ING, False Invoice as part exchange on Agreement

Vinbri

I took out an agreement with ING in 2006 for the purchase of a car that would finish in 2010. I looked at the agreement to see when it would actually terminate, and noted the part where a part exchange had been entered into the agreement "£950" I was told by the seller (not ING) this was the paper work procedure to avoid a deposit.
I signed the agreement but had no knowledge of the following.

I have since found out via ING that an invoice issued, in my name, without my agreement for the exchange for a Hyundai no registration stated had accompanied the agreement. We own a Hyundai so I assume this is the vehicle that is supposed to have been exchanged. At the time of the agreement, the Hyundai would have had a value of approx £3000.00.

I am very annoyed that this invoice was issued in my name without my knowledge. :mad:

I stopped that payments for the last few months of the agreement, and I have been in correspondence with ING who say the agreement is valid, and are now taking action against me - SO THE QUESTIONS ARE:

Is the agreement valid?
Do I have any recall?

From some advice I have been given, the agreement is not enforceable, I have no idea if this is true, but ING will not move an inch to settle.

Thanks in advance

ILW

Bit confused.
Are you saying they gave you a technical trade in of £950.00 but did not take the car off you? If so I cannot see what the problem is.

Vinbri

No physical exchanged of a vehicle occurred. It is only when I queried the exchange did I find that the invoice had been issued to ING.
Just recieved in todays post a Default Notice from ING to recover the Car?

ILW

Vinbri wrote: »

No physical exchanged of a vehicle occurred. It is only when I queried the exchange did I find that the invoice had been issued to ING.
Just recieved in todays post a Default Notice from ING to recover the Car?

That will be because you have stopped making payments. Still cannot see the relevance of this trade in invoice.

BenL

So the dealer helped you out, saving you handing over a vehicle in part ex and not requiring a deposit.

Guy in the pub said its not enforceable so you stopped making payments.

ING will have reported your non payment to the credit reference companies, served you a default notice and will be taking your car soon.

They will sell the car, maybe for less than you owe them. You will owe them money for the difference and have no car and a reduced ability to borrow money on credit.

I'd get paying them the back installments you have kept to one side and make arrangements to get the default cancelled and carry on with the agreement until 2010.

LeeSouthEast

I'm really not seeing the issue here, other than you've knackered your credit rating for 6 years over a few months of payments?

mabski

either way you look at it something dishonest has occurred and i would certainly see if this has made your agreement unenforcable.
as for the ING reposessing the vehicle i doubt very much that they could with the amount that you have already paid against the agreement and they have no rights whatsoever without obtaining a court order first

~Brock~

It is not unknown for dealers to 'manufacture' deposits or part exchanges to get around an individual lender's acceptance criteria. The question you should ask is 'how have i been affected by this?'

The answer is that you haven't been affected by it at all.

When questioning the enforceability of the agreement the terms that should be stated and correct include the Amount of Credit and information about the Interest rate and Charges. None of these would have been any different without the deposit because the price of the car would have changed accordingly. Whilst it is certainly a bit of sharp practice by the dealer (against the lender, not you) a court would be able to enforce it.

In the case of a HP agreement, the deposit would have actually worked in your favour because it would have counted towards the amount needed to be paid before you could terminate.

mabski wrote: »

either way you look at it something dishonest has occurred and i would certainly see if this has made your agreement unenforcable.
as for the ING reposessing the vehicle i doubt very much that they could with the amount that you have already paid against the agreement and they have no rights whatsoever without obtaining a court order first

Don't really agree on this one. Put yourself in the lenders shoes. If there is less than a year to go on the agreement then the car could well be worth more than the balance outstanding. If the customer stops paying, for whatever reason, the easiest way to get paid would be to recover the car and sell it.

Don't be fooled by the court order requirement - these are issued quite easily, and simply add another cost to the balance outstanding.

mabski

after the amount the poster has already paid the car is more his than the lenders so no court would issue an reposession order.
all they can do is trash his credit report which has most proberbly already happened and pass it to a dca so some threat monkey can chase him for the money

Vinbri

Thanks for the input.
Details of payment. I owe about £1000.00 off a £10,000 agreement, the car would be worth more than what is owed. Paid about £9k
I take on board all of what you have said, still feel there as been some mallpractice at my expense. I have offered to settle with ING but they will not even reply to letters.

~Brock~

mabski wrote: »

after the amount the poster has already paid the car is more his than the lenders so no court would issue an reposession order.
all they can do is trash his credit report which has most proberbly already happened and pass it to a dca so some threat monkey can chase him for the money

Depending on the type of agreement, the car is 100% the lenders until the final payment is made and title passes. They may grant only a suspended order, depending on the pleadings of the OP, but otherwise would grant possession often as a matter of course.