OT: Purchasing a car (privately). Payment methods

[hugh]

I just took the buyer along to my bank and we paid it in over the counter so it was checked and counted independently.

[hugh]

The advantage of a bankers draft is that it is drawn on the bank itself. They have already taken the funds from the account of the person requesting it before they issue it. As I have said in another post problems may arise with forged international bankers drafts so stay clear of them.

[hugh]

Just like hiring an ex-NOW editor then?

[Dave N]

It seems that some confusion has arisen. Perhaps I should have explained that I was referring to the retail PIN card terminals, not to the small card readers used for generating one-time passwords.

[Mark]

The card reader is required for certain operations only, such as setting up a new recipient for payment.

[Mark]

They may be useful to check whether there is a secured loan or that the keeper is leasing the car.

But the onus would be on the purchaser to prove this, which could be difficult & costly.

[Man at B&Q]

I have two accounts with card readers and have never used either of them. they are not used for logging in nor for day to day account admin, including withdrawing to other accounts. Tesco have changed their banking partner and no longer use the readers so one is now completely redundant.

MBQ

[tinnews]

Who says? The situation in reality would be that the buyer has the car on his drive or in his garage and it's up to the HP company to prove the buyer doesn't own the car. It's surely up to them to prove that the deal wasn't "in good faith".

Depending on the value of the car one could of course use the Small Claims system.

[Mark]

Judging from the cases I have read about.

This is a strange situation since the seller of the car presumably never owned it and was not allowed to sell it.

Given the circumstances that someone has sold a car with outstanding HP it is likely that they have no money or even may not be traceable. Who is the HP company going to chase?

What if the HP company chooses not to use the small claims procedure, knowing that an individual is may not be able to afford to defend the action?

[fred]

In article , Mark writes

Authoritative sources on this subject[1] quote the following text:

"The Consumer Credit Act 1974 gives ?good title? to the innocent private purchaser of a car which later turns out to be subject to a claim by a finance company because of a previous, unpaid hire-purchase agreement. This means that the finance company is not entitled to repossess the car from you. Remember, this does not apply to cars which have been stolen, or cars that were subject to a lease or hire agreement."

This is entirely at odds with the information posted in the link to the apparently amateur site that you posted. I would be inclined to give precedence to the authoritative sources over those of the amateur.

Also, the Consumer Action Group forums have this interesting thread which supports the 'good title' position and quotes chapter and verse on applicable statutes:

(or [1] Sites with .gov in the URL, Trading Standards and other eg: , Private Sales, para

5

[tinnews]

Surely what happens is that the buyer has the car, unless the HP company does something that's the way it stays. So, the HP company comes along and takes the car. Buyer sues them in the small claims court to recover the car.

[Steve Firth]

Oh that's easy. It's so that if a customer asks "do you support faster payments?" the bank can say "yes" and not be telling a lie. The fact that they have rendered the faster payments system useless by reducing the limit to such a level that one can't even pay one's telephone bill using it is immaterial to the greedy bastards.

[Martin Bonner]

The HP company don't get to choose whether or not to use the small claims procedure. They can choose to make a claim or not; it is then allocated to the small claims track, the fast track (which is slower), or the multi track *by the court* (mainly depending on the size of the claim).

[Mark]

So it still may not be allocated to the small claims track thereby making it very difficult (i.e. expensive) for a individual to defend.

[Steve Walker]

I've never been able to work that one out. They have special arrangements for cheques, allowing them to pay them in long after normal banking hours so as to avoid an extra day's delay and then they elect not to join the faster banking scheme and so add three days to simple electronic payments!

Even with different banking groups - this morning, as usual, I paid money from my RBS business account to my NatWest personal account and then part of it from my NatWest account to our LloydsTSB joint account. The money was there as fast as I could log in!

SteveW