Ex-staff changed company car ownership and got loan against it, car now being repossessed!

[madhav]

36 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

If I understand you correctly, the 500 k baht and the 'other car' is the one she stole form your company and borrowed against? If the Focus was purchased and financed at the same dealership, I would be very surprised. Ford primarily uses Tisco Bank for vehicle financing but some dealerships have been known to shop around for other loan companies if Tisco reject an applicant. It depends on how hungry or connected the salesman is. If it is the same dealership and financing, unless she has a steady supply of guarantors or co-signers, then I suspect something definitely dodgy going on.

At the same time the company vehicle (ford fiesta) was purchased new by the company, the ex staff member also purchased a car for herself on finance (ford focus). She has been paying that car off steadily while working with us for the last 2 years up until she quit in Jan 2017.

 

However in July last year while she was still working for us, she went through the whole process already outlined in this thread, ie went to the police and transport etc and got the ownership changed (after reporting that we sold it to her for 500k) and then applied for the loan on this newly acquired car (our company car the Ford Fiesta). This was done with another finance company (not tisco) who I believe she has a friend working within the company.

 

This whole operation was done while still in possession of her car which obviously had yet to be fully paid off. By now I suspect this personal car of hers, the Ford Focus has probably been repossessed also.

Edited April 23, 2017 by madhav

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I am not privy to the laws and can therefore can only offer opinion.... 

 

... IMO: The Finance company did not carry out Full Due Diligence... they have been defrauded, not the original owner. 

 

... IF I buy a stolen car, it is my fault - I see this issue in similar light. 

 

What concerns me here - is due to such porous security at the DLT it leaves anyone open to an easy theft.

 

 

Agree with you last sentence.

 

I am not sure though the finance company is liable for anything. They did their due diligence, have transfered a car to their name based on all legal papers required.

[robblok]

8 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I am not privy to the laws and can therefore can only offer opinion.... 

 

... IMO: The Finance company did not carry out Full Due Diligence... they have been defrauded, not the original owner. 

 

... IF I buy a stolen car, it is my fault - I see this issue in similar light. 

 

What concerns me here - is due to such porous security at the DLT it leaves anyone open to an easy theft.

 

 

I think your looking at US law.. there you would be right.. but its not the same in Dutch law.. and so I have been told Thai law. Most Thai law is NOT based on US law.

 

The finance company did due diligence... there was a blue book, the car was in possession of the person with the blue book. There are no more requirements. What else do you expect them to do. If you have a blue book and you have the car, i can assume the car is yours because these are the documents needed and you have the car. So I acted in good faith when I buy from you I am protected from claims from the rightful owner.

Now if it was clear the blue book was forged (it was not it was handed out by the DLT) then I acted in bad faith.. no protection.

 

I have looked US law up its different there, but I have been assured Thai law has the same clauses as Dutch law. The Thais got most of their laws from the French.. German and English (not US) Dutch got their laws mainly from French and German. So its often similar to Thai law.

 

I do agree with your assessment of the DLT. 

[chrissables]

14 hours ago, madhav said:

I know all the details of her house, her phone number, mother and grandparents home, all of it. But what good is this info? The police are the ones who must act, so unless they do, my knowledge of this information is useless.

 

She had access to the car the whole time, and funny enough she actually was paying off the loan, there were several repayments.

 

 

 

Yes have thought about this. Something needs to be done. The car is worth at least 500k. If we let is go, need to buy a new one. Even if we pay the money back on her behalf, the car is technically still hers. So this avenue is useless also. Will need to get another car in the mean time while the process is in motion.

 

It is a good question though as the process is very energy consuming.

Have you looked into a private investigator chasing her down, maybe with his fee partly coming from success?

[madhav]

6 minutes ago, chrissables said:

Have you looked into a private investigator chasing her down, maybe with his fee partly coming from success?

 

This along with a donation to the police would definitely speed everything up. I agree and thanks for the input.

 

For me the question remains what will happen when the police catch her and she gives her testimony?

