Lbl Bill of Sale - churning out unfair terms

[frustrated46]

Hi,

 

I found something out on Friday which might be useful to everyone. The OFT site page detailing the unfair terms in the lbl bill of sale states it was activated and an undertaking from lbl obtained in Feb 2006. At the time I thought that the OFT itself had got the date wrong, ie, it should have been February 2009.

 

But talking to the trading standards officer from Wandsworth Council, he confirmed it was actually Feb 2006. However, my BOS, the one I signed in October last year has ALL of the terms considered unfair by the OFT still in it. They have not been changed despite the undertaking from the company. The trading standards officer asked me to send him a copy because if lbl have NOT adhered to an undertaking three years ago, and are still churning out the same terms, it is quite serious. Particularly because they are currently appealing the CC license revocation by the OFT, and the guy I was talking to at Wandsworth said that if they DID manage to keep their licence, they would have to give "Undertakings". Such undertakings would be meaningless if they haven't complied with previous undertakings.

 

So check your BOS against the OFT unfair terms list and contact the guy at Wandsworth trading standards, and the OFT asap.

[dampriser]

Hi,

 

I found something out on Friday which might be useful to everyone. The OFT site page detailing the unfair terms in the lbl bill of sale states it was activated and an undertaking from lbl obtained in Feb 2006. At the time I thought that the OFT itself had got the date wrong, ie, it should have been February 2009.

 

But talking to the trading standards officer from Wandsworth Council, he confirmed it was actually Feb 2006. However, my BOS, the one I signed in October last year has ALL of the terms considered unfair by the OFT still in it. They have not been changed despite the undertaking from the company. The trading standards officer asked me to send him a copy because if lbl have NOT adhered to an undertaking three years ago, and are still churning out the same terms, it is quite serious. Particularly because they are currently appealing the CC license revocation by the OFT, and the guy I was talking to at Wandsworth said that if they DID manage to keep their licence, they would have to give "Undertakings". Such undertakings would be meaningless if they haven't complied with previous undertakings.

 

So check your BOS against the OFT unfair terms list and contact the guy at Wandsworth trading standards, and the OFT asap.

 

Already made a complaint with the OFT about this and other things. Had a response last week stating they are taking up my complaint and that they are approaching LBL for a response.

Will of course post back when i know more.

[SillyFool]

Hi all, I too have discovered this and the OFT have acknowledged the fact that the 'some of the terms of Bill of Sale you signed appear not to be compliant with the Undertaking effective from 23 February 2006'

Does anybody know if this therefore makes the Bill of Sale unenforceable? The loan itself will still probably stand but can they retain my log book and have a declared financial interest in my vehicle? Any help would be greatly appreciated as I wish to sell my car to fund a new home but cannot do so whilst LBL have 'outstanding finance' on it.

Many Thanks

[frustrated46]

Hi, I talked to the trading standards officer at Wandsworth council about this and he asked for a response from lbl. They said it was a ONE-OFF mistake, and I was the only one...

I need to inform the OFT too, can you let me know who to contact? The more they have knowledge of, the less likely they will allow lbl to retain their licence.

[SillyFool]

Hi frustrated46, all I did was email my query to the enquiries email address at the OFT (enquiries@oft.gov.uk) with a copy of my Bill of Sale and a copy of the 2006 instructions (although they would obviously have these) I got my letter back from them within 1 week stating that LBL did not comply and they may need to speak to me further should they take the matter further with regards to licensing etc.

[actionblusox]

Hi frustrated46, all I did was email my query to the enquiries email address at the OFT (enquiries@oft.gov.uk) with a copy of my Bill of Sale and a copy of the 2006 instructions (although they would obviously have these) I got my letter back from them within 1 week stating that LBL did not comply and they may need to speak to me further should they take the matter further with regards to licensing etc.

 

hi

may need to speak to you further for what result or reason?

 

and also

if the OFT do not allow lbl to retain their licence what would happen to all of us that have been conned by these lowlife?

ie will it be passed on to some other low life and we still hide our cars?.

or will all loans given out since feb 2006 be null and void and scrapped as a con?

i was forced into taking out 3 loans from £500 which was the first, to pay the previos loans off and i now owe them a small fortune but they have not contacted me for 2 years since i sent them a letter claiming misrepresentation and extortionate rates.

any help cos i too need to sell my car.

thanks

[SillyFool]

They just signed off their letter stating that if they do decide to take any action against this trader they may need to contact me again in the future. Presumably to use my complaint/example of non compliance as one of the reasons for removing their licence or similar.

