Seller lied to me and sold me a car with outstanding Santander Consumer Finance left on it.

JJ_Egan

But if he does not pay in full they will take the car off you pretty quickly .

Shakin_Steve

People really should read up before posting

https://www.whatcar.com/advice/buying/what-happens-if-i-buy-a-car-with-outstanding-finance/n18536

p3ncilsharpener

Shakin_Steve said:

People really should read up before posting

https://www.whatcar.com/advice/buying/what-happens-if-i-buy-a-car-with-outstanding-finance/n18536

I don't see anything in this thread which goes against that.

The last post before yours for example is perfectly correct.  The finance company could still repossess their car.  They might be in the wrong legally, but there's nothing to stop them actually doing it.

kaMelo

Shakin_Steve said:

People really should read up before posting

https://www.whatcar.com/advice/buying/what-happens-if-i-buy-a-car-with-outstanding-finance/n18536

As above, nothing in this thread contradicts what is written in that article
The position at the moment is this;
   The finance company own the car and the OP doesn't.
   The person the OP bought the car from breached their loan agreement and possibly the law.  

But that isn't the end of it for the reasons pointed out.


To the OP,  I notice you mention Santander want to see a copy of the V5 but have said nothing about them wanting to see a bill of sale which I find strange. The bill of sale is proof of ownership and should be enough to counter any claim from Santander that your purchase was not in good faith. The V5 by itself proves nothing.

macman

I repeat: did the vendor tell you that the car was free of finance? If not, then he didn't lie to you. Saying it had 'no issues' is so vague as to be meaningless, and most people would take that purely as a reference to it's mechanical condition-nothing to do with finance.
Otherwise, it appears that you neither asked, nor did an HPI check?

poppasmurf_bewdley

macman said:

I repeat: did the vendor tell you that the car was free of finance? If not, then he didn't lie to you. Saying it had 'no issues' is so vague as to be meaningless, and most people would take that purely as a reference to it's mechanical condition-nothing to do with finance.
Otherwise, it appears that you neither asked, nor did an HPI check?

The vendor might not have lied to the buyer, but he still committed an offence by selling something that did not belong to him.

Obviously, by not asking or checking via an HPI check, the OP did himself no favours.  

phillw

macman said:

I repeat: did the vendor tell you that the car was free of finance? If not, then he didn't lie to you.

You don't consider "I am selling my car" a lie if it has outstanding finance?

p3ncilsharpener

phillw said:

macman said:

I repeat: did the vendor tell you that the car was free of finance? If not, then he didn't lie to you.

You don't consider "I am selling my car" a lie if it has outstanding finance?

No more than someone saying "I am selling my house" when it has an outstanding mortgage on it.  Similarly, I wouldn't say to someone who said "Let's go back to my house" "Hey, it's not YOUR house, the bank owns 80% of it" if they had a mortgage.

Perhaps you would, but I don't think the average person would assume the use of "my" even implies let alone explicitly claims that it is 100% owned by the person.

poppasmurf_bewdley

p3ncilsharpener said:

phillw said:

macman said:

I repeat: did the vendor tell you that the car was free of finance? If not, then he didn't lie to you.

You don't consider "I am selling my car" a lie if it has outstanding finance?

No more than someone saying "I am selling my house" when it has an outstanding mortgage on it.  Similarly, I wouldn't say to someone who said "Let's go back to my house" "Hey, it's not YOUR house, the bank owns 80% of it" if they had a mortgage.

Perhaps you would, but I don't think the average person would assume the use of "my" even implies let alone explicitly claims that it is 100% owned by the person.

You cannot sell a house which has a mortgage attached to it until the mortgage has been repaid.  It's nothing like selling a car which has finance attached. Saying otherwise is totally misleading.  

p3ncilsharpener

poppasmurf_bewdley said:

p3ncilsharpener said:

phillw said:

macman said:

I repeat: did the vendor tell you that the car was free of finance? If not, then he didn't lie to you.

You don't consider "I am selling my car" a lie if it has outstanding finance?

No more than someone saying "I am selling my house" when it has an outstanding mortgage on it.  Similarly, I wouldn't say to someone who said "Let's go back to my house" "Hey, it's not YOUR house, the bank owns 80% of it" if they had a mortgage.

Perhaps you would, but I don't think the average person would assume the use of "my" even implies let alone explicitly claims that it is 100% owned by the person.

You cannot sell a house which has a mortgage attached to it until the mortgage has been repaid.  It's nothing like selling a car which has finance attached. Saying otherwise is totally misleading.  

You can't sell a car with finance attached to it, except, oops, you can.  OP bought a car that's still financed.

But you're missing the point.  The use of the term "my" is not an explicit statement that you own something 100%.  It's absurd to treat it like that.

If someone said "Can you hand me my phone" would you turn around and say"It's not YOUR phone, you're still paying off the contract"?  Of course you wouldn't.

It's exactly the same with the car.  You can't make the claim that someone who says they're selling "their" car is making an explicit claim of 100% ownership of said car.  You couldn't even credibly claim that it's implied either.