Help! Car was impounded and now the lender has it

Mza123

Why wouldn!!!8217;t they, a car was taken, they have to do you can relay this to insurance companies lol, ignorant

AndyMc.....

Mza123 wrote: »

Why wouldn!!!8217;t they, a car was taken, they have to do you can relay this to insurance companies lol, ignorant

Home Office counting rules that’s why.

CardinalWolsey

You have said that your car was taken by someone else at a party you attended, using your keys because you yourself were not in a fit state to drive. That's good that you chose not to drive.

You then went on to say that when you realised the car was missing the next day, you reported it to the police, who later informed you that they had impounded it.

On what basis had the car been pulled over the night before? If it hadn't been reported as stolen at that time, it wouldn't register on in-car ANPR. So either something else triggered ANPR, or the person that was driving it was driving recklessly (for example).

The police obviously decided that the car shouldn't be being driven by the person that was driving it - so they impounded it. So the police must already taken the details of that person, and processed them accordingly. But I struggle to understand why the police would not have attempted to contact the registered keeper, i.e. you? Is the V5 in your name at your parents' address (i.e. where you live), at the address of the property you rent out, or somewhere else?

Look at this from your finance company and insurer's perspectives.

You forgot to update your finance company with your change of address.
You forgot to update your insurance company with your change of address.
You forgot to update your V5 with your change of address.
A third-party get's pulled over by the police, driving your car, when it hadn't been reported stolen - so the police were suspicious of them / the car for some other reason.
The car only gets reported stolen _after_ it has already been pulled over for something else.

What conclusions would you draw?

You need to be explaining the above points clearly to your insurer and finance company, because prima facie something untoward is going on. It may all be a series of unintended events, and you're now suffering the consequences, but summarise for those companies all of your actions that have got you to this point (e.g. by way of a chronological list, starting from the purchase, to when you changed address etc - is there a one month gap, or six months etc, to what happened on party night and the days following), and convince them that you shouldn't have your insurance cancelled and the car repossessed.

AndyMc.....

CardinalWolsey wrote: »

You have said that your car was taken by someone else at a party you attended, using your keys because you yourself were not in a fit state to drive. That's good that you chose not to drive.

You then went on to say that when you realised the car was missing the next day, you reported it to the police, who later informed you that they had impounded it.

On what basis had the car been pulled over the night before? If it hadn't been reported as stolen at that time, it wouldn't register on in-car ANPR. So either something else triggered ANPR, or the person that was driving it was driving recklessly (for example).

The police obviously decided that the car shouldn't be being driven by the person that was driving it - so they impounded it. So the police must already taken the details of that person, and processed them accordingly. But I struggle to understand why the police would not have attempted to contact the registered keeper, i.e. you? Is the V5 in your name at your parents' address (i.e. where you live), at the address of the property you rent out, or somewhere else?

Look at this from your finance company and insurer's perspectives.

You forgot to update your finance company with your change of address.
You forgot to update your insurance company with your change of address.
You forgot to update your V5 with your change of address.
A third-party get's pulled over by the police, driving your car, when it hadn't been reported stolen - so the police were suspicious of them / the car for some other reason.
The car only gets reported stolen _after_ it has already been pulled over for something else.

What conclusions would you draw?

You need to be explaining the above points clearly to your insurer and finance company, because prima facie something untoward is going on. It may all be a series of unintended events, and you're now suffering the consequences, but summarise for those companies all of your actions that have got you to this point (e.g. by way of a chronological list, starting from the purchase, to when you changed address etc - is there a one month gap, or six months etc, to what happened on party night and the days following), and convince them that you shouldn't have your insurance cancelled and the car repossessed.

How would you suggest the police would have contacted him?

wgl2014

Plus the RK is likely to be the finance company. Presumably the Police contacted them after the seizure hence the car being collected.
Also sounds like a TWOC to me rather than a theft which may be what Andy is getting at.

AndyMc.....

wgl2014 wrote: »

Plus the RK is likely to be the finance company. Presumably the Police contacted them after the seizure hence the car being collected.
Also sounds like a TWOC to me rather than a theft which may be what Andy is getting at.

Quite right given it was found by the police before it was reported stolen.

