Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • LuckyEddy56
    • By LuckyEddy56 6th Aug 18, 9:06 PM
    • 14Posts
    • 2Thanks
    LuckyEddy56
    The seller now wants more money
    • #1
    • 6th Aug 18, 9:06 PM
    The seller now wants more money 6th Aug 18 at 9:06 PM
    I bought a motorcycle cheaply from a nice old lady who's son had left it sitting in her garden for years. I made an offer, the old lady told me she would consult her family to check if the offer was acceptable, she said she had checked and that it was. Now, after I got the bike through the MOT without having to spend much, her granddaughter has contacted me saying she wants more money or the bike back and that the old lady never had the right to sell it to me, also, as the old lady and I both signed the V5 in the names of someone else, ( I signed it in my sons name as I was buying it for him, she signed it in her sons name as he is disabled and unable to deal with it himself), the granddaughter is also threatening to report the bike as stolen if I don't pay her more or give the bike back. I don't know where I stand ? Can someone please advise me what to do? Thank you.
Page 3
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 7th Aug 18, 2:04 PM
    • 2,573 Posts
    • 1,587 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    an LOS(Lost or Stolen) marker only goes on PNC once the registered keeper attends police station with copy of V5 and normally has to be within 24 hrs of reporting, as otherwise the system is left open for malicious reports, You'd be surprised just how many people phone up to report but can't be bothered to attend.and of course civilian call handlers are given legal training to enable them to do their job certainly for the MPS it was a month at Hendon and ongoing once on Borough.
    Originally posted by ttoli
    No it doesn't it goes on once the crime is raised.
    don't count your chickens before they're hatched
    • ttoli
    • By ttoli 7th Aug 18, 4:43 PM
    • 714 Posts
    • 479 Thanks
    ttoli
    In which case , things have changed since I left the job
    • missile
    • By missile 8th Aug 18, 3:50 PM
    • 9,834 Posts
    • 4,956 Thanks
    missile
    Actually, 2 years ago, I offered her 1500 for it if I could pay it off 200 a month but she said no. I also offered (for free), to have the bike repaired for her and to sell it for her on Ebay just to help her out but she said no to that too? Then 2 years on, I bumped into her again and she said she had been hoping to see me around and that they want rid of the bike and were thinking of scrapping it and would accept any offer!
    Originally posted by LuckyEddy56
    Seems you knew the bike was worth much more than 300. You scammed and old lady and her disabled son = shame on you
    "A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." ~ Mahatma Gandhi
    Ride hard or stay home
    • onomatopoeia99
    • By onomatopoeia99 8th Aug 18, 8:16 PM
    • 5,008 Posts
    • 11,284 Thanks
    onomatopoeia99
    So you paid 1/10th of its true value.
    Originally posted by AndyMc.....

    Clearly a moneysaving expert to be lauded on here for his supreme negotiating skills then.
    INTP, nerd, libertarian and scifi geek.
    Home is where my books are.
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 8th Aug 18, 8:42 PM
    • 2,573 Posts
    • 1,587 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    Clearly a moneysaving expert to be lauded on here for his supreme negotiating skills then.
    Originally posted by onomatopoeia99
    Would you say the same of someone who knowning buys stolen property?
    don't count your chickens before they're hatched
    • Stoke
    • By Stoke 9th Aug 18, 9:14 AM
    • 2,981 Posts
    • 3,145 Thanks
    Stoke
    So you paid 1/10th of its true value.
    Originally posted by AndyMc.....
    No, because the bike had a rusty chain and a damaged fuel tank, two flat tyres and probably other problems.

    If I own an Escort Cossie, it's worth 20 grand. If I own an Escort Cossie with a shed load of damage, it isn't worth 20 grand.... it's worth less.

    Sounds to me like the OP hasn't done a whole lot wrong here..... and the nice old lady and daughter are taking the micky.

    Tell them go to the police. I suspect they'll do nothing. At which point it's a civil matter and she's got an upward battle.

    You could return it in the original condition. Take the new battery off etc. You could even void the MOT if you wanted to be vindictive, I think I would to be honest, if I decided to return it. Fact is, I wouldn't return it.
    • Herzlos
    • By Herzlos 9th Aug 18, 9:39 AM
    • 8,658 Posts
    • 7,957 Thanks
    Herzlos
    Seems you knew the bike was worth much more than 300. You scammed and old lady and her disabled son = shame on you
    Originally posted by missile



    But not in it's current state. Since it was in a poor state and was going to be scrapped, he paid far more than she would have otherwise gotten for it.