If any can help with regards to my intial question about whether this makes my Bill of Sale unenforceable I would be very grateful.

[frustrated46]

Tricky question, because only a judge can decide that. I would argue, however, that it does because the purpose of the unfair terms was to unfairly prejudice the rights of the consumer.

[Blown up]

Will also be making several complaints to the OFT soon about LBL as I am helping my friend with her loan from them , I will post as soon as I can , also waiting to hear from the high court about the BOS. Will post about this once I have had a reply. I am now in the process of checking her terms to see if they have been changed . Thank you for the advice about Wandsworth Trading Standards , every piece of the puzzle helps.

Edited July 8, 2009 by Blown up
named wrong person

[frustrated46]

Hi, just an update. I have had two emails from the OFT, the first wanting a copy of the Bill of Sale I signed last year with the Unfair Terms still in it, and the second wanting a copy of the lbl defence to my court action. They would like to see this because I let them know that lbl seem to be saying to the court that the OFT had NO RIGHT to find their terms unfair...

 

They say in the defence:

 

9. With respect to sub-paragraph 6(i) is admitted that the defendant has corresponded with the Office of Fair Trading ("the OFT") concerning the provisions of its bils of sale. It is denied that any findings of unfairness have resulted or that the OFT is capable of making such findings.

10. As to paragraph 6(ii) the defendant denies that any of the said terms has been found to be unfair whether under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations or otherwise and/or tht any of them is unfair. It is further denied that terms 7 and 8 of the bill of sale are unfair in light of the provisions of paragraph 1(e) of schedule 2 of the said regulations.

Isn't this, well, a lie??

 

Frustrated

[dampriser]

Hi, just an update. I have had two emails from the OFT, the first wanting a copy of the Bill of Sale I signed last year with the Unfair Terms still in it, and the second wanting a copy of the lbl defence to my court action. They would like to see this because I let them know that lbl seem to be saying to the court that the OFT had NO RIGHT to find their terms unfair...

 

They say in the defence:

 

9. With respect to sub-paragraph 6(i) is admitted that the defendant has corresponded with the Office of Fair Trading ("the OFT") concerning the provisions of its bils of sale. It is denied that any findings of unfairness have resulted or that the OFT is capable of making such findings.

 

10. As to paragraph 6(ii) the defendant denies that any of the said terms has been found to be unfair whether under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations or otherwise and/or tht any of them is unfair. It is further denied that terms 7 and 8 of the bill of sale are unfair in light of the provisions of paragraph 1(e) of schedule 2 of the said regulations.

 

Isn't this, well, a lie??

 

Frustrated

 

My update is that Mr De Bie has replied to me, but only answered one part of one question, and ignored the rest. The OFT have confirmed they have received the response too, but are awaiting its allocation to an adjudicator.

I have however obtained the registration number of my BOS with the court, whom i phoned, and they confirmed was registered on the 7th day.

 

So now I'm just waiting for the OFT to assess Mr De Bie's response, which shouldn't be too long now.

 

It just pee's me off that they have ignored my question in relation to the unfair terms.

 

I'm wondering that the fact that they have ignored the OFT's instruction of changing the unfair terms constitute an unfair relationship between LBL and myself??

Has anyone seen case notes on the unfair relationship clause being successfully challenged, as i understand it's a relatively new clause?

[SillyFool]

Hi Frustrated46, when you say about LBL's defence to your court action presumably you have issued formal proceedings against them? What are you actually claiming for? I want to commence action myself so should this be for the return of Log Book?

[frustrated46]

They took my car, so I got an exparte injunction to stop them selling it. The claim is for the return of my car and costs.

[tomterm8]

Not withstanding the fact that this is not legal advice I would recommend anyone taking legal action to consider whether, on the face of it, a BoS with terms that substantially contradict a legally binding undertaking between the OFT and that company may constitute a breach of section 140A of the consumer credit act 1974, with the effects laid out in section 140B of the consumer credit act 1974. (These sections were introduced via the Consumer Credit act 2006).