GOVERNMENTS RESPONSE TO THE CONSULTATIONS ON THE FUTURE OF BILLS of SALES

[Nicky Bodmin]

Hi Guys have a read of this. Bob Imrie is the guy that trains the Trading Standards Officers his website is amazing. A little something from it

 

Bills of Sale

 

A few lenders, mostly small businesses and trading only within a locality, provide credit secured on the debtor’s goods but do not take possession of the goods or property. (The goods concerned are normally motor vehicles.) Any breach can lead to immediate repossession. This is of course what happens with a land mortgage, but these are not controlled because there is a presumption of legal advice being taken. Where the security is on goods however, the Bills of Sale Acts (1878, 1882 and 1890) require that the loan be registered at the High Court in London. The OFT has published guidance on Bills of Sale, and can assist Trading Standards staff with looking up the register at the High Court.

The problem is that a consumer who defaults on a loan with an attached Bill of Sale may face immediate repossession of the goods, there being none of the protection provided for Hire Purchase and Conditional Sale agreements.

The Government has announced that it requires the industry to subscribe to a Code of Practice, and CCTA's one is attached to the end of the Government's response to the consultation on the future of Bills of Sale.

Useful information from the OFT can be found here, but note that I have had to update it to cover recent changes in the law. Finally, below is an extract from the High Court's rules.

13.4 Bills of Sale Acts 1878 and 1882 and the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1967 (RSC O.95)

13.4.1 Every bill of sale and absolute bill of sale to which the Act of 1878 applies must be registered under s.8 of that Act, within 7 clear days of its making, and, under s.11 of the Act of 1878, the registration of a bill of sale must be renewed at least once every 5 years. The register for the purpose of the Bills of Sale Acts contains the particulars of registered bills of sale and an alphabetical index of the names of the grantors, and is kept in the Action Department in Room E15 – E17.

13.4.2 An application to register a bill of sale, which is made within the prescribed time, should be made by filing in Room E15-E17 the original bill of sale and any document annexed to it together with a witness statement or affidavit in form PF 179 or PF 180. An application to re-register a bill of sale, which is made within the prescribed time, should be made by filing in Room E15-E17 a witness statement or affidavit in form PF 181.

13.4.3 An application to rectify;

1. an omission to register, by extending the time for registration, or
   
2. an omission or mis-statement of the name, residence or occupation of a person in the register, by correcting the registration,
   

ust be made by witness statement or affidavit to a Master of the Queen's Bench Division. In addition to the matters set out in forms PF 179 or PF 180, the evidence in support must also set out the particulars of the omission and state the grounds on which the application is made.

13.4.4 Where the residence of the grantor of the bill of sale or the person against whom the process is issued is outside the London bankruptcy district, or where the bill of sale describes the goods as being in a place outside that district, the Central Office will send copies of the bill of sale to the appropriate county court district judge.

13.4.5 The Master, on being satisfied that the omission or mis-statement of name, residence or occupation of a person in the register was accidental or due to inadvertence, may order the omission or mis-statement to be rectified by the insertion in the register of the correct name, residence or occupation of the person.

13.4.6 Where the Master is satisfied that the omission to register a bill of sale or a witness statement or affidavit of renewal within the prescribed time was accidental or due to inadvertence, s/he may extend the time for registration on such terms ass/he thinks fit. In order to protect any creditors who have accrued rights of property in the assets in respect of which the bill of sale was granted between the date of the bill and its actual registration, any order to extend the time for registration will normally be made "without prejudice" to those creditors. The order will be drawn up in form PF 182.

13.4.7 An application for an order that a memorandum of satisfaction be written on a registered copy of a bill of sale, made without the consent of the person entitled to the benefit of the bill of sale, must be made by the issue of a Part 8 Claim Form. Where the consent of the person entitled to the benefit of the bill of sale has been obtained, the application may be made by a witness statement or affidavit containing that consent and verifying the signature on it. Form PF 183 contains precedents for the evidence and forms of consent. Where the application is made with consent, the evidence need not be served on any other person. If the Master is satisfied on the evidence, s/he will endorse his/her approval on the witness statement or affidavit (an order is not normally drawn up) and send it to Room E17 for a memorandum of satisfaction to be entered on the copy of the Bill in the Registry. If a copy of the bill of sale has been sent to a county court district judge, a notice of satisfaction will be sent to that district judge.

13.4.8 Where the consent has not been obtained, the Claim Form must be served on the person entitled to the benefit of the bill of sale and must be supported by evidence that the debt (if any) for which the bill of sale was made has been satisfied or discharged.

