QUESTION 4

Ali purchased a television set on hire purchase from Wah Siong Electronics. According to the hire purchase agreement, Ali is supposed to pay 36 installment. After paying the 35th installment, Ali refused to pay the last installment. Wah Siong Electronics are going to repossess the television set from Ali but they are not sure about the repossession. Advise Wah Siong Electronics

ANSWER

Section 2(1) HP Act 1967, A hire purchase agreement includes a letting of goods with an option to purchase and an agreement for the purchase of goods by installment. The parties involved in this agreement are hirer and owner. The owner is means that a person who has let the goods to a hirer under HP agreement. The hirer is means that a person who has taken goods from an owner under the HP agreement. Based on this problem, we can know that Wah Siong is act as an owner and Ali is a hirer. Whether Wah Siong Electronics has the entitled to repossess the television set from Ali or not. The section involved in this problem are;-

1. Section 16; notice must given to the hirer when goods are to be repossessed. 2. Section 17; after repossession, the owner must not sell or dispose of the goods of 21 days. 3. Section 18; the hirers rights and immunities when goods ar repossessed. 4. Section 19; power of hirer to regain possession of goods in certain circumstances. 5. Section 20; power of court to vary existing judgements or orders made when goods are repossessed.

According to these sections, they are related to that problem between Ali and Wah Siong Electronics. It is because in section 16, the owner can repossessed the goods only after written notice about his intention is served on the hirer. Basically repossession can only take place if the hirer defaulted in payment. 21 days time must be given after serve of notice for hirer to settle the payments. If not then repossession may take place. Documents acknowledging receipt of goods must be served to the hirer by the owner. After 21 days taken possession of the goods, then owner can sell the goods. Before 21 days, must get consent from hirer. The owner must comply with all this requirements. The case that can be related for this problem is Pang Brothers Motors Sdn.Bhd. V Lee Aik Seng (1978). In this case the appellant issued a notice to repossess the car which is 2 days short statutory minimum 21 days.

In the section 17, owner cannot sell the goods within 21 days after the repossession. If he wants to do so consent of the hirer must be sought. If the owner sells the car within these 21 days, he will be guilty of an offence.

Section 18 also related with these matters that shows the right of hirer after repossession. The hirer after 21 days of repossession by owner give notice to the owner in writing requires the owner to re-deliver the goods. The hirer also can require the owner to sell the goods to any persons introduced by the hirer. Section 18(4)(a). The hirer also may recover from the owner value of the goods. Section 18(1)(b). In this section the owner has the rights after repossession that owner can sell he goods by public auction. The owner must serve on the hirer a copy of notice of such public auction. Section 18(4)(a). Owner must give hirer an option to purchase the goods at a price which in intended to sell. Section 18(4)(b).

In section 19(1), within 21 days after giving notice to the owner regarding repossession, the hirer may pay to the owner the amount due, remedies any breach of the agreement and pays to the owner the costs incurred in taking possession of the goods. Later the owner shall returned the goods to the hirer and consider nothing has gone wrong. Section 19(2), when goods are returned to the hirer pursuant to (1) but the breach has not been remedied, the owner has no rights to repossessed the goods again unless notice has been given to the hirer to remedy the breach. If the hirer fails to do it within 21 days or within the time specified in the notice, the owner can repossess the goods.

Section 20 is the last section that related to this matters. In this section that shows power of court to vary existing judgments or orders made when goods are repossessed. After goods has been repossessed, the court has a right to vary or discharge any orders made by other courts requires the hirer to pay money to the owner.

CONCLUSION

From the above problem, we can conclude that Wah Siong Electronics has a right to the television set from Ali. It is because Ali has defaulted in payment for his goods that buy from Wah Siong Electronics.