Comments on: Car Repossession Code of Ethics

By: guest

guest — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 05:14:40 +0000

I’ve had an experience with this recently and would love to hear from other readers about their experiences.

My car was repossessed this past Friday and I went to pick it up on Monday. The yard where they stored my car is called “Too” which was protected by high security fences in the middle of no-man’s land. It was extremely difficult to find. Fortunately, it’s still in running order. However, the bank (EON) charged me RM500 for repossession. The repossessors did not tow away the car. The waited for me outside my house and followed me to my place of work in Damansara. As I got out of my car they accosted me from both sides. I handed the keys over to them. I paid off the loans about 1hr after they took my car. Initially, the bank officer accepted my payment of the outstanding installments but about 20 minutes later said that they cannot accept my payment unless I also pay RM500 in repossession fees at the same time. This seems a bit exorbitant for someone just to drive my car from Damansara to Selayang isn’t it? When I called the EON Bank Credit Recovery Center in Klang, I spoke to the officer in charge, a person named Shah. He told me over the phone that the RM500 charge was the minimum amount mandated by Bank Negara and that I if I wanted to petition for a reduction, I would have to write to Bank Negara. Guess what? I called Bank Negara and the representative told me that there’s no such thing as a minimum, and that the banks calculated the amount based on the difficultly of repossessing the vehicle (which in my case was quite easy). So I called Shah back at the CRC and when I told him that I’d spoken to someone at Bank Negara, he gave me a different story this time, saying that the RM500 was the minimum amount charged by the repossessors, namely “Too”. He also said that all of the RM500 is paid to the repossessors and that the bank does not take any of that amount for processing fees (which I found quite hard to believe). Anyway, bottom line is that it seems like the bank is free to charge any amount that the feel like charging at the time of my repayment of the installment. I feel that there is a severe lack of transparency in this regard and just gives banks way too much power in situations like this. Something should be done to reign them in before this gets out of hand. Would love to hear about other people’s experience on this matter.

By: guest

guest — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:14:57 +0000

Paul, can you please post the direct link to the Code of Ethics? I was told by EON Bank that the minimum fee approved by Bank Negara for reposession is RM500. Anyone have further info on this?

By: mzfnd

mzfnd — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:33:24 +0000

Repo job is a risky job. That’s one of the reason why these guys don’t always abide by the code of ethics.

By: dr_carz

dr_carz — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 14:19:46 +0000

THERE WILL BE MANAY CASES WITH OUR SITUATION NOW!

By: mokkf82

mokkf82 — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:50:23 +0000

Indigo! Surely u are not use to night living and u would not be able to know their thinking.
I got a friend who work as bar tender, his salary is around 1k ++ and he able to drive a Jazz for some reasons. Lots of girl friends too!
After half a year owning the car, the car ended up being pulled back by the bank.
And when i asked him why? he just said “my job needs it! “

By: indigo

indigo — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 06:58:05 +0000

Well how about we put everything in opposite. The possesors get attacked by the uncooperative dwellers. I do hear a of lot cases where all villagers/friends ans relatives were summoned by the dwellers to protect the vehicle and the possessors ended up by getting beaten up. I just don’t understand some people. If you couldn’t actually pay the installment, then why force yourself to buy a car and still refuse to give back to the right owner which is the bank.

By: ganz

ganz — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 02:31:27 +0000

the problem is
“Repossessors should only gain entry into premises with the knowledge and consent of the occupant.”

if the car park inside.. and the owner not allowed them to enter the premise,

surely, who want to let go their car..

and issue of lossing accessory during repossessing.. such audio, seat, steering..
don’t tell me it not occured .. nobody want to take responsible on these

By: ndmervin

ndmervin — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 02:06:12 +0000

With the fuel price hike, what one drives doesnt matter anymore. The bigger the car one owns, the bigger the laughs one gets..

By: osh_kosh

osh_kosh — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:55:24 +0000

good thinking Paul,

at least now the car owner know their right…

By: azrai

azrai — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 23:25:22 +0000

The moral of the stories is; pay the installment on time. Ukur baju di badan sendiri. If you afford a kancil, don’t ever think of Honda.

By: mystvearn

mystvearn — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 19:45:32 +0000

This is what I have seen on TV, not sure the same or not but
2 Repossessors should only gain entry into premises with the knowledge and consent of the occupant.
3 Repossessors should be well mannered and dress decently. They should ensure the practice of professionalism and dignity in carrying out their work.
4 The use of strong arm tactics of any kind is strictly prohibited in the performance of their work.

are broken a lot of times. Maybe its my bad imagination but sometimes they just come in and take your car withyou already knowing it.
Anyone got real stories to share here