Online New Car Buying - ? Pre-Registered Car Con

Scrapit

sweetsand said:

waamo said:

sweetsand said:

waamo said:

sweetsand said:

waamo said:

sweetsand said:

molerat said:

Looks like my car dealer will be going to prison then - my current pre-reg was 2 weeks old when registered to me   But that was a genuine pre reg not a dodgy dealer making numbers up - across the country they had about 100 various specs of the same model.  The previous one was 7 weeks old but it had been on sale for about a month before I bought it.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/22/section/43C

I don't believe that law really applies to a dodgy pre-reg. DTD is scaremongering why you should buy a new car from them rather than a pre reg from someone else. It is more about not registering a vehicle or falsely registering to avoid being traced - I am sure the dealership would pass on details pretty quickly in the same way as Motability or any lease co would.  It would be interesting though if involved in an accident as the insurer would likely walk away and void the policy.

Pre reg = no less than 25% off list price or walk away - my last 2 were around 31-34% off list.

Thank you. As I said previously, read my posts, this dealer has been up and going for 20 years poss plus that and has good reivews. As i said before, if the link contains info that is wrong, I'm sure other dealers that specilze in pre reg cars would pull them up. for that reason it is my sincere beleife that the information is genuine and accurate.

If you believe it to be correct then show one example of somebody being prosecuted for it. Just one that's all it needs. 

Why should I, it was not me that put that message up years ago and still ongoing and legal site that sells millions of pounds worth of cars.  

Bottom line, several posters called me many nasty names here and I backed up my post with what I thought was right and the evidence is in the link to a well known site amongst those that buy, sell cars - now if you think the site is a fraud/lie, take it up with them as I won't as in my judgment it is true as it is a respected broker according to net reviews and that is good enough for me.

May I strongly suggest you look up what Abraham Lincoln said about quotes on the internet.

May I very strongly recommed you contact DrivetheDeal as I am in agreement with that they have stated and happy to go along with that ie the info they pust there as being 100% aaccurate.
Perhaps they will put you and the others straight.

The problem is that your comprehension seems to be as accurate as your typing.

I've made my stance clear and told you before that my strong recommedation to you and the others is contact Drive the Deal the link I posted here on this threa on page one when I was called a liar/etc. I have always gone by the article in the link and beleived in it and if you still can't see that, I will say it for the last time, contact them as I have not problem and happy with what they have posted and have found it very useful.
Thank you

I'll bear with as I'm late to the party.
You know the link you posted?
You know the first point is a policy?
You know the second point is a legal requirement, basically saying not to falsify orders? 
I think youve managed to get several wrong ends of only one stick. Expect even more of your posts to get reported.

RBN20

Yet another thread turned into Comedy Central because of a certain poster needing to first of all drop into conversation every single high end branded vehicle they ‘own’,and then get something completely wrong and start arguments with everyone, whilst playing the victim the whole time 🙃

Ectophile

Since nobody else has bothered to post the link to the actual legislation yet, here it is: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/22/section/43C

There's nothing there saying that the person driving the car has to be the registered keeper.  Which makes sense.  It's quite common on leased cars for the leasing company to be the registered keeper.

daveyjp

williamgriffin said:

daveyjp said:

facade said:

Forgive me for not reading the other 6 pages, but if it is a criminal offence to keep a car registered to someone else, why aren't the jails full of leasees?

Because thats not what the drivethedeal judgment states.

It is a potential offence not to register a vehicle to the rightful registered keeper as soon as a sale or transfer takes place.

A lease is an agreement to rent a car from a registered keeper, which is the leasing company.

You can't lease a car from a third party leasing company and have the dealer as the registered keeper.

What's the offence? The owner, person keeping and registered keeper need not be the same person. 

I know, which is why I never stated it has to be the same person/organisation.

The offence is having a regsitered keeper on the V5c that isn't the registered keeper, which is what dealers were doing.  Selling cars, but remaining the registered keeper for 3 months.

AdrianC

daveyjp said:

The offence is having a regsitered keeper on the V5c that isn't the registered keeper, which is what dealers were doing.  Selling cars, but remaining the registered keeper for 3 months.

...having a RK that isn't the RK.

Bet metaphysical for this time of night.

But the RK is related to the vehicle - they are in a commercial relationship with the person who owns it and is using it, and can forward any correspondence on. And THAT's the bit that s43c is trying to ensure is retained at all times... The ability to forward correspondence on to the person actually in possession.

Car_54

AdrianC said:

daveyjp said:

The offence is having a regsitered keeper on the V5c that isn't the registered keeper, which is what dealers were doing.  Selling cars, but remaining the registered keeper for 3 months.

...having a RK that isn't the RK.

Bet metaphysical for this time of night.

But the RK is related to the vehicle - they are in a commercial relationship with the person who owns it and is using it, and can forward any correspondence on. And THAT's the bit that s43c is trying to ensure is retained at all times... The ability to forward correspondence on to the person actually in possession.

Exactly. The dealers who do that are not breaking the law, but simply "getting round" their agreement with the manufacturer.

The much-quoted website is trying to scare customers off using such dealers, by misinterpreting legislation and threatening non-existent criminal record sanctions and financial penalties.

facade

Car_54 said:

AdrianC said:

But the RK is related to the vehicle - they are in a commercial relationship with the person who owns it and is using it, and can forward any correspondence on. And THAT's the bit that s43c is trying to ensure is retained at all times... The ability to forward correspondence on to the person actually in possession.

Exactly. The dealers who do that are not breaking the law, but simply "getting round" their agreement with the manufacturer.

The much-quoted website is trying to scare customers off using such dealers, by misinterpreting legislation and threatening non-existent criminal record sanctions and financial penalties.

Is the correct answer

It is a sort of lease whereby you have automatically purchased the vehicle at the end of the lease term. The downsides are you are not the first keeper, and no doubt some admin over warranty claims during the lease period, plus I wonder if the bvehicle counts as an asset of the dealer if they go bust during this time?

However the driver will be in trouble if they have told their insurance company that they are the owner and the vehicle is registered to them during this time.

DoaM

facade said:

Car_54 said:

AdrianC said:

But the RK is related to the vehicle - they are in a commercial relationship with the person who owns it and is using it, and can forward any correspondence on. And THAT's the bit that s43c is trying to ensure is retained at all times... The ability to forward correspondence on to the person actually in possession.

Exactly. The dealers who do that are not breaking the law, but simply "getting round" their agreement with the manufacturer.

The much-quoted website is trying to scare customers off using such dealers, by misinterpreting legislation and threatening non-existent criminal record sanctions and financial penalties.

Is the correct answer

But.. but. but.. the website says something different and I'm going to believe the website!

 

facade

DoaM said:

But.. but. but.. the website says something different and I'm going to believe the website!

 

I believe everything I see on the interweb, especially the stuff I make up myself

Grumpy_chap

Shouldn't be any big problems with buying pre-reg so long as the discount warrants it and slightly shorter warranty and accept being officially the 2nd keeper.