So Who Owns These Bikes?

[penym]

I am trying to help a friend who sufferrs chronic mental illness. She is in her 50s and has psychotic depression. She lives in social housing and a young couple “befriended” her, visiting her and showing interest in her two dogs. They persuaded her to buy them two bikes at a cost of £500 plus a phone on contract. They have no credit but she bought the bikes from a Littlewoods catalogue and got the phone from EE. The couple agreed to pay her monthly for the phone and the bikes but have only paid one month out of three that they have had this stuff. She has no written contract with these people and is unlikely to recover money from them.

From what she has found out, they have conned another tenant into giving them money and the Council had to move her away. My friend is very impulsive and rang EE and cancelled the phone contract which did not please the couple.

She has been told by one of the neighbours that they are trying to sell the bikes that she is paying for.

I feel so sorry for her, left with a debt by cunning people who knowing of her mental illness, persuaded her to but goods for them with no honest intention to pay the money spent. She would obviously like to repossess the bikes but she is alone and is scared of them. Her housing officer asked a police officer to visit, but he said as no criminal offense had been committed there was nothing the police could do.

All I can think of is to ask the support worker to help her deal with Littlewods about the bikes and with two other companies who lent her money. She is on DLA plus PIP and housing benefits.

Having written all this down, I cannot see that she has any legal protection, but it seems so unfair that they could sell the bikes, get the proceeds and yet my friend has to pay for them.

She lives in the Midlands and I live in London so can only listen to her on the phone.

Is there anything to be done to help in this situation?

Penym

[staffordian]

From a layman's perspective...

Your friend bought the bikes. The couple have no proof of purchase (unlike your friend).

It is therefore quite possible for your friend to argue that she bought the bikes to lend to her "friends", and if they are now selling what they don't own, surely that then becomes a criminal matter?

Just a thought.

[pochisoldi]

From my understanding of the situation, the bikes have been dishonestly appropriated - i.e. stolen. (The theft occurred when they decided not to pay and to sell the bikes)
Report this to the police initially as a theft from a vulnerable person. (no different than theft from anyone else, but it plays to the concept that the Police have a higher duty of care to society's vulnerable, and might see the matter investigated further)

PochiSoldi

[redsturgeon]

Yes, clearly a couple of con artists who like to prey on the vulnerable. The unfortunate thing is though by the sound of their history they will keep on badgering her now in a way that the police will find difficult to stop.

John

[Clitheroekid]

It is therefore quite possible for your friend to argue that she bought the bikes to lend to her "friends", and if they are now selling what they don't own, surely that then becomes a criminal matter?

The friend can't argue that she lent the bikes to the scrotes as she didn't. To deliberately lie to the police would make her morally equivalent to them.

I can't see that it is a criminal matter, as I don't see how you could prove intent on the part of the scrotes. Essentially, your friend bought the bikes then sold them to the scrotes, simultaneously lending them the purchase price. It's therefore a purely civil claim for breach of contract.

Your friend can't even just `repossess' the bikes. Title to them passed to the scrotes on delivery, and a seller can only retake possession of goods that have been sold and delivered if they have a written agreement containing a retention of title pending payment clause, which clearly doesn't apply here.

Strictly speaking, her legal remedy is to sue the scrotes for the money owed and get a judgment. She could then issue a warrant of execution enabling bailiffs to seize the bikes. Unfortunately, in the real world, by the time she got anywhere near that point the bikes would probably be long gone, and I doubt there would be any other assets worth seizing.

If I were in her position I'd be tempted to get a friend to see if they could buy the bikes by way of a cheque, and then stop the cheque! Unfortunately, I can't see the scrotes being willing to take a cheque (though they might be persuaded if the offer was high enough!)

[penym]

Thank you for all your replies. Well, it is resolved by telling their next door neighbour ( who knew they were trying to sell the bikes) to have a chat with these horrible people and tell them my friend has asked the police to call as they are trying to sell stolen goods. They fell for this and the bikes were returned!, plus the phone she bought for the male, which she had cancelled with EE.

So one of the bikes is going straight back to Littlewoods but the man drilled holes on the other bike so he could have a small trailer on it. Littlewoods will not accept this bike as it is damaged. She will have to pay for this one and try to sell it once it is hers bought and paid for. I do not know what she is doing with the phone, a Samsung Galaxy 6, but it was returned with the back panel cracked.It is really owned by Mobiles Direct as she says they supplied the phone as part of the contract package.I think she must return it.

Once again thanks to everyone who answered. Clitheroe Kid, these people are not the type who pay with or accept cheques!

penym