Do i have to pay ? Strange situation.

moneysavingmarrow

I would have thought that by even considering to claim that he owes nothing for the bike, the op is laying himself open to obtaining goods by deception, especially as the salesman has offered him a legitimate way of making the sale correct.

Oh. And by the way op. Dont be an a**ehole and one of those that make credit dearer for the rest of us. PAY WHAT YOU OWE!

DrScotsman

Snakeeyes21 wrote: »

No judge would rule in the favour of the bike shop without a valid signed credit agreement, what would stop the shop taking anybody to court claiming they owed money if they didnt have to prove an agreement was in place?

Sorry if anything I explain is stuff you already know, but a civil court is not like a criminal court. In a criminal court, the defendant is innocent until proven guilty, and has to be guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" for him to be declared guilty. In a civil court, it is not like that, it is based on "preponderance of evidence".

The claimant has proof that the motorbike was once in the hands of themselves, and is now in the hands of the OP - the V5 (or motorbike equivalent) should be enough for that. In addition, if they have CCTV then they can show the OP came in, filled in some documents, and left with a motorbike.

The claimant will tell the judge the version of events, that there was a problem with the credit agreement and that the OP was asked to sign a new one.

Now at this point, if the OP's defence is just "Everything they say is true, but I don't have to sign a new one", he is instantly liable. He has broken the implied contract between him and the dealer that he will pay one way or another - which is implied by the fact he now has the motorbike, the CCTV, and the V5. And assuming the OP isn't going to lie, that's all he can say, correct?

If the OP decides to lie and says "I already paid for it", since this is not a criminal trial the judge would want to see some sort of proof of payment, which after reading the court papers the OP should have brought. If he says "they didn't give me any" or "I lost it", then the judge would be very sceptical.

If the OP's defence was seriously "They gave it away to me", then the judge will find him liable. Based on "preponderance of evidence", the claimant is a dealer, who SELLS CARS, and the judge is not an idiot. Therefore this scenario is far too unlikely.

Any problems with that?

Fonz_2

DrScotsman wrote: »

Sorry if anything I explain is stuff you already know, but a civil court is not like a criminal court. In a criminal court, the defendant is innocent until proven guilty, and has to be guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" for him to be declared guilty. In a civil court, it is not like that, it is based on "preponderance of evidence".

The claimant has proof that the motorbike was once in the hands of themselves, and is now in the hands of the OP - the V5 (or motorbike equivalent) should be enough for that. In addition, if they have CCTV then they can show the OP came in, filled in some documents, and left with a motorbike.

The claimant will tell the judge the version of events, that there was a problem with the credit agreement and that the OP was asked to sign a new one.

Now at this point, if the OP's defence is just "Everything they say is true, but I don't have to sign a new one", he is instantly liable. He has broken the implied contract between him and the dealer that he will pay one way or another - which is implied by the fact he now has the motorbike, the CCTV, and the V5. And assuming the OP isn't going to lie, that's all he can say, correct?

If the OP decides to lie and says "I already paid for it", since this is not a criminal trial the judge would want to see some sort of proof of payment, which after reading the court papers the OP should have brought. If he says "they didn't give me any" or "I lost it", then the judge would be very sceptical.

If the OP's defence was seriously "They gave it away to me", then the judge will find him liable. Based on "preponderance of evidence", the claimant is a dealer, who SELLS CARS, and the judge is not an idiot. Therefore this scenario is far too unlikely.

Any problems with that?

Thank god for reason - all the chavs can stop getting excited about all the free stuff they could steal from society now

Rupert_Bear

oldie99 wrote: »

I bought a motorbike from a dealer in may. I purchased the bike on finance, i went through all the details that go along with this to buy the bike on finance. Anyway, i was told to expect a letter in a week or two with my schedule of payments. No letter was delivered and no payments were taken, i just thought it would be sent eventually, it wasn't.

The motorbike shop/dealer contacted me last week explaining that the finance deal was not completed (papers not sent off or something) and that i would have to come back in to sign a new agreement. I told them i would come in when i get a chance, but as i said that was last week so some advice is needed to sort this out.

Is there any chance that i will not have to pay for the bike as i did all they asked of me in the first place ? It is their mistake and the guy on the phone sounded very desperate and nervous when he contacted me over this, which also had me thinking it could be because he's worried there's nothing he/they can do.

Anyone who is clued up this sort of thing or knows of anywhere i could get some sound advice would be very much appreciated. Thanks.

Signed for or not you had the bike. Imagine you had sold a bike to a friend and their was a verbal agreement they would pay you in 1 month. The money was not forthcoming. The friend then turns around said there was nothing in writing and therefore refuses to pay. I a bet you would really feel p..d off.

Because it is a company you seem to think it is ok to get out paying. Go on do the decent thing.

leveller2911

I'm not really sure why we are still posting on this thread.Given that the OP only posted twice and has not been back leads me to believe that they are one of those horrible creatures that live under the bridge written about in fables of times gone by.......more commonly known as a "TROLL"

kittiej

All of this has made me wonder why anyone should bother to get a copy of their credit agreements, because all of the advice I see on these boards is get a copy of your credit agreement, but in this thread all that advice seems to be out of the window.

I'm confused now.

So if you don't get a copy of your agreement for any loan then you have to pay up regardless?

DrScotsman

This situation is different to others.

I don't know much about car finance, but judging by Treadmill's post...

Treadmill wrote: »

As soon as you sign an agrement is created, an agreement to exchange future earnings with a premium attached for the goods, its only the responsibility of the person signing to read it and sign it, its the responsibility of the Garage to exchange it for cash from the finance company who will charge a premium for releasing the cash straight away and risking default.

...the way it works is this. You have an implied contract with the dealer you can have the motorbike as long as either you or the finance company pays up for it. The credit agreement is not between you and the dealer, so it is completely irrelevant. The garage did make the mistake, correct, so because of their mistake they should compensate the OP for his loss, which I said above is the cost of his petrol and time. He has not lost the cost of the whole bike!

Vague analogy: What happens if you pay for something by cheque, and then the company you've paid lose the cheque. Do you think that means you get out of paying? While the company should compensate you for your losses (1st class stamp 39p, a tiny bit more for your time ), I'm pretty sure you'd still be liable for the payment

~Brock~

kittiej wrote: »

All of this has made me wonder why anyone should bother to get a copy of their credit agreements, because all of the advice I see on these boards is get a copy of your credit agreement, but in this thread all that advice seems to be out of the window.

I'm confused now.

So if you don't get a copy of your agreement for any loan then you have to pay up regardless?

Read what I put in post #23, very carefully, and your point may be answered.

Rednoseranter

I think in car/bike finance ownership isn't transferred to the customer its transferred to the finance house (once the dealer receives the funds from the lender) - the dealer hasn't received his funds, the bike will still be the property of the dealer - no loop hole to take advantage off, if the dealer doesn't receive either the funds or his property back its just theft.

kittiej

Thank you Brock

I would turn round and hand the bike back to them. I would think that if the dealer can't get their act together over paperwork then if something went wrong with the bike they'd be as equally rubbish.

Tbh I wouldn't want to run the risk of the original credit agreement turning up once they tidied their desk up. Very dodgy practice iyam.

I am assuming that whilst payments weren't taken you saved the money up, therefore buy something else for cash.

I would want to be dropping that dealer like a hot spud right now.