Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I bought a rx7 three years ago and have since rebuilt the car from the ground up, put in a s5 13b turbo, completely overhauled the interoir, 18" mags, custom paint job, custom bodykit and lots of electronics and motor upgrades. Over $15000 was spent.

Two weeks ago i received a letter from savings and loans saying i must surrender the car to them due to an unpaid loan. i didn't understand this because i paid for the car outright. when calling them they told me that a loan was taken out six years ago for the car by a past owner and $5900 was still owing.

After seeking legal aid i was told i could either pay them $5900 or surrender the car. due to financial diffuculty as i am now a uni student and no family member or friend willing to help me out i had to give up the car.

Legal aid asked why didn't i get an encomberance (outstanding loan) check done on the car when i bought it. being ninteen i had no idea such a check could be done.

I have found out now that checks can be done for $10 at any registration department.

If you or anyone you know know is buying a car privatly or through a car yard, get this check done, even if you know the person you are buying the car from.

I will keep every one posted on what happens.

Thanx for taking the time to read this.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/35239-read-this-encomberance-checks/
Share on other sites

Dude that is some fcuked up shite. But yeah - good to get a REVs check done on a private sale.

I dunno really how they get away with this (ie G'Ment)

Have you got the details of the dude you got if from ??

Good advice..... Seek as much legal as you can and keep us posted

Best of luck to you mate !

B-Man

What a bummer. :rolleyes:

Unfortunately as far as the law is concerned they own the vehicle and the person who sold you the car had no right to. At the end of the day all they want is some $$$.

Have you tried to come to an arrangement with savings and loan to pay it off? Ask to talk to a senior manager and explain your situation, then put it in writing. If it is not in writing it means nothing to them. You never know they may be amenable to a lower amount or a monthly payment.

You could also sell the car (acknowledging their encumbrance) and keep the difference. If you are going to do this, inform S+L and let them know it may take a while but they will get their money. Support your case with a copy of an ad to sell the car.

Another option may be to remove everything you put on the car than can be unbolted and give them whatever is left (then buy it back at auction).

Good luck whatever happens. :P

(for anyone in NSW buying a vehicle privately DO A REVS CHECK!)

B-Man, "I dunno really how they get away with this (ie G'Ment)" :confused:

If banks and finance companies did not have the basic right to secure property for which they were providing the finance there would be no lending for anyone to buy anything. It is not a scam. The scam in this instance is the vendor misrepresenting ownership of the vehicle.

Unfortunately for slippery ignorance is no excuse.

Hi Dino, I agree about the lending, banks, security etc. And yes the owness is on the buyer to check encumerance out.

I am down on the G'Ment ATM cause I just got lumped with a $7800 Tax Bill - somehting about Superanuation Surcharge - WTF ?? - I have NFI what this is all about - But fancy lumping $8K bill on you just like that ?? Needless to say, I will be talking to Tax and Legal about it.

Same with Slipery.... It's a tough call.

What I mean by the G'ment getting away with it (should have explained myself some more) is that in cases like these , maybe the G'Ment should mediate and set up some form of schedule or somehting - or go after the fcker who defaulted in the first place.

The damn bank prolly gets $$ twice - once from the loan defaulter and again from the innocent (but ignorant) new owner - well not new, this loan is 6 years old - Pity it didn't kick in after the statute.....

It all sux......

Now I might have to sell the Gloria .......

Yeah pity there is no "protection" for the consumer as you say. I agree 100% but their response would be "should have done a check, that's why we provide the system".

o/t - re. Superannuation Surcharge Levy :hellpisd: don't even get me started.....I'll see if I can dig up some public info for you. Our prof. association has been on this for ages...what a ****ing rort for "the man". :cuss: :goddam: :P:rolleyes: :spew:

You could also sell the car (acknowledging their encumbrance) and keep the difference. If you are going to do this, inform S+L and let them know it may take a while but they will get their money. Support your case with a copy of an ad to sell the car.

Can he do this? Isn't this just as illegal as the first person who sold the car to this guy?

Surely to sell the car, he would have to pay S+L their $5900 first, otherwise he'd be selling something that wasn't his? dunno.gif

Well you have a few choices.... (not that I know your legal rights.. if you have any)

1. Strip the car and hand it back

2. Counter sue the guy who sold you the car

3. Talk to S+L about it, see if they will do you a deal?? Most banks love to give out money so they might help you out.

I am surprised that they dont go after the guy who used to own it!!

I don't think the guy who sold slippery the car can be held responsible...ie, slippery has taken on the debt when he took the car, just because he didn't do the revs check....thats the way i understand it...which is why a revs check is always recommended before buying any car....

slippery - so sorry to hear! especially since you put alot of money and effort into rebuilding the car :D wasn't it possible (like a few others have suggested) to sell a few parts to get some money? and maybe get a loan for the rest? that'd be a better option than selling your pride and joy?! :)

I don't think the guy who sold slippery the car can be held responsible...ie, slippery has taken on the debt when he took the car, just because he didn't do the revs check

Yeah I think your right moanie. When I sold my celica (traded in on the skyline) the debt went with it, and the dealer paid off the loan..

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...