Mza123

CardinalWolsey wrote: »

You have said that your car was taken by someone else at a party you attended, using your keys because you yourself were not in a fit state to drive. That's good that you chose not to drive.

You then went on to say that when you realised the car was missing the next day, you reported it to the police, who later informed you that they had impounded it.

On what basis had the car been pulled over the night before? If it hadn't been reported as stolen at that time, it wouldn't register on in-car ANPR. So either something else triggered ANPR, or the person that was driving it was driving recklessly (for example).

The police obviously decided that the car shouldn't be being driven by the person that was driving it - so they impounded it. So the police must already taken the details of that person, and processed them accordingly. But I struggle to understand why the police would not have attempted to contact the registered keeper, i.e. you? Is the V5 in your name at your parents' address (i.e. where you live), at the address of the property you rent out, or somewhere else?

Look at this from your finance company and insurer's perspectives.

You forgot to update your finance company with your change of address.
You forgot to update your insurance company with your change of address.
You forgot to update your V5 with your change of address.
A third-party get's pulled over by the police, driving your car, when it hadn't been reported stolen - so the police were suspicious of them / the car for some other reason.
The car only gets reported stolen _after_ it has already been pulled over for something else.

What conclusions would you draw?

You need to be explaining the above points clearly to your insurer and finance company, because prima facie something untoward is going on. It may all be a series of unintended events, and you're now suffering the consequences, but summarise for those companies all of your actions that have got you to this point (e.g. by way of a chronological list, starting from the purchase, to when you changed address etc - is there a one month gap, or six months etc, to what happened on party night and the days following), and convince them that you shouldn't have your insurance cancelled and the car repossessed.

The car was stopped in a random stop search because of operation piranha which is trying to crack down on people on the road driving illegally. Why this specific car was chosen was probably because it was really late night and no one else was around.

The police could only have contacted me by sending a letter, or contacting my insurance and then asking for my contact details. This happened late night/early hours of the morning, I contacted the police first as soon as I realised the car was gone.

The V5 and every other document for the car is on my parents address, because of course I live there.

There was no issue with the insurance they only wanted me to prove that I was infact a homeowner otherwise it would invalidate my policy. So I didn’t forget to update anything because I didn’t need to.

The person driving the car didn’t even know the owners details

My insurance was never cancelled. All I said about insurance was that they wouldn’t release the car to me on the Friday until I proved I own a home. IF I didn’t do this within 14 days then and only then would my insurance be void

Warwick_Hunt

Mza123 wrote: »

The car was stopped in a random stop search because of operation piranha which is trying to crack down on people on the road driving illegally. Why this specific car was chosen was probably because it was really late night and no one else was around.

The police could only have contacted me by sending a letter, or contacting my insurance and then asking for my contact details. This happened late night/early hours of the morning, I contacted the police first as soon as I realised the car was gone.

The V5 and every other document for the car is on my parents address, because of course I live there.

There was no issue with the insurance they only wanted me to prove that I was infact a homeowner otherwise it would invalidate my policy. So I didn’t forget to update anything because I didn’t need to.

The person driving the car didn’t even know the owners details

My insurance was never cancelled. All I said about insurance was that they wouldn’t release the car to me on the Friday until I proved I own a home. IF I didn’t do this within 14 days then and only then would my insurance be void

Why do you need to be a homeowner to hold vehicle insurance?

Warwick_Hunt

Mza1234 wrote: »

No I mean repay the full settlement for the car. The car was seized Thursday night, I went Friday morning. I was told to ring my insurer and amend my policy and come back on Monday (the station don’t deal with impounded cars on weekends)

I came back today (Monday) after fixing the issue with my insurer only to find out the lender has already taken the car. I ring them only to find out as the car was out of my possession over the weekend this violates my contract and I must either pay the full settlement for the car, or they will auction the car and I pay the remainder.

I have been up to dates on my payments for the car (infact I have over paid some months)


Ps my login for the other account doesn’t work for some reason hence why I made a new one

How did your lender get a copy of the 165 notice so quickly to get the car from the recovery yard and what insurance did they use?

AdrianC

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

Why do you need to be a homeowner to hold vehicle insurance?

You don't.

But if you've told them you are, and have received a lower premium as a result of that putting you into an actuarially-safer demographic...