Purchased a cloned car via part exchange - Police will not help!

rossmx31

Please help

2 months ago, I purchased an Audi Q3 from a small-time car trader. The agreed “sale” was the Audi Q3, for my Audi S5. The prices of each vehicle were very similar and considered fair.

I had a HPI check pass the Audi Q3, cross checked the V5C VIN numbers with the VIN numbers on the car and the HPI report, everything checked out.

The “sale” was made, and all receipted. The trader gave me the Q3’s V5C, and similarly I gave the trader my S5’s V5C with the “trader” section completed and kept by me.

Subsequently, after trying to put my private reg on the Q3, it’s become apparent that the Q3 is in fact a clone of a stolen vehicle. It’s been inspected by the police / DVLA, and has been seized.

I’ve tried communicating with the trader, to no avail. Devastated at potentially losing £15k.

The police have seperatley raised a “fraud” crime to investigate, and potentially recover my vehicle. But this is where things get interesting / annoying, and any advice or guidance will be appreciated.

I then find my S5 advertised at another motor trader some 5 miles from where I conducted my sale on eBay. I contact the police, who ask me to travel to the dealers and confirm it’s at there premises before calling ‘999’ at which point they should be able recover / seize it (I found this strange... do I have to do all of their job for them?!)

So the following day, this is exactly what I do. A police officer then arrives, and I show him all evidence (receipt, old V5C slips, old car insurance etc), but then after speaking with the motor trader (a different motor trader to whom my original sale was conducted), they tell me they cannot seize the vehicle as he has a receipt for the S5! They say they “lawfully cannot seize it”. They have however said they have stopped the motor trader selling it on?!

Now, I’m not disputing the current possessor / motor trader in question has obtained the vehicle knowingly unlawfully, but surly as my original “sale” was performed transacting stolen goods, it is surly void?! The original trader did now own the Q3 as it’s stolen, therefore had no legal right to trade it for my S5?

The police are now claiming this is a civil matter, which I dont think is true. Initial legal advice, as well as guidance from other officers who are family friends, have advised me that the police have acted completely incorrectly and irresponsibly. I’m now VERY concerned the car will disappear and I’ll never see any money.

Please any help will be appreciated. I am struggling to speak to or escalate this to anyone in the police - it’s very very stressful!

twhitehousescat

if all the hpi checks were showing as OK , why are you not claiming from HPI

rossmx31

You have very limited chances of claiming the HPI check as it’s a clone.

The check is made against the registration number that was on the car

The thieves have done a good job of duplicating the VIN numbers to match the car reg that was checked.

It’s certainly an avenue I will also be investigating but I don’t Ha our much optimism of that route.

The route I was optimistic of was the S5 recovery - not so much now as the police have been to the garage where the S5 is and will have spooked them.

unholyangel

twhitehousescat wrote: »

if all the hpi checks were showing as OK , why are you not claiming from HPI

The HPI Guarantee will not cover any losses arising due to a “cloned” vehicle to the extent that any part of the purchase price (including but not limited to any deposit, holding fee or other part-payment) for the vehicle is paid in cash other by any other payment mechanism other than via the banking system. We recommend that all vehicles are paid via the banking system – such as cheque or a bankers draft. For the purpose of this clause a “cloned” vehicle is one that has been stolen, and given a false identity, normally that of an identical vehicle.

I suppose he could try argue that he didn't pay in cash therefore that exemption doesn't apply. Now had it read "for the vehicle is paid by any other payment mechanism other than via the banking system", then that would be pretty clear.

As for the garage, I presume the police are of the opinion that a court will need to decide whether the title passed or not. Is the dealer you purchased from still trading? I know you said the cars were close in value but did you pay anything at all by credit (either card or finance agreement)?

AdrianC

I suspect the logic is "You sold him the S5. You bought the Q3 from him" - they were linked transactions, but still two transactions.


The current owner of the S5 is innocent in all this - your old car is gone.



You are owed the value of the Q3 - and that's easy to quantify, and easy to claim for.

rossmx31

I cannot contact the trader I purchased the Q3 from - I’ve tried but no answer - he wasn’t a motor trader with a forecourt or anything, one of the many “traders” who obtain vehicles inc V5’s but never change the name.

