@upsy_daisy: Right from that i can deduce that you are not on the "High Rate" of component of "Care" so you have no exemption on the "Age" which is around 55 from this type of "WFI" as your care needs can be meet adequately, regardless of your husband receiving "Carers" allowance" you have no argument that you need constant care and you are virtually unable to walk! so wherever you would have to be "In Work or other place" you would need that care constantly and bedsides if you quoted to the jobcentre staff or the interviewer that you were in reciept of high rate care that would have been the end of it as you would be exempt!!. . As it would seem you are on low rate "Mobilty" help with getting around, you would seem to have the instrument in helping you attend interviews/work ie: Transport or the ability to help costs towards it seems you are able to walk adeqautly, carers allowance is payable to the "Carer" and is essentially help with costs of the "Carer" etc in helping them provide care for you hence the title "Carers Allowance" can sometimes make people think the person recieving care it is essentailly for there use only which it is not!. I'm sorry to be the bearer of some potentially bad news but you did ask but it would seem you cannot at this point claim exemption!. Best Regards.

@upsy_daisy: There are 3 rates of care? Low,Middle,High which of these are you in receipt of or what is your weekly (Care payment only) worth this is the important one?, there are 2 rates of mobility which are you in receipt of High or low?. Best Regards.

@upsy_daisy: What rates have you been awarded for DLA? ie: there are 2 components Mobility/Care? and forgive me for asking what is your age?, these answers are critical to your possible exemption from this requirement trust me!. Best Regards.

Without divulging to much here can you give an approximate location of this dealership please? is this by any chance wearside audi or tyneside/teeside?. Best Regards.

What you fail to advise is thus in this thread anyway.........is the vehicle subject to Hire Purchase agreement or as car finance (Loan) then subject to your answer any advice as to your rights can then be given?. Best Regards.

Looky here: Consumer Sales Directive & the Sale of Goods Act SUBJECT Sale of Goods Rights, Faulty Goods, Poor Service. RELEVANT OR RELATED LEGISLATION Sale of Goods Act 1979. Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations (following 31/3/03 transposition of Directive 1999/44/EC). KEY FACTS 1. Rights have been enhanced when the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations was implemented on 31 March 2003. 2. The Regulations transpose EC Directive 1999/44/EC on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees. 3. Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale). 4. If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale a consumer can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances). 5. For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) consumers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement). 6. At present, the onus is on consumers to prove the good did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years). 7. Now consumers have a six months reversed burden of proof and a right to seek a repair, replacement and a partial or full refund. The following are subject to the transposition of the Directive 1999/44/EC via the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations on 31 March 2003: 8. If the consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract (e.g. were not inherently faulty). 9. After six months and until the end of the six years, it is for the consumer to prove the lack of conformity. 10. If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if the fault has meant that they have had only some benefit from the goods. 11. If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can claim a full refund, if the fault has meant that the consumer has enjoyed no benefit from the goods. 12. Where retailers or manufacturers offer free guarantees or warranties, the Regulations provide that they will now be legally binding. 13. The guarantees must also be written in plain English, must be available for viewing by consumers on request before purchase and must state that they do not affect the consumer's legal rights. 14. The Regulations do not impose an obligation on retailers or manufacturers to offer guarantees nor do they apply to extended warranties, which have to be purchased by the consumers. 15. The consumer has exactly the same rights with second hand goods as he does with new, however, with older goods it is increasingly difficult for the consumer to prove that a fault was inherent at the time of sale and the conformity criteria also allow second hand goods to be judged less rigorously than new. Best Regards.

