CAB refuse DRO.

jimmyjoker

wba31 wrote: »

I hate to say this but I think you're missing the point of the DRO intermediaries research, the rules of the DRO etc. You now should not just lie about receiving money for the car, any intermediary worth their salt would then be asking you what you did with the money, they may ask for evidence showing it paid to you and evidence of it's subsequent expenditure.
I totally agree with you here, not worth it whatever the outcome.
in the first instance, your daughter should have been honest about the car in your name being hers,
Contrary to immorals post, that is not the case. It was in her partners name.
it would have stopped her DRO,
No it would not, because it was never registered to her.
but for you now, you could have got her case notes to show that she is accepting ownership of the car so it's not yours.
You are going by what immoral has told you.........not from what I have posted.
For you both to have a DRO and there is an overvalue car in the middle of you is not right, one of you is eligible and one of you isnt.
You really need to read this thread yourself, not judging/advising by what immoral has told you.

For me you have signed the car into your daughter's name? can you prove that she PURCHASED the car in the first place (when the vehicle first came into ownership of the family).
Please read the thread. Her partner brought the car. You have been seriously mis-informed.
If so, that proves that the car isnt and never was yours, and you should be able to do a DRO with that.
HOWEVER if your daughter's DRO is still running,
Which it isnt.
now the car is registered in her name she has a duty (and failure to do so can be dealt with by way of prosecution, she has signed a form stating this) to inform the Insolvency Service of the ownership of the car.
Not applicable.
It may well be that despite Parker's valuing the car over £1000, a reputable trader may say "realistically in todays market its worth £950..." get that in writing and signed by mr trader with his company headed paper, and the IS will consider that evidence when deciding whether the DRO needs to be revoked or not.
I spoke with Mr Trader and he is going to value the car tomorrow and give me a written headed quote.
If her DRO is now finished,
Yes it has.
she has dodged a fat one.
No she has NOT because she has done nothing out of order/illegal/immoral. You have obviously relied on immorals PM/info to you and not read the whole of this thread.
If you bought the car in the first instance for her,
Why are you being so hypothetical, if you had read my thread/posts you would not be saying all this?
then you have undersold the asset, and a DRO may be revoked if you apply. If you claim to receive monies for the sale of the vehicle to your daughter, I as an intermediary will want to know what you have done with it. You can keep £300 for yourself, but in element the rest of it should be split pro-rata between all the debts to be scheduled in the DRO. If not, then you have still disposed of an asset because the sum of money will be missing...
As above, Im getting bored now.

Please read my thread and my comments. You have been seriously mis-informed by someone to be making comments/questions like that !!!!!.

wba31

jimmyjoker wrote: »

What on earth are you talking about? I am not one bit amused or impressed by that comment, infact I would go as far to say, it could be read as an accusation but you cleverly put a "?" at the end.

First half of your username is very apt. Do you go around the site looking for immoral posts and if you cant find one then try to create one?. You need to read more carefully before asking a stupid question/accusing a member of goodness knows what.

If you had been bothered to read the first post in detail then you would have seen that my daughters partner brought the car, registered it in his name, parted company with my daughter, then eventually signed the car over to me. My daughter or her DRO is irrespective of this.

You should pay more attention and get your facts correct before going round posting those kind of comments. I have already pointed out how suspect this V5 transaction could/and does look for my DRO but its the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth however it may appear.

I am willing to draw a line under this right now, I have only come here to get the best advise possible and dont need any further aggro. Feel free to delete these posts if you feel the same.

Im afraid I have to stick up for Immoral in this, in my time of posting on this thread Immoral has acted as nothing but highly experienced and fair DRO intermediary. If we as intermediaries are not wary, careful and seeking of the 100% truth in all these situations, it could actually be our jobs on the line if we are seen to turn a blind eye to something serious.
Only you know the truth about this situation, but I suggest you consider accusing someone of being immoral when you yourself have said you may lie to simply get the DRO to go through

wba31

jimmyjoker wrote: »

Please read my thread and my comments. You have been seriously mis-informed by someone to be making comments/questions like that !!!!!.

I am not mis-informed, your story for me has lacked consistency in how you have said you may lie about receiving money for the car in order to force an order through.
If i was against you in any way I would not have told you how simple it could be for your DRO to be successful.
I talk hypothetically to cover every angle so should something slightly different to how it appears here, you know how any advisor is looking at it.
If you dont want our advice, do not post on here. Had there been an issue which meant you werent able to do a DRO, between us we would have saved you £90, as it isnt refunded on any order refused, as it stands we have all got to the bottom of what you need to do, so you're free to go ahead now you know what to do about the car valuation (which isn't important for you) but just getting evidence that someone else bought it.

I look forward to your thanks for our help once your DRO is in place

caz2003uk

jimmyjoker wrote: »

The truth is suspicious and a white lie would IMO have been better. I went to see C.A.B and I ticked all the boxes for acceptance of a DRO.

I forgot at interview to inform the advisor about my daughters car being registered to me, so a few days later via e-mail I told them the truth. The truth is that my daughters previous o/h brought a car and registered it in his name and they later parted company. He agreed to sign over the car to me because my daughter was under a DRO with the debt he had left them in. She uses the car to take their child to school etc.

I have never been named on the insurance, owned the car or maintained it etc. She has the only 2 insurance policies to prove I am not a named driver, also it states that the car is registered by a family member. I saw things coming to a head with a debt so I told my daughter to transfer ownership to herself. This was done a week before my CAB interview which in itself I now know looks a bit suss.

And now a DRO will not be supported by CAB advisor because I have sold a veichle in the last 2 years so dont qualify for DRO.