 

Whose to say that her story will be that we signed all the papers and authorised the transfer of ownership and the deal was made legitimately. Then what? It will be her word against ours and therefore likely need to be moved to court.

[NanLaew]

14 minutes ago, robblok said:

I think your looking at US law.. there you would be right.. but its not the same in Dutch law.. and so I have been told Thai law. Most Thai law is NOT based on US law.

 

The finance company did due diligence... there was a blue book, the car was in possession of the person with the blue book. There are no more requirements. What else do you expect them to do. If you have a blue book and you have the car, i can assume the car is yours because these are the documents needed and you have the car. So I acted in good faith when I buy from you I am protected from claims from the rightful owner.

Now if it was clear the blue book was forged (it was not it was handed out by the DLT) then I acted in bad faith.. no protection.

 

I have looked US law up its different there, but I have been assured Thai law has the same clauses as Dutch law. The Thais got most of their laws from the French.. German and English (not US) Dutch got their laws mainly from French and German. So its often similar to Thai law.

 

I do agree with your assessment of the DLT. 

Yes, good points indeed.

 

Consumer protection in Thailand is a bit of an oxymoron.

[NanLaew]

5 minutes ago, madhav said:

Whose to say that her story will be that we signed all the papers and authorised the transfer of ownership and the deal was made legitimately. Then what? It will be her word against ours and therefore likely need to be moved to court.

But apart from the documents that she forged to enable the fraud, she doesn't have any proof that anyone in the company ever gave their permission for her to do what she did, verbally or in writing. If the blue book was lost, she should have advised the owner of the car note of such instead of anonymously going ahead and doing what she did. She  must be really desperate for cash... oh wait, we are in Thailand.

 

Sadly, it is going to cost you money to do the right thing and try and get justice served but that isn't unique to Thailand... just maybe a bit more expensive with all the extra hand outs needed to get people to do their jobs properly.

[madhav]

15 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

But apart from the documents that she forged to enable the fraud, she doesn't have any proof that anyone in the company ever gave their permission for her to do what she did, verbally or in writing. If the blue book was lost, she should have advised the owner of the car note of such instead of anonymously going ahead and doing what she did. She  must be really desperate for cash... oh wait, we are in Thailand.

 

Sadly, it is going to cost you money to do the right thing and try and get justice served but that isn't unique to Thailand... just maybe a bit more expensive with all the extra hand outs needed to get people to do their jobs properly.

The POA is the only proof required from my understanding and according to her we instructed her and therefore gave permission for her to do this. This was the very purpose of the POA. To give authority for her to act on company behalf.

[chrissables]

45 minutes ago, madhav said:

 

This along with a donation to the police would definitely speed everything up. I agree and thanks for the input.

 

For me the question remains what will happen when the police catch her and she gives her testimony?

 

Whose to say that her story will be that we signed all the papers and authorised the transfer of ownership and the deal was made legitimately. Then what? It will be her word against ours and therefore likely need to be moved to court.

Well if you have the original book, i would think it shows she was lying. But.......

[kartman]

So the car owes the finance co 240k which is probably what it will make at Auction which is why the finance co loaned 200k what will it cost and how long to get it back in the OPs possession if everything goes smoothly. How many days between repossession and ability to sell for the FC.

[Don Mega]

27 minutes ago, madhav said:

The POA is the only proof required from my understanding and according to her we instructed her and therefore gave permission for her to do this. This was the very purpose of the POA. To give authority for her to act on company behalf.

But if she is saying that  why would you have not given her the book as well , instead she reported it lost  to get a new one and the fact you still have the original book screws up her story.

Edited April 23, 2017 by Don Mega

[NanLaew]

24 minutes ago, chrissables said:

Well if you have the original book, i would think it shows she was lying. But.......

It would still be a case of someone having to prove that it was never lost, ie. she lied about its loss.The OP already says the finance company doesn't recognize it as it was already reported lost.

 

In order to get the new one, did she report the original lost to the police or is it all done in-house at the transport office? If she made a false statement to the police or a government officer (land transport officer), is there legal recourse against that?

 

Quote

The blue book was reported as stolen by the ex staff, she went to the police to report it and the police report was taken along with the other necessary falsified documents to the transport department to reissue a new blue book.

I went back and see that she lied to the police. Does Thailand have laws about telling lies to the police (regardless of their own reputation) or government officers?

 

Edited April 23, 2017 by NanLaew

[grollies]

It does all hinge on PoA and I go back to my previous point about the issuing solicitor and notary - yes, a notary is required according to Siam Legal.

http://www.siam-legal.com/legal_services/Power-of-attorney-in-Thailand.php

 

''The law requires both Principal and Agent to be legally capacitated, and able to either give or execute the powers enumerated in the POA. It must also conform with all other formal and substantial requisites of law for it be considered valid and enforceable, among which is the notarization of the instrument after it is signed by both parties.''

 

 

 

[Don Mega]

14 minutes ago, grollies said:

It does all hinge on PoA and I go back to my previous point about the issuing solicitor and notary - yes, a notary is required according to Siam Legal.

http://www.siam-legal.com/legal_services/Power-of-attorney-in-Thailand.php

 

''The law requires both Principal and Agent to be legally capacitated, and able to either give or execute the powers enumerated in the POA. It must also conform with all other formal and substantial requisites of law for it be considered valid and enforceable, among which is the notarization of the instrument after it is signed by both parties.''

 

 

 

Have transferred ownership of several vehicles using a POA and never had it needed to be notarised.

 

Edit: It had to be witnessed by a 3rd party, which I have always got my wife  to be the "witness".

Edited April 23, 2017 by Don Mega

[madhav]

7 minutes ago, Don Mega said:

Have transferred ownership of several vehicles using a POA and never had it needed to be notarised.

 

Edit: It had to be witnessed by a 3rd party, which I have always got my wife  to be the "witness".

It required 3 signatures on a bit of paper. That's all it takes. Quite absurd really if you think about how much damage it can cause someone.

[madhav]

57 minutes ago, Don Mega said:

But if she is saying that  why would you have not given her the book as well , instead she reported it lost  to get a new one and the fact you still have the original book screws up her story.

This is a good point and a strong argument. Although she could argue that it was lost when we sent her to get another one but then it was found at a later date.

[grollies]

7 minutes ago, madhav said:

It required 3 signatures on a bit of paper. That's all it takes. Quite absurd really if you think about how much damage it can cause someone.

Just had a look at online PoA forms. Scarily devoid of legal requirement, like you and Don Mega say, just a few signatures.

 

Wonder why Siam Legal say what they quote on their website.

 

Usually the acting solicitor has to confirm the grantor is competant to give permission for PoA.

 

TIT.

[Don Mega]

Just now, madhav said:

This is a good point and a strong argument. Although she could argue that it was lost when we sent her to get another one but then it was found at a later date.

But you did not sign a POA for her to change book into her name which brings up the issue of company registered VS private registered, if it is registered as a company asset what are the implication for the company disposing of the vehicle  ?

[madhav]

5 minutes ago, Don Mega said:

But you did not sign a POA for her to change book into her name which brings up the issue of company registered VS private registered, if it is registered as a company asset what are the implication for the company disposing of the vehicle  ?

Can't remember exactly what the fake POA gave authority for, will take a look and get back and post it...there were 3 items on it, I think it was:

 

1: Permission to submit the police report of lost blue book

2: Get a new blue book

3: sell the car.

 

However will take a look later.

 

Disposing of the vehicle: It was something we needed to research because initially there may have needed to be a meeting between shareholders to approve of this sale before it actually happening. But then it is the same crap all over again. Just a few signatures and a stamp on a piece of paper and a POA with a few more signatures. 

Edited April 23, 2017 by madhav

[grollies]

What was the given location where the PoA was signed? Can you prove you were elsewhere that day?

 

Sounds like all you can really do is challange the validity of the PoA, witnesses, etc.

 

Good luck anyway.

 

 

Edited April 23, 2017 by grollies

[madhav]

Just had a look. Power of attorney has 3 points:

 

1: make a record at the police station for the missing book

 

2: Apply for a new blue book to replace the old one

 

3: All attorney to apply for a new blue book under their name (new name)  immediately 

 

I mean what sane person would write the last point. Basically means I give permission to give away my property freely!

