Legal question

[mgcjag]

Hi All.....in conversation re purchasing an E type , checking to see if there is a distraint order on it was raised......never heard of this befor and was told . It is the first stage of bailiffs seizing goods or recovering debt. The Bailiffs can issue a distraint warrant listing assets, which then remain in a persons possession, but may not be sold until the debt is cleared. Should the debtor fail to pay the debt or come to an agreement with creditors then the goods will be seized by bailiffs.
Any one come across this before....is it correct......does an HPI check on this....and what would be the implications should you purchase a car with a distraint order on it....

[christopher storey]

This is what used to be known as " Sheriff in walking possession" and is now controlled by the Taking of Goods Regulations 2013 . However, these regulations do not mention the rights of third parties AFAIK , and thus the position is governed by the general law, which is complicated by a number of potentially conflicting statutes such as the Factors Act 1889 , the Hire Purchase Act 1964 and by other aspects of Mercantile law. However, in general , any purchaser of goods subject to walking possession does not acquire good title even if he buys without notice of the walking possession, and the goods remain liable to seizure even in his hands . I doubt that HPI would have notice of a walking possession agreement

[mgcjag]

Thanks Christopher so it is possibke to buy a vehicle that has a walking possession and it could be seized back off you......another case for buyer beware......what would happen if you asked the seller and got it in wrighting from him that there was no possession order on it....is there another way to totally safe guard yourself from repossession.....thanks Steve

[malcolm]

My understanding is that if you got it in writing from the seller, the vehicle would still be liable to the same rules on seizure, you'd simply have a better (or easier) case for suing the seller. That of course would depend on the sellers ability to pay etc etc. In other words, messy. But what else can you do? I guess we all take a risk when we buy.

[mgcjag]

Would be interesting to find out if when you insure which you would from the day of purchase could cover for repossession

[Herzeg]

Just checked my policy and in the key facts it excludes "loss or damage from fraud, trickerery or deception". If an insurer would cover you for having the high court take it away the "crash for cash" people would soon have a scam running selling cars they don't have a right to sell.

John

[malcolm]

You can insure anything providing you have an insurable interest. You DO have an insurable interest in this; the problem would be finding someone to insure it. I imagine no standard cover would include it. A "name" at Lloyds would insure it, but the cost of one-off policies is normally prohibitive.

[christopher storey]

I think Malcolm has got it in one ! A written statement from the vendor that the car was free of all incumbrances would be an actionable warranty as against the vendor , but by definition if the sheriff has walking possession the vendor isn't good for the money. I must say it's not something I have thought of, but you are right that it is just another hazard , and a worrying one