    That it's worth 10x the value after spending several hundreds more in work is irrelevant.
    • Stoke
    • By Stoke 9th Aug 18, 10:02 AM
    • 2,981 Posts
    • 3,145 Thanks
    Stoke
    Seems you knew the bike was worth much more than 300. You scammed and old lady and her disabled son = shame on you
    Originally posted by missile
    dear me.
    • westernpromise
    • By westernpromise 9th Aug 18, 3:46 PM
    • 4,263 Posts
    • 5,553 Thanks
    westernpromise
    Unfortunately the OP is almost certainly in the wrong because the purported seller of the bike did not have proper legal title to it, and therefore it wasn't granny's to sell any more than it is mine to sell.

    This means of course that neither does the OP have good title to it either. The fact that you bought something in good faith doesn't give you title to it (although interestingly in some countries eg Germany it does - if you buy a stolen car there, in good faith at a fair price, it's yours). What you should have asked for is proof of ownership, in the form of a receipt from whomever the seller in his turn bought it.

    You may have that in any file of paperwork that came with the bike, in which case you're in a good position. You can say the old biddy represented that she acted for the owner, and to that end, she provided the receipt.

    If you don't have that, then strictly the property should be returned to the legitimate owner, which is the disabled bloke. Thefts are at the expense of whoever bought the stolen item, not of the party who lost it. You, however, then seek compensation from granny for your loss. This is not the 300 that you paid her. Your loss is that you no longer have a 2,000 bike. So that's what you're owed by the old biddy who misrepresented that she had the right to sell on the owner's behalf.

    You're helped by the fact that the misrepresentation seems to have been admitted ("her granddaughter has contacted me saying she wants more money or the bike back and that the old lady never had the right to sell it to me").

    So if this goes any further, I'd just set out the above noting that after the work you've done, the bike's worth 2k. If the owner wants it back he can have it, but in that case you will not accept 300 for it. You will instead sue the old lady for 2k to replace it with a similar item for the agreed price, or if she prefers she can pay you this upfront as compensation before you return the bike.

    The fact that you signed on behalf of your son is irrelevant because you and he can adjust that formality at any time. The key fact is that if she had the V5, she signed it, she took money and she gave you the keys, it is beyond argument that she misrepresented.
    Buying a house, if you believe the market has a way to fall, or if you are paying sill asking prices ( like some sheeple ) or if you are buying in London, is now a massive financial gamble!!!!! - June 8, 2012 by TheCountOfNowhere
    • mattyprice4004
    • By mattyprice4004 9th Aug 18, 3:57 PM
    • 3,779 Posts
    • 3,307 Thanks
    mattyprice4004
    So you paid 1/10th of its true value.
    Originally posted by AndyMc.....
    Are you drunk?
    He clearly states it's worth that in GOOD condition. Is the condition he's described it as good in your books?!

    Jeepers, this forum is a funny place sometimes
    • Stoke
    • By Stoke 9th Aug 18, 4:29 PM
    • 2,981 Posts
    • 3,145 Thanks
    Stoke
    Unfortunately the OP is almost certainly in the wrong because the purported seller of the bike did not have proper legal title to it, and therefore it wasn't granny's to sell any more than it is mine to sell.

    This means of course that neither does the OP have good title to it either. The fact that you bought something in good faith doesn't give you title to it (although interestingly in some countries eg Germany it does - if you buy a stolen car there, in good faith at a fair price, it's yours). What you should have asked for is proof of ownership, in the form of a receipt from whomever the seller in his turn bought it.

    You may have that in any file of paperwork that came with the bike, in which case you're in a good position. You can say the old biddy represented that she acted for the owner, and to that end, she provided the receipt.

    If you don't have that, then strictly the property should be returned to the legitimate owner, which is the disabled bloke. Thefts are at the expense of whoever bought the stolen item, not of the party who lost it. You, however, then seek compensation from granny for your loss. This is not the 300 that you paid her. Your loss is that you no longer have a 2,000 bike. So that's what you're owed by the old biddy who misrepresented that she had the right to sell on the owner's behalf.

    You're helped by the fact that the misrepresentation seems to have been admitted ("her granddaughter has contacted me saying she wants more money or the bike back and that the old lady never had the right to sell it to me").

    So if this goes any further, I'd just set out the above noting that after the work you've done, the bike's worth 2k. If the owner wants it back he can have it, but in that case you will not accept 300 for it. You will instead sue the old lady for 2k to replace it with a similar item for the agreed price, or if she prefers she can pay you this upfront as compensation before you return the bike.