13.4.9 An application to restrain removal on sale of goods seized in accordance with RSC O.95 r.3 and under the proviso to s.7 of the Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act 1882 must be made by the issue of a Part 8 Claim Form for hearing before the Interim Applications Judge.

13.4.10 Under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1967 an application to record an instrument creating a fixed or floating charge on the assets of a registered society or to rectify any omission or mis-statement in it must be made within 14 days beginning with the date of its execution.

13.4.11 Under RSC O.95 r.5 and in accordance with s.1(5) of the Act of 1967 the court may order;

1. that the period for making an application for recording a charge be extended, or
   
2. an omission or mis-statement in such an application be rectified.
   

The procedure for obtaining an order as in (1) or (2) above is similar to that under s. 14 of the Bills of Sale Act 1878 and must be made by witness statement or affidavit to a Master of the Queen's Bench Division as in paragraph 13.4.3 above and must exhibit a copy of the instrument duly authenticated in the prescribed manner together with any other particulars relating to the charge.

13.4.12 RSC O.95 r.3 refers to the assignment of book debts; the register of assignments of book debts is kept in Room E15- E17 in the Central Office. An application for registration under s. 344 of the Insolvency Act 1986 should be made in accordance with RSC O.95 r.6(2). Parties may use form PF 186 for their evidence in support. It is helpful if the original assignment is also produced.

 

 

Select this button to go back where you came from:

Return to reference menu - - Go to creditlaw homepage

Copyright 2011 © Bob Imrie

Site developed by David Imrie

[Hip_Hop]

Thanks Nicky,

 

It's always helpful having such reference articles to peruse when one is looking for answers.

 

It may also help others to know of my personal experience of the Bill of Sales rules, in conjunction with the above. Especially if one is thinking of getting a judge to make a BOS void?

 

Some may think after reading the rules, that a Judge will interpret their Bill of Sale as having to be made void if they believe their Bill of Sale doesn't strictly abide by the rules. This assumption IMHO is usually arrived at without considering all the competing interests that a Judge must consider.

 

I make this point following on from my own, very personal experience with 13.4.1 and a Master at the High Court.

 

13.4.1 Every bill of sale and absolute bill of sale to which the Act of 1878 applies must be registered under s.8 of that Act, within 7 clear days of its making.

 

I had an audience with the Master at the HCJ last summer, when I attempted to have a Bill of Sale made void, on the grounds of it being registered outside of 7 days. It was registered c9 days after its making,

 

The Master who I saw, was noted by the clerks in the Action Department in Room E15 – E17 as the expert on the archaic law of Bills of Sale and the best person to present my sealed copy of a Bill of Sale, as it had been registered outside of 7 clear days.

 

You can surprisingly turn up at the High Court, wait in turn in a narrow corridor, to see a Master or Deputy Master without an appointment, provided they are in attendance. Quite amazing really.

 

The Master initially thought I was the Lender (I was suited up at the time), looking to have the Bill of Sale registered outside 7 clear days of being made.

 

He enquired where my supporting witness statement was and when he realised I was the Borrower, not the Lender, his attitude changed immediately.

 

He basically implied that being days out was neither here nor there and metaphorically waved me away.

 

No matter what polite remonstrations I attempted to make, to support the BOS, being made void for being outside of 7 clear days, he was simply not interested.

 

I was obviously under the impression that the rules of registration of Bills of Sales were non compromising in their interpretation? I was mistaken. It appears, Judges look at all the competing interests of all the parties, (whether both parties are present or not).

 

On reflection, I believe, the judge interpreted my situation as being, that the Lender had loaned and the Borrower had freely entered in to accepting such loan. So the registered BOS should stand regardless whether it is, or isn't registered within 7 clear days.

 

This interpretation is further supported by an observation made by another poster, OBWanBennoni, who noted when visiting the HCJ too, that there is a ledger in the Action Dept that has numerous entries showing Bills of Sales that have been registered outside of 7 clear days, in several entries many weeks later.

 

It seems if the High Court has registered a Bill of Sale, than for all intent and purpose, the Bill of Sale stands as being formally registered.

 

This probably explains, why there is no precedent case law that shows a Bill of Sale being made void for simply being registered outside of 7 clear days, despite any interpretation that the man in the street may conclude, by reading the Bill of Sale rules?

 

 

As per usual, just offering up my personal opine with the usual caveats.

 

Hope it is helpful.

 

Hip_Hop

Edited February 5, 2011 by Hip_Hop
clarity

[Nicky Bodmin]

Hi Guys,

 

I found out something interesting.

