easier then. In theory at least. Whether assets/cash exist to settle it is another question.

The HPI indemnity I suspect came up clean due to the quality of the fraud and the fact that incorrect details were being HPI'd in relation to that car.

If there is other sort of insurance then you need to claim on that.

Thunderbird_2

longy79 wrote: »

....., i hpi'd it inputting chassis number and reg and both came up clear,........

I assume that the HPI company should be liable because you did put the Chassis number not the fake reg only. I could be wrong though!

Good luck mate.

foreverold

This is horrible. If it's any consolation I am there too at the moment. My only saving grace is that I had a car to part exchange and I reported it stolen within 6 hours of exchanging a deal to get a new car, so have some recourse with my insurance company. In your scenario your best bet is to ask the police to release the vehicle to you under the Police Property Act. You will be asked to sign a retention certificate which essentially states that you acknowledge the car is under investigation and you agree not to sell it etc. This should get the car back to you whilst you fight the insurance co.

foreverold

foreverold wrote: »

This is horrible. If it's any consolation I am there too at the moment. My only saving grace is that I had a car to part exchange and I reported it stolen within 6 hours of exchanging a deal to get a new car, so have some recourse with my insurance company. In your scenario your best bet is to ask the police to release the vehicle to you under the Police Property Act. You will be asked to sign a retention certificate which essentially states that you acknowledge the car is under investigation and you agree not to sell it etc. This should get the car back to you whilst you fight the insurance co.

Also Google Police Property Act . . .under section 5 it gets interesting as the Police are not to act as Bailiffs therefore they shouldn't really be seizing property if it's not under investigation. Where they do that it's really just to cover there !!!!

Premier_2

foreverold wrote: »

Also Google Police Property Act . . .under section 5 it gets interesting as the Police are not to act as Bailiffs therefore they shouldn't really be seizing property if it's not under investigation. Where they do that it's really just to cover there !!!!

The Police haven't acted as a bailiff. They have taken possession of stolen goods in order to return them to the rightful owner.

Unfortunately the OP has no right to the vehicle - the con artist it was obtained didn't own it in the first place.