I myself have always seen and had excellent advice from both immoral and wba concerning DRO's and so have many many others on this forum!

I have put in bold a section from your first post which has led me to read into it that:

Your daughter was subject to a DRO and then her and her ex split up he registered the car in your name instead of your daughters to stop her from having her DRO revoked. You also admit that you never owned the car so that would mean from your post that your daughter being the only user(as per your mention of who was insured) would have presumably been the owner although not the registered keeper (as stated in the v5 the registered keeper is not necessarily the owner)

So in theory your daughter did in fact own a car (through being given to her via your registered name) that was above the restriction of £1000 by the rules of the DRO she was subject to!

Now you are wanting to do a DRO you have passed the car into your daughters name now she has no restriction on her-so you are not seen to own a car over the £1000 threshold!

I don't mean for this to come across in a harsh way just wanted to point out how your post read as I'm sure it did to the DRO intermediaries providing you with free advice based on the information YOU have given.

jimmyjoker

And I have not come here to fall out with other people, especially advisors of your quality.

Again, I have told you the truth and TBH do not blame CAB advisor or immoral for being inquisitive and laying it on the line to me but it does appear to me that immoral is being judgmental and with my mind in turmoil over the preesure I couldnt help but be deffensive.

I sincerly hope you will show me the way forward, if not then no hard feelings. Thanks for your input and immorals even though I didnt know she was on my side.

Im so sorry if I offended anyone but I felt I was (wrongly) being offended while all I was doing is telling you all the truth. Dont matter no more.

Thankyou to everyone for all their input.advice. Take care out there.

jimmyjoker

caz2003uk wrote: »

Your daughter was subject to a DRO and then her and her ex split up he registered the car in your name instead of your daughters to stop her from having her DRO revoked.
No she was not subject to a DRO at that time. Im sorry but you are totally wrong. He brought the car probably 1 year before they split up. He kept ownership of it and in the end threatened to to sell it. Thats when I stepped in and asked him to do the decent thing.

It appears you are also mis-led on this thread, maybe its me not explaining my fully or something. TBH Im gutted right now and not sure if I care anymore. Think what you want, it matters not my dear.

Good luck in life.

caz2003uk

jimmyjoker wrote: »

Good luck in life.

I was under the impression she was subject to a DRO as you said and I quote:

He agreed to sign over the car to me because my daughter was under a DRO with the debt he had left them in.

I presumed that meant she was in a DRO at the time, I don't really understand why if she wasn't under DRO restrictions the car wasn't registered straight to her in the first place as it is her car after all?

I hope you see where I'm coming from as the story keeps changing slightly! I'm not having a go etc as I said before I didn't want it to come across harsh I'm just trying to understand! I have been where you are now, with the daunting decision to under tKe insolvency procedures so I know how hard it is hence if we can understand fully what it is you mean we can at least then attempt to help you! As it stands the facts written in this thread are not consistent hence our confusion over your situation

john10001

caz2003uk wrote: »

Can I just point something out....being the registered keeper does not make you the owner of the car!!

It even says so on the registration documents!

Would this help the OP considering in the OP she/he stated the car was registered in her name but was her daughters car?

Caz makes an excellent point on this. You can be a registered keeper of a car without being the owner.

I don't know if you received any money for the car or not, but from the small amount I read I haven't seen anything about that only that your daughter is the user of it and I presume owner, just that you have previously been the registered keeper.

I imagine a lot of dad's up and down the country may be the registered keeper of vehicles that they don't actually own but belong to their daughters.

If the above is the case, you haven't actually sold anything or transferred ownership as that already previously was owned by your daughter, all you have done is transfer whom the registered keeper of the vehicle is.

wba31

jimmyjoker wrote: »

And I have not come here to fall out with other people, especially advisors of your quality.

Again, I have told you the truth and TBH do not blame CAB advisor or immoral for being inquisitive and laying it on the line to me but it does appear to me that immoral is being judgmental and with my mind in turmoil over the preesure I couldnt help but be deffensive.

I sincerly hope you will show me the way forward, if not then no hard feelings. Thanks for your input and immorals even though I didnt know she was on my side.

Im so sorry if I offended anyone but I felt I was (wrongly) being offended while all I was doing is telling you all the truth. Dont matter no more.

Thankyou to everyone for all their input.advice. Take care out there.

I apologise if my tone was off, and hope your are clearer now on the little thing you need to do to prove to an intermediary that the car was only signed to you for the reason it was, and you can get your debt solution in place ASAP.
If you need any further advice we would be happy to help you, just please understand that we will always seek to see the big picture to not give you any incorrect advice.


In case your CAB wont help you again, try ringing Step Change Debt Charity (formerly CCCS) on 0800 138 1111 or National Debtline on 0808 808 4000 and they can administer the DRO for you

immoral_angeluk

Blimey.. You ask a question and it all kicks off....

OP, I'm a DRO intermediary, it's my job to ask questions and make sure I'm aware of anything that could even vaguely impact on a dro. I apologise if you took my question in any way other than trying to get to the bottom of it all and it certainly wasn't meant to cause any offence. Again, if I misread I apologise.

I'm certainly not being judgemental. At the end of the day I don't know you and was just going by the initial post.

Either way you need to be VERY careful when it comes to transferring ownership and assets either during or in the 2 years prior to any dro. You have a legal obligation to declare any assets, or transactions at undervalue (transfers of ownership unless market value is paid is included in this). If you fail to declare it it can constitute a criminal offence, cause your dro to be revoked, get you a restrictions order or worst case scenario a criminal prosecution.

As said, being the registered keeper does not make you legal owner. The owner is whoever bought the car, or who it was subsequently gifted to where there is no intention if the original owner ever getting it back.