    The fact that you signed on behalf of your son is irrelevant because you and he can adjust that formality at any time. The key fact is that if she had the V5, she signed it, she took money and she gave you the keys, it is beyond argument that she misrepresented.
    Originally posted by westernpromise
    Sounds good to be fair. I'm not usually one for 'threatening to sue old ladies' but I think exceptions occasionally have to be made. The OP has spent time, money and effort getting the bike into a roadworthy condition, buying it in good faith. Yes, he was wrong to buy it on the word of the old lady, but then I've bought things off people before that were probably not technically the legal owner (like I bought a TV off someone who's daughter had gone to University). I suspect it's an easier mistake to make than you think.

    Send it in writing to both her and the daughter, spread a little fear.

    Like I said, if she won't pay what you paid to make it roadworthy, then you could always be spiteful and 'return it' to it's original condition. Any welding that was done, you take a nice angle grinder and put back to what it was before.

    If she does offer to cover what you paid, then I would return it without an argument to be honest.
    • shaun from Africa
    • By shaun from Africa 9th Aug 18, 4:35 PM
    • 10,474 Posts
    • 11,816 Thanks
    shaun from Africa
    Unfortunately the OP is almost certainly in the wrong because the purported seller of the bike did not have proper legal title to it, and therefore it wasn't granny's to sell any more than it is mine to sell.
    Originally posted by westernpromise
    Having proper legal title doesn't come into it as there is nothing written into any law that states this is the case.

    All that is required is that the seller must have the right to sell the goods and as far as the OP knew, this was the case as the seller stated that she would consult her family to see if the offer was acceptable.

    If I put something up for auction at a local auction house and it sells then was the buyer acting illegally as at no time did the auction house have legal title to the goods?
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 9th Aug 18, 4:45 PM
    • 3,648 Posts
    • 2,263 Thanks
    Car 54
    You're helped by the fact that the misrepresentation seems to have been admitted ("her granddaughter has contacted me saying she wants more money or the bike back and that the old lady never had the right to sell it to me").
    Originally posted by westernpromise

    It has not been admitted. The only person who can admit it is the old lady. The granddaughter has alleged misrepresentation.
    • westernpromise
    • By westernpromise 9th Aug 18, 5:59 PM
    • 4,263 Posts
    • 5,553 Thanks
    westernpromise
    Having proper legal title doesn't come into it as there is nothing written into any law that states this is the case.
    Originally posted by shaun from Africa
    Incorrect, it's fundamental English common law that you can't sell something you don't own. If you pay for such a thing, such as a stolen car, it is you who the thief is robbing because the legitimate owner is entitled to have it back. You would then have to recover your money from the thief.
    If I put something up for auction at a local auction house and it sells then was the buyer acting illegally as at no time did the auction house have legal title to the goods?
    No, because you would sign something with the auction house whereby you warranted that you did have good title. The auction house would as part of its T&Cs disclaim liability for establishing whether this was true or not, i.e. caveat emptor. Auction houses don't claim to be the owners of goods; they act as agents for the owners.
    Buying a house, if you believe the market has a way to fall, or if you are paying sill asking prices ( like some sheeple ) or if you are buying in London, is now a massive financial gamble!!!!! - June 8, 2012 by TheCountOfNowhere
    • westernpromise
    • By westernpromise 9th Aug 18, 6:06 PM
    • 4,263 Posts
    • 5,553 Thanks
    westernpromise
    It has not been admitted. The only person who can admit it is the old lady. The granddaughter has alleged misrepresentation.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    Possibly so - it depends how you read this piece of the OP
    her granddaughter has contacted me saying she wants more money or the bike back

    I'm reading "she" as referring here to the old lady, who is presumably still somehow in the picture and now saying she wants the bike back - but if that's not the intended sense, and it's the granddaughter who wants the money, then we have the granddaughter misrepping now as well as grandma!! Quite the family!
    Buying a house, if you believe the market has a way to fall, or if you are paying sill asking prices ( like some sheeple ) or if you are buying in London, is now a massive financial gamble!!!!! - June 8, 2012 by TheCountOfNowhere
    • shaun from Africa
    • By shaun from Africa 9th Aug 18, 8:58 PM
    • 10,474 Posts
    • 11,816 Thanks
    shaun from Africa
    Incorrect, it's fundamental English common law that you can't sell something you don't own. If you pay for such a thing, such as a stolen car, it is you who the thief is robbing because the legitimate owner is entitled to have it back. You would then have to recover your money from the thief.

    No, because you would sign something with the auction house whereby you warranted that you did have good title. The auction house would as part of its T&Cs disclaim liability for establishing whether this was true or not, i.e. caveat emptor. Auction houses don't claim to be the owners of goods; they act as agents for the owners.
    Originally posted by westernpromise
    Of course you can sell something that you don't own providing that the owner has given their permission for you do to so and this is something that probably happens thousands of times a week when family members advertise and sell something for another member of their family.
    You stated that auction houses do this by acting as agents for the owner which is what the person selling the bike stated that they were doing, selling it on behalf of the owner and that she had consulted with them and the price offered was acceptable.