The S5 is currently on the forecourt of ANOTHER trader.

The police, in my opinion, do not want to get involved as they are being lazy as it’s quite a complex case.

Simply put, I lost my S5 through a fraudulent transaction, whether purposely or not. The item I transacted for my S5 (ie the Q3), was a stolen / cloned car. The other person in that transaction did not have legal ownership of the Q3, therefore, the transaction was void so he could not take legal ownership of my S5. Any subsequent sale of my S5 remains void as the trader shouldn’t have legal ownership of my S5- I do

AdrianC

rossmx31 wrote: »

I cannot contact the trader I purchased the Q3 from - I’ve tried but no answer - he wasn’t a motor trader with a forecourt or anything, one of the many “traders” who obtain vehicles inc V5’s but never change the name.

Surely you have paperwork - invoices - with his details on?

If not, you are - frankly - up a creek without a paddle.

The S5 is currently on the forecourt of ANOTHER trader.

Irrelevant, unless you can somehow prove that he is the person/business you have a contract with.

Simply put, I lost my S5 through a fraudulent transaction, whether purposely or not. The item I transacted for my S5 (ie the Q3), was a stolen / cloned car. The other person in that transaction did not have legal ownership of the Q3, therefore, the transaction was void so he could not take legal ownership of my S5. Any subsequent sale of my S5 remains void as the trader shouldn’t have legal ownership of my S5- I do

Sorry, but no.

Concentrate on finding the correct individual/business to launch a court claim for the value of the Q3. That is the only way you are getting anywhere.

rossmx31

AdrianC wrote: »

I suspect the logic is "You sold him the S5. You bought the Q3 from him" - they were linked transactions, but still two transactions.


The current owner of the S5 is innocent in all this - your old car is gone.



You are owed the value of the Q3 - and that's easy to quantify, and easy to claim for.

But my issue is my receipt is written as “Q3 in exchange for S5”. The trader has illegally “sold” / “traded” the Q3 as he never had legal ownership of it. Therefore our deal / transaction is void

rossmx31

AdrianC wrote: »

Surely you have paperwork - invoices - with his details on?

If not, you are - frankly - up a creek without a paddle.

I have a written receipt with the traders name, signed. I still have the V5C slips from my S5.

Irrelevant, unless you can somehow prove that he is the person/business you have a contract with.

It is relevant. Because they have obtained a vehicle that has been unlawfully obtained! I’m not saying they are at any fault. But unfortunately for them they have obtained a vehicle that has been unlawfully obtained! Therefore, they cannot own the vehicle

Sorry, but no.

Concentrate on finding the correct individual/business to launch a court claim for the value of the Q3. That is the only way you are getting anywhere.

I’ve tried, but unsuccessfully.

rossmx31

AdrianC wrote: »

Surely you have paperwork - invoices - with his details on?

If not, you are - frankly - up a creek without a paddle.



Irrelevant, unless you can somehow prove that he is the person/business you have a contract with.



Sorry, but no.

Concentrate on finding the correct individual/business to launch a court claim for the value of the Q3. That is the only way you are getting anywhere.

I have a written signed receipt from the trader, stating “Q3 in exchange for S5”

I can’t get hold of him.... I wonder why.

My point is that the garage the S5 is now at - regardless of whether knowingly or not - have obtained a vehicle that has not been lawfully obtained. Therefore they cannot have legal rights over it... which is as unfortunate for them as it is for everyone else involved in this criminal chain!

wgl2014

rossmx31 wrote: »

I have a written signed receipt from the trader, stating “Q3 in exchange for S5”

I can’t get hold of him.... I wonder why.

My point is that the garage the S5 is now at - regardless of whether knowingly or not - have obtained a vehicle that has not been lawfully obtained. Therefore they cannot have legal rights over it... which is as unfortunate for them as it is for everyone else involved in this criminal chain!

You have no relationship with the garage who now have the S5. Your deal was with the first garage and it is them who you need to be focused on.
Speak to a specialist solicitor.