Do i have to pay ? Strange situation.

[Deleted User]

Treadmill wrote: »

As far as I can tell without a signed credit agreement you do not owe them anything, its not theft as the bike has ben signed over to you so don't worry about that.

Its an error in your favour, make the most of it

Why do people always obsess about signatures and credit agreements?

You have possession of the bike. That's enough for a judge to rule against you in a contractual dispute. Try claiming it was a 'gift' from a shop (which would be your only argument) and sit back to watch everyone else laugh. Oh, not forgetting any CCTV footage of you signing a credit agreement, any calls recorded to a finance company, plus any other paperwork the store may have.

Just because you didn't sign a credit agreement doesn't mean there is no contract for you to make payment. Contracts can be verbal, or created by a pattern of behaviour. Shop gives product to customer. Customer seen on CCTV signing paperwork. Shop - in the 'normal course of trade' - is known to be an organisation that makes money by giving items to customers in exchange for money/credit - a judge would infer that there is an onus on your to pay, quite readily!

You've got the bike, so be a grown-up and pay for it!

PNPSUKNET

brightonman123 wrote: »

how could they even get to court / ccj, without a signed contract?

very sirprised OP got goodds to take away, before loan confirmed.

dealer's loss, though i guess that means ownership isnt provable, either.. when it comesto selling on?

anyone can take someone to court, once a court issues a judgement for money it records as a ccj. even as they guy is the registered keeper he is not the legal owner as its never been paid for.

reehsetin

Deleted_User wrote: »

Just because you didn't sign a credit agreement doesn't mean there is no contract for you to make payment. Contracts can be verbal, or created by a pattern of behaviour. Shop gives product to customer. Customer seen on CCTV signing paperwork. Shop - in the 'normal course of trade' - is known to be an organisation that makes money by giving items to customers in exchange for money/credit - a judge would infer that there is an onus on your to pay, quite readily!

You've got the bike, so be a grown-up and pay for it!

as much as i hate the fact this can happen it's not as simple as that as shown by this
if it was just a bike purchase and they didnt take payment would fully expect they would be able to cover their money as even though there was nothing written a contract was formed. But credit agreements are different they do require a contract! I would quite easily think that the shop could take him to court for payment of the bike but not force him to sign a credit agreement

Treadmill

If you flogged a motorbike on ebay, and a bloke came around to collect it and gave you a check in payment, and you let him take away the bike, but you lost the cheque before banking it, would you have any recourse to claim against him or get him arrested for not paying ?

Its the same thing, you might want him to do the honourable thing and cut you another cheque, he might be a nice bloke and cut you another cheque, but if he doesn't then you are in a bit of a pickle.

In the OP case think of the credit agreement as a cheque, which it pretty much is, the only difference is the funds come from the finance company and not directly from the buyer. The dealer should have made sure the finance was cleared before releasing the goods as a private seller should wait for the cheque to clear before releasing the goods.

its an error in the favour of the OP

PNPSUKNET

dont be suprissed if you do get a letter from the court

~Brock~

This is simples!

It doesn't matter is there is or isnt a credit agreement. There is a contract for the supply of a bike at an agreed price, and I assume that there is a signed order form or invoice that can prove this.

You have the bike but the consideration has not been paid.

Sure, you dont have to go back and sign another credit agreement.....the alternative is to pay cash.

And to those who are advocating just keeping the bike and claiming it as a gift, I really hope such advice comes to haunt you in the future when you screw up over something. As another poster has said, this will have been a simple mistake by another working bloke. What the hell have we all become eh??? Is this what Martin would advocate?

Treadmill

Martin would call it a loophole and tell you to take advantage of it

~Brock~

Treadmill wrote: »

Martin would call it a loophole and tell you to take advantage of it

Martin would call it theft and would know full well that he would be mauled in the press if he was seen to publicly advocate it.

There is no loophole. The lack of a credit agreement is irrelevant. The goods haven't been paid for. Why do you find this concept difficult?

Gillianh2

I cannot believe that you are serioulsy considering not signing the new agreement. You have been using the bike and benefitting from not making any payments at all on it for the past 5 Months!!!!

You owe the shop the money for the bike. This could be enough to push this company out of buisness. Businessess are closing all the time, due to late payers etc. Just sign the agreement, or return the bike simples!

Treadmill

~Brock~ wrote: »

Martin would call it theft and would know full well that he would be mauled in the press if he was seen to publicly advocate it.

There is no loophole. The lack of a credit agreement is irrelevant. The goods haven't been paid for. Why do you find this concept difficult?

Payment was offered in the form of a signature on a credit agreement which is as good as cash, If the OP had paid cash which was subsequently lost by the Bike shop, would you expect the OP to pay again ?

Money is created when people sign credit agreements, in this case, money was created and then lost through incompetence.