What advice were you able to give them? What was your proposed recommendation?

What advice were you able to give them? What was your proposed recommendation?
| | | Anywhere |

Event Overview

Terex contacted Lynne Walton to ask if the rejection of their claim was justified. Lynne’s response was “Absolutely not”. Terex engaged Lynne to represent them in the claim. Lynne had two valid arguments and one strategy to win.

Argument one – Force Access operated a rental fleet of EWPs. The parts debt was less than 4 months old. The shortest part life was a filter which was guaranteed to last for 6 month. Most parts lasted up to 5 years. Therefore all parts not paid for were still in the rental fleet.

Argument two – PPSA states that a PMSI supplier retains title and interest to accessions (the parts) until the asset is sold ‘in the ordinary course of the customers business’. The IP sold the rental fleet to Coates Hire. Lynne’s valid argument was that the sale wasn’t ‘in the ordinary course of business and therefore title to the parts remained with Terex and didn’t pass to Coates Hire. The IP suggested we ‘try going to court’.

Our recommended strategy was quite different as often legal threats mean very little to IPs. We advised the IP that we would be advising Coates Hire that they hadn’t bought our parts when they purchased the rental fleet. Not surprisingly, the IP offered to settle the matter. Terex was delighted with the outcome.

About

 

When & Where

  • From:1970-01-01   12:00 AM
  • To:1970-01-01 12:00 AM
  • Location: Online Event

Share This Event

This entry was posted in . Bookmark the permalink.