 

Has any one out there got any documents with different address details on.

Ie. Should have a doc proof of who you are ie passport driver lic. and proof of address Utility bill.

 

If those two evidence doc have a different address on each of them. then the loan company have not shown due diligence, then they has not acted responsibly to satisfy the requirements of the money laundering laws. because without these checks the money could be used for illegal purposes.

 

Now the courts will listen to those words. POWERFUL stuf. It needs looking into.

 

You know what the police and the courts are like when you say money laundering,

 

That info came from Bob Imries again the Trading Standards he trains all the TS people

[Hip_Hop]

Hi Nicky,

 

I'm surprised that you are raising this again as you raised the same point last October? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?263511-bos&p=3183644&highlight=#post3183644 In any event, It's not really a Bill of Sale point and should rightly be raised in a new thread.

 

I did respond at the time that the lender would simply wait for the borrower to supply correctly addressed documents. That avenue is the one that Lender's take and is supported in your thread of last October.

 

There don't appear to be threads on the CAG that reinforce that they are acting any differently and that they are falling foul of the Money Laundering rules, by accepting documents that prove that due diligence has not been followed?

 

Are you aware of any?

 

I have for convenience, pasted 2 responses made in your thread last October.

 

They still stand up 4 months on.

 

Hi Nicky,

 

As with my loan application, my driving licence was in my old address, after speaking with the lender they said they would only use this one peice of evidence as photo id and not address id.

 

the bill of sale/credit agreement will show the address the borrower gave to the lender, its the 3rd line down on my agreement, if they have supplied you a copy.

regards

 

Hi Nicky,

 

 

Nicky you are no doubt right that there will always be situations where occasionally, addresses may not match, like when one moves house and temporarily has previous addresses on the pertinent docs you refer too, but I doubt a Lender would offer a loan with non matching address details because it would be such a simple process to ask the borrower to get the docs updated and reapply in a few days.

 

 

But I understand why you are asking.

 

Just my considered personal opinion as always, given with the usual caveats.

Edited February 11, 2011 by Hip_Hop

[Nicky Bodmin]

Hi Hip Hop,

 

You are correct it is not a BOS issue. I wasnt making it a point of that.

 

What I am saying there are other ways to put the whole CA into bad light, if these details are not correct. Most of the situations with LBL are a civil matter, breach of either the CA regs or enforcement regs, but this little inacuracy makes it a criminal matter.

 

Now do you see where im taking this. No action can be taken by LBL if it turns out that these two requirements are not met.

 

Because the application doesnt satisfy the money laundering laws if the two proof

 

of ID and proof of address are not the same LBL should not lend on on that application. But decline it.

 

The money laundering laws are far more powerful than civil.

 

If ever proven guilty of this they can go to prison.

 

If anyone wants to follow this for more indepth info contact Bob Imries. He will be able to give all onfo needed. Very interesting man to talk to and very helpful.

 

And well done on your win.

 

What grounds did you do them on. I have tried to find post but couldnt. Im in court on the 3rd March

 

What compensation did you ask for

[Hip_Hop]

Hi Hip Hop,

 

Now do you see where im taking this. No action can be taken by LBL if it turns out that these two requirements are not met.

 

Because the application doesnt satisfy the money laundering laws if the two proof

of ID and proof of address are not the same LBL should not lend on on that application. But decline it..

Except where like the example shown in the case of IMS's posting above, it is perfectly valid to do so, in the circumstances?

 

I don't see why any Lender would need to fundamentally go down the route of not satisfying the requirement as you suggest they might do? Where is the evidence that backs up that this is happening in the real world of "lenders of last resort"?

The present woeful economic climate, and tighter lending restrictions, has meant that there are no shortages of desperate individuals looking for any financial solution, that will help them out.

The money laundering laws are far more powerful than civil.

If ever proven guilty of this they can go to prison.

Absolutely...Any examples on the CAG forum or elsewhere, where a main competitor of Log Book Loans has been proven guilty of this and gone to prison?...........Nope. Why?...See posting response above.

 

And well done on your win.

 

What grounds did you do them on. I have tried to find post but couldnt. Im in court on the 3rd March

 

Link for judgment and order granted against Nine regions Ltd T/A Log Book Loans http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?278885-Judgment-and-Order-Made-Against-NINE-Regions-T-A-Log-Book-Loans!

