Guys, remember that the BVRLA guidelines are used for lease vehicles and commercials and are very strict. Finance companies like to use them due to this strictness and ability to try to claw back extra money from you, even though the car is just fired off to an auction.
The CCA only stipulates reasonable condition for a returning vehicle and also limits your liability at 50% of the total value of the car (inc interest). Finance companies could put clauses in your agreements about the car needing a full respray before return, or having it inspected to Papa Johns wear and tear guide, but the term 'reasonable' in the CCA trumps anything they might like to add into a PCP/HP agreement.
Then even more importantly they like to reference your agreement, contract, end of contract charges etc. There is no contract or agreement as this is cancelled once you enforce VT, as entitled to do so, so they cannot refer back to clauses in an agreement that is cancelled.
We'll see where this goes, I'll keep the thread updated.
The CCA only stipulates reasonable condition for a returning vehicle and also limits your liability at 50% of the total value of the car (inc interest). Finance companies could put clauses in your agreements about the car needing a full respray before return, or having it inspected to Papa Johns wear and tear guide, but the term 'reasonable' in the CCA trumps anything they might like to add into a PCP/HP agreement.
Then even more importantly they like to reference your agreement, contract, end of contract charges etc. There is no contract or agreement as this is cancelled once you enforce VT, as entitled to do so, so they cannot refer back to clauses in an agreement that is cancelled.
We'll see where this goes, I'll keep the thread updated.