Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Law Project are trying to force HMG to release details of how Sunak's hedge fund made large profits from Moderna. Government ordered to disclose Sunak’s hedge fund emails - Good Law Project GOODLAWPROJECT.ORG Good Law Project has won a battle with the Treasury after it tried to suppress emails between Rishi Sunak and the hedge fund he founded.  
    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Invoice for used van.


kevmaz
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5709 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi, This is my first post on this exellent forum.I bought a used van from a car sales place, the advert for the van on the car sales website,reeled of a load of specifications for the van which included Air conditioning, whist driving the van home (but thats another story) I switched the AC on but it did not work blowing air but not air conditioned air. I reported this to the car sales place but were told it would need regassing at my expence.

Told to read the invoice I had signed which states (I understandthat the seller of the vehicle takes no responsibilty for the working order of any sercurity devices which includes items such as Alarms, immobilisers, "RED KEYS", or stereros, and AIR CONDITIONING etc...) Surely this can not be right, this sounds like SOLD AS SEEN which I thought was illegal.

Can someone help with this as this is just the tip of the iceberg with this van.:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the add said air con, then that must be deemed to mean working!

any qualification of sales is worthless unless it was part of the agreed terms of the sale, which you agreed to. unfortunately you signed the sales invoice which would make any claim a bit difficult!

this would not be applicable or have any validity to any aspect of the vehicles road worthyness though.

However I still think you have valid claim as it was advertised as having air conditioning and unless you were told it was not working before you paid for it. I would suggst you approach them on this basis and see where you get otherwise you would have to take them to court; maybe just worth getting done yourself, especially if the van was cheapish!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You receive an invoice 'after' the sale so unless these specific points were brought to you attention at the time of purchase, they have no legal power.

 

Were you given the opportunity to read this invoice before purchase?

 

What is the 'etc;' after air conditioning?

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

You receive an invoice 'after' the sale so unless these specific points were brought to you attention at the time of purchase, they have no legal power.

 

Were you given the opportunity to read this invoice before purchase?

 

What is the 'etc;' after air conditioning?

 

Hi ,thats what the invoice states "air conditioning etc" No nothing was brought to my attention regarding faults I just signed maybe they thought I was a mind reader, because they also did not tell me the brakes were useless, a spanner warning light on the dashboard,black smoke emiting from the exhaust when i accelerate(I have had the van to a diagnostic center who informs me that the fuel injectors are failing and need replacing (hence black smoke)at a cost of £1400(ouch) they did not tell me about that either. I have taken the van back to garage twice to get these problems sorted out but they will do nothing about it. So what do I do now:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is only one thing you can do Kev - reject it under the sale of goods act.

 

No amount of words can be used to take away your rights under the soga, and an ambiguous statement such as 'etc;' (which could cover every single fault you can think of or which you complain of and they decide comes under 'etc;') cannot be used to limit those rights.

 

Only if they specifically brought to your attention a fault which you accepted or something they could not have known about, can it be discounted, but not for really obvious things that you should have noticed without being told.

 

It is illegal to emit black smoke, so the van is not fit for purpose.

 

When did you purchase the van?

How old is the MoT?

Were you given the 'advice' sheet with the MoT certificate?

 

You can only reject it in writing and must not use the van again.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is only one thing you can do Kev - reject it under the sale of goods act.

 

No amount of words can be used to take away your rights under the soga, and an ambiguous statