Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Non-motoring legal advice => Topic started by: ugoben on June 22, 2026, 05:37:56 pm
-
One thing I don't see, have you tried to claim on the insurance that was on the Mazda as it was effectively stolen from you albeit by fraud rather than a 'direct' theft. I'm not sure if it would be covered in way, I doubt it. You talk about it being obtained by fraud or deception, do the police accept that it is a stolen car? I might, of course, be looking at this incorrectly, there are far more legally savvy people on here than me.
Have you had any response from DVLA to the V888 request?
Did you keep any details of the person with whom you did the part exchange?
I suspect that, unless the police can trace the person with whom you part-exchanged the car and get a successful prosecution, this will go nowhere and you will be left as the unfortunate loser in the whole story.
-
Please i will appreciate guidance on how to proceed.
-
At this stage, clarity more than anything. I want to establish where LP64 NZF ended up, whether recovery is still possible.
-
So what do you want to happen? The vehicle returned? Scrapped? Given a new registration?
-
Yes. I no longer have either vehicle. The cash element was reimbursed, but the position regarding LP64 NZF remains unresolved, which is why I'm trying to understand what recovery or legal options still exist.
-
Right. So you are still out of pocket on what you paid for the Mazda. Owing to the fact you have no Mazda and no Toyota and only part of the fee for the Toyota returned via the cash element?
-
Fair question. The reimbursement dealt with the cash element of the fraud, but LP64 NZF was my part-exchange vehicle in the same transaction.
The Toyota C-HR I received was later confirmed by police to be stolen and seized. My interest now is understanding what happened to LP64 NZF afterwards, whether it is still being passed on, and whether any recovery or legal options remain available.
-
To clarify, ... The bank reimbursement addressed the financial losses arising from the fraud ... My concern is that LP64 NZF remains active, a new V5C has been issued and the vehicle may continue to circulate or be sold on despite having been obtained through a fraudulent transaction.
That doesn't clarify anything.
If the bank reimbursement "addressed the financial losses arising from the fraud" then what does it matter to you what happens to LP64 NZF? Are you not explaining yourself very well and somehow you are still out of pocket or is there another part to the story that you haven't shared?
-
To clarify, the reimbursement did not simply relate to ownership of LP64 NZF.
The fraudulent transaction involved both a cash transfer and my Mazda CX-5 (LP64 NZF) being handed over as a part exchange in return for a Toyota C-HR (DY72 LWA), which West Midlands Police later confirmed was stolen and seized.
The bank reimbursement addressed the financial losses arising from the fraud but did not resolve the status, movement or subsequent registration history of LP64 NZF.
My concern is that LP64 NZF remains active, a new V5C has been issued and the vehicle may continue to circulate or be sold on despite having been obtained through a fraudulent transaction.
-
OP, you said "my banks upheld my fraud claims and reimbursed the losses."
So why do any subsequent changes of "ownership" concern you in any way?
-
You've already told us that.
-
I have now formally submitted a V888 request to DVLA and separately provided supporting evidence to DVLA's CIO office, including proof of legitimate purchase from Copart UK, payment receipts, and evidence that a further V5C was issued in March 2026. I also have bank fraud outcomes that upheld my claims.
My immediate concern is preventing further onward sales of the car while ownership and recovery issues remain unresolved.
-
A High Court Judge can compel a public authority to act (or more commonly to reconsider a decision not to act) if you win a Judicial Review.
-
Hello everyone,
I would appreciate some advice regarding a vehicle fraud matter that has become quite complicated.
Timeline
* In April 2025 I legitimately purchased a 2015 Mazda CX-5 (LP64 NZF) from Copart UK (Lot 51882895).
* I have evidence of purchase, payment receipt and the V5 document reference supplied by Copart.
* I subsequently became the registered keeper.
* The vehicle was later fraudulently obtained from me during a transaction involving a Toyota C-HR (DY72 LWA).
* West Midlands Police later confirmed the Toyota C-HR was stolen and seized.
* Following my fraud complaints, my banks upheld my fraud claims and reimbursed the losses.
* The Mazda CX-5 was never recovered.
I have recently discovered that:
* LP64 NZF remains active on DVLA records.
* It is currently taxed until May 2027.
* It has a valid MOT until February 2027.
* A further V5C was issued on 20 March 2026.
* The vehicle has also apparently been advertised for sale since it left my possession.
* I have reported matters to Action Fraud, West Midlands Police and have an existing correspondence trail with DVLA's CIO office.
* West Midlands Police have advised that if I wish to pursue recovery I may need to seek legal representation. They have not placed any marker on the vehicle.
* I have now submitted a V888 request to DVLA requesting current keeper and keeper history information.
My questions are:
1. What is the best legal route to prevent the vehicle from being continually sold on? Any recommendation for a good solicitor?
2. Can a solicitor compel police or DVLA to take further action?
3. Once I obtain the V888 information, what are the realistic recovery options? would this be better pursued as a civil recovery claim rather than a criminal matter?
4. Is there any mechanism to have the vehicle flagged as fraudulently obtained?
I have documentary evidence supporting the above, including Copart purchase records, bank fraud outcomes, DVLA correspondence, MOT/tax records, and police references.
Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.