    Despite your saying that it's "fundamental English common law" There is nothing in either the SOGA or CRA that states anything about needing good title to sell goods. They both state exactly the same thing:

    (1) In a contract of sale, other than one to which subsection (3) below applies, there is an implied [F9term] on the part of the seller that in the case of a sale he has a right to sell the goods, and in the case of an agreement to sell he will have such a right at the time when the property is to pass.
    in any other case, that the trader must have the right to sell or transfer the goods at the time when ownership of the goods is to be transferred.
    How about this:
    https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/selling-goods-non-owner

    If a person is in possession of goods, with the consent of the owner, as a mercantile agent, any sale by that person is valid even if the owner does not provide express authorisation for the sale. This means that an innocent purchaser can gain good title to the items if wrongfully sold by the agent.

    Examples of agents passing good title to buyers include car dealership scenarios, where the owner of a vehicle gives his consent to a dealer to try and sell the car on his behalf. The owner does not have to be consulted on the particular sale for the transaction to be valid.
    If granny was given permission to sell the bike but she did it at too low a price, that is her fault and the OP can still get good title to it.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 9th Aug 18, 10:27 PM
    • 3,648 Posts
    • 2,263 Thanks
    Car 54
    Of course you can sell something that you don't own providing that the owner has given their permission for you do to so and this is something that probably happens thousands of times a week when family members advertise and sell something for another member of their family.
    You stated that auction houses do this by acting as agents for the owner which is what the person selling the bike stated that they were doing, selling it on behalf of the owner and that she had consulted with them and the price offered was acceptable.

    Despite your saying that it's "fundamental English common law" There is nothing in either the SOGA or CRA that states anything about needing good title to sell goods. They both state exactly the same thing:





    How about this:
    https://www.netlawman.co.uk/ia/selling-goods-non-owner



    If granny was given permission to sell the bike but she did it at too low a price, that is her fault and the OP can still get good title to it.
    Originally posted by shaun from Africa
    The previous poster referred to common law, i.e. NOT statute law. Those statutes to which you do not apply: the SOGA and CRA apply to traders, not private sales. The other quote refers to "a mercantile agent", which the granny patently was not.
    • silverwhistle
    • By silverwhistle 9th Aug 18, 10:30 PM
    • 2,202 Posts
    • 3,115 Thanks
    silverwhistle
    You would then have to recover your money from the thief.
    Originally posted by westernpromise

    In this case the granny then?
    • westernpromise
    • By westernpromise 10th Aug 18, 10:23 AM
    • 4,263 Posts
    • 5,553 Thanks
    westernpromise
    In this case the granny then?
    Originally posted by silverwhistle
    In effect, yes.

    Her position isn't really winnable either way. If she did have either good title or the owner's authority to sell, then any dispute is between her and the owner, the latter perhaps having a claim against her for negligently selling his bike too cheaply or at all.

    If she now admits (or a court decides) that she did not have good title, then by selling, taking the OP's money and giving him the V5 she's misrepped that she had title and the OP has lost out by the misrep. So she now owes him a bike as above. Strictly he could be required to hand the bike back, but if so, he'd have a claim against her for his loss of a 2k bike.
    Buying a house, if you believe the market has a way to fall, or if you are paying sill asking prices ( like some sheeple ) or if you are buying in London, is now a massive financial gamble!!!!! - June 8, 2012 by TheCountOfNowhere
    • westernpromise
    • By westernpromise 10th Aug 18, 10:31 AM
    • 4,263 Posts
    • 5,553 Thanks
    westernpromise
    Of course you can sell something that you don't own providing that the owner has given their permission for you do to so and this is something that probably happens thousands of times a week when family members advertise and sell something for another member of their family.
    You stated that auction houses do this by acting as agents for the owner which is what the person selling the bike stated that they were doing, selling it on behalf of the owner and that she had consulted with them and the price offered was acceptable.
    Originally posted by shaun from Africa
    Quite. And the owner is trying to get the bike back by arguing that granny did not in fact have either title to or permission to sell it.

    If this is established (in whatever way) to be true, he gets the bike back and the buyer's out of pocket to the tune of that bike. As this has happened because granny misled the OP, she owes the OP his loss.

    If it is not true that she was not authorised to sell, then the OP keeps the bike.
    Buying a house, if you believe the market has a way to fall, or if you are paying sill asking prices ( like some sheeple ) or if you are buying in London, is now a massive financial gamble!!!!! - June 8, 2012 by TheCountOfNowhere
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,353Posts Today

7,261Users online

Martin's Twitter