@AngryMercOwner: The SOGA 1979 as amended in 2003 if now far more reaching and furthermore it now includes the right to claim damages etc up to 6 yrs,below is a copy of the finer points of the amended act which all finance company's will now have to take heed as well as other organisations including dealers!!. Consumer Sales Directive & the Sale of Goods Act SUBJECT Sale of Goods Rights, Faulty Goods, Poor Service. RELEVANT OR RELATED LEGISLATION Sale of Goods Act 1979. Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations (following 31/3/03 transposition of Directive 1999/44/EC). KEY FACTS 1. Rights have been enhanced when the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations was implemented on 31 March 2003. 2. The Regulations transpose EC Directive 1999/44/EC on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees. 3. Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale). 4. If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale a consumer can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances). 5. For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) consumers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement). 6. At present, the onus is on consumers to prove the good did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years). 7. Now consumers have a six months reversed burden of proof and a right to seek a repair, replacement and a partial or full refund. The following are subject to the transposition of the Directive 1999/44/EC via the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations on 31 March 2003: 8. If the consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract (e.g. were not inherently faulty). 9. After six months and until the end of the six years, it is for the consumer to prove the lack of conformity. 10. If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if the fault has meant that they have had only some benefit from the goods. 11. If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can claim a full refund, if the fault has meant that the consumer has enjoyed no benefit from the goods. 12. Where retailers or manufacturers offer free guarantees or warranties, the Regulations provide that they will now be legally binding. 13. The guarantees must also be written in plain English, must be available for viewing by consumers on request before purchase and must state that they do not affect the consumer's legal rights. 14. The Regulations do not impose an obligation on retailers or manufacturers to offer guarantees nor do they apply to extended warranties, which have to be purchased by the consumers. 15. The consumer has exactly the same rights with second hand goods as he does with new, however, with older goods it is increasingly difficult for the consumer to prove that a fault was inherent at the time of sale and the conformity criteria also allow second hand goods to be judged less rigorously than new. Just for the record i have many similar problems with my vehicle a 06 Mercedes C180K Avantgarde auto supposedly used approved it had done only 9700 miles when i purchased it sept 07 and @13,700 now it is has cost somewhere in the region of £2,500.00 in 8 months and warranty repairs in short it keeps going Kapput!!. Customer service even at head office UK level is nigh on non exsistant, i've even tried to exchange it under there 30 day plan it falls on deaf ears. Best Regards.

And what about the fact that LBL were operating national multiple franchises without consumer credit licenses between 1998/9-2004/5!!, i see that don't mention that?.:o And the fact they were reported to the trading standards and were investigated for operating as such and as such would be on record, i wonder how many void agreements (Unenforceable) they had then nationally!!. :grin: Perhaps thats why they settled without going to court by way of a signed NDA Agreement between myself and them........and which has only just been reported very recently that another person had done the same as if it were the first time this had happened...........i don't think so?. Honestly there's enough evidence past and present to put into question there fitness to hold any type of CCL even now!. Best Regards.

Just for the record........from June 1999 water charges were no longer treated as a "Priority" debt! by any enforcement agencies and the courts, therefore anything you may owe as debt or in the future as a bill is not a priority and as such you can make an offer of which you deem acceptable!. So therefore when and if they get heavy and/or threatening use the above!!. Best Regards.

Greetings to all loooooooooong time:eek: but i see LBL are still acting in there usual usual ways!, now lets see what happens next?. Best Regards.

Hmmmm you could always advise them a forum user on here knows that they have a few skeletons in there cupboard-especialy Chelsea park investments?,and is quite prepared to put up the evidence to prove any allegations illegall trading quite recently and possibly even now!!.:o Were you actually seen and advised by the cash converters staff?,or seen by a visiting representative from another branch?. Regards.

Fleeced73: Your comments/request has been noted ok!!. Regards.

@Charlotte1974: Ah ha chelsea park investments raises it's ugly head again i see, charlotte were are you located roughly please or rather at which branch of this mob was the loan serviced?. And when did you take the loan out mm/yy?. Regards.

My sentiments exactly and further i would suggest that all so called "interesting info" posted by lbl is also taken also with a pinch of salt!. One more thing the photograph taking is not new, it is and has been practised at some locations for some time now?.

Sorry to the bearer of bad news lbl, but none of that is news-it's history!!. Why dont you enquire upon them nine regions etc etc about the period when they were operating without valid consumer credit license's such as to cover chelsea park investments ltd, obiously they could'nt afford the fee's poor sods!!. I know one thing though it sure did cost them big time, and i have the docs to prove it "Non -Disclosure" that is, ohhh btw i'm still waiting for the elusive "I won" bit against Lbl ltd!!. Regards.