 

What compensation did you ask for

Link for Out of Court settlement with Nine Regions Ltd T/A Log Book Loans http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?284310-Out-of-court-Settlement-with-Nine-Regions-Ltd-T-A-Log-Book-Loans-%28WON!%29

Edited February 11, 2011 by Hip_Hop
clarity

[Nicky Bodmin]

Thanks Hip Hop,

 

But what did they do to make it an unlawful repro.

 

Also what compesation did you ask for there are so many types depending on what u want

[Nicky Bodmin]

Hi again,

 

I dint know of any CAG that has done this but if it is not put in the case thats what has been done the courts dint do any thing. You have to make it part of the pict of claim.

LB: have failed to do due diligence on the loan.

They have taken unnecessary risks. because when they lend money they have to be sure that person is legitimate. Other wise they maybe allowing them to invest in illegal activities.

if they have relied on 3 different addresses then for the issuing of a BOS then they have not preformed due diligence there fore could have breach the money laundering conduct.

But unless it is used in the case it will not be dealt with by the judge. Wrong I no but the Judges only look at the case in hand.

They don't look for other problems in the CA or the enforcement

If its not on paper or raised in the hearing then it is missed.

This is why Im telling GAGS about it. Its another stick to beat them with.

Contact Bob he will tell you all you need to know

[Hip_Hop]

With respect, We appear to be going around in circles. The reason why you can't find any cases referring to LBL or other similar "Lenders of Last resort" on the CAG or elsewhere is because there isn't any.

Your posting is simply alluding to how one could make the CCA/BOS made void? If a Borrower could show that the proof of address and identity provided by them, could reasonably be shown not to have proven that the applicant's identity was not that as offered by the documentary evidence? No bonafide borrower is going to expose themselves to that, unless of course you are a victim of fraud, where in your case, you are trying to prove that the borrower was not you but a fraudster who had access to false documentation, pretending to be the owner of your vehicle, in order to get a log book loan?

Edited February 11, 2011 by Hip_Hop

[Nicky Bodmin]

Hi Hip Hop,

 

Did you say that the address on driving lic is not the same as proof of address.

 

If so. You have found one. But if you didn't use it in your case then the courts wont look for it. They only deal with what the application is asking for nothing more

[Nicky Bodmin]

Hi

 

Im not talking about my case here Im talking about any CAG or any person that has dealings with them.

 

And yes it is a very strong point that if those basic details and requirements are not in place then LBL should not have processed the loan in the first place.

 

By them not making sure all details ie all addresses the same then that is what they are risking.

[Hip_Hop]

Hi Hip Hop,

 

Did you say that the address on driving lic is not the same as proof of address.

 

If so. You have found one. But if you didn't use it in your case then the courts wont look for it. They only deal with what the application is asking for nothing more

 

No Nicky, it was IMS

Hi Nicky,

 

As with my loan application, my driving licence was in my old address, after speaking with the lender they said they would only use this one peice of evidence as photo id and not address id.

 

the bill of sale/credit agreement will show the address the borrower gave to the lender, its the 3rd line down on my agreement, if they have supplied you a copy.

regards

[Hip_Hop]

Hi

 

Im not talking about my case here Im talking about any CAG or any person that has dealings with them.

 

And yes it is a very strong point that if those basic details and requirements are not in place then LBL should not have processed the loan in the first place.

 

By them not making sure all details ie all addresses the same then that is what they are risking.

 

It would indeed be a strong point if it was happening , but as the CAG forum and no evidence to the contrary elsewhere, amply demonstrate, it isn't, so it's not.

 

Although hypotheticals are always worth a mention in a thread or two, purely for interest sake and to pass the time of day.

 

Without substantive evidence that this is happening in the real world, it has no purpose but to raise a "What if" scenario, when that scenario doesn't really exist. Know what I mean?

 

Anyway, I am exacerbating the circular argument point that I made earlier, so will desist from further comment on this point and move on.

Edited February 11, 2011 by Hip_Hop
typo

[Nicky Bodmin]

well if you find this hard to believe call Bob imries.

 

I find this hard to understand I have given a bit of info that would help allot of people, and all that has happened is you have attacked me saying prove it.

 

Thats fine I wont pass on any more info from this point on.

 

I don't need to find supporting evidence because it is not relevant to my case.

 

But because it was mentioned in the conversation I thought I would post this so it can be used if needed.

 

Do with it what you will.

 

Wish I had never bothered waisting my time on this. I have my own case to deal with and time that should have been put to that instead of this. Good Luck

Edited February 11, 2011 by Nicky Bodmin
changed word

[Nicky Bodmin]

One last question.

 

Why do they make that requirement all documents at the same address when applying for any form of finance.

 

Answer that question and you will understand.