[Don Mega]

Clearly there is some dodgy shit gone down with "corrupt" officials involved.

 

I'd be lawyering up and getting onto the Anti Corruption Commission.

 

https://www.nacc.go.th/main.php?filename=index_en

[Mike45]

Thailands law.

Chapter 6: Offence of Receiving Stolen Property

Section 357. Receiving Stolen Property

 

Whoever, assists in concealing, disposing of, making away with, purchases, receives in pledge or otherwise any property obtained through the commission of an offence, and such offence being theft, snatching, extortion, blackmail, robbery, gang-robbery, cheating and fraud, misappropriation or misappropriation by an official, is said to receive stolen property, and shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding five years or fined not exceeding ten thousand Baht, or both.

If the offence of receiving stolen property be committed for profit or against the property obtained by theft under Section 335 (10), robbery or gang-robbery, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment of six months to ten years and fined of one thousand to twenty thousand Baht.

If such offence of receiving stolen property is committed against the property obtained by theft according to Section 335-2, by the robbery according to Section 339-2, or by the gang-robbery according to Section 340-2, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment of five to fifteen years and fined of ten thousand to thirty thousand Baht.

[stevenl]

25 minutes ago, madhav said:

Just had a look. Power of attorney has 3 points:

 

1: make a record at the police station for the missing book

 

2: Apply for a new blue book to replace the old one

 

3: All attorney to apply for a new blue book under their name (new name)  immediately 

 

I mean what sane person would write the last point. Basically means I give permission to give away my property freely!

Whi signed as witness?

[madhav]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Whi signed as witness?

Two of her friends. One is an ex staff member.

[NanLaew]

3 hours ago, madhav said:

Two of her friends. One is an ex staff member.

Conspiracy to defraud. This gets better and better.

[grollies]

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

Conspiracy to defraud. This gets better and better.

Yep, go after the witnesses, I'm sure one of them will grass once threatened with conspiracy charges.

[Hereinthailand]

Everyone of you is beating a dead horse, do you really think anyone will give a sh*t about this case ? maybe in 20 years time after lots of money spent on police, lawyers, middle men etc. she might have to face the music but I seriously doubt it. Many important people were involved in this fraud, knowing or not do you think they are going to step up to the plate and admit their mistake or guilt ???? Come on, get real. Like I said write it off lesson learned. Yeah its sucks getting burnt but this is Thailand !!

[The Dark Lord]

Hi to the OP,

 

i have great sympathy for your position, my stepson managed to get a car (that I bought brand new with cash in full and registered under Mrs Dark Lords name ) in his name and took out a loan against it for his house ( the majority of which we had paid for in any case) 

 

when i I found out and had calmed down I was promised that within x months the loan would be cleared and he would then buy the car from me over a ten year period. 

 

This was trotted out to me every time i enquired about yhe status status and recently I discovered that the little bastardised has gone and bought a new car, the loan remains unpaid and I have ( to date) lost over THB 500,000 and counting as it devalues daily.

 

i have the car back with me now but can do bugger all about its disposal and I am less than impressed.

 

tried lawyers tried Plod even suggested he upped his accident and medical insurance ( for a reason) but nothing happens. 

 

His mother ( the current Mrs Dark Lord ) has cut him off from her life her will and has made sure that when she goes off to her ne t incarnation he gets nothing and can claim nothing.

 

sadly in my experience you just have to suck it up and accept it as a risk you take if you trust people here. 

 

I cannot post post my real thoughts or feelings as I would inevitably face an article 44, electronic defamation and time in the monkey house for posting threats against a good citizen as well as getting a triple lifetime ban from TVF from the mudderators. 

 

Argh I am off for a beer..........

[Robert24]

The 1st step of changing ownership from company to get name seems unclear to me. Did she fake some signatures too?

All in all seems like a case for the police and lawyers to deal with.

Sent from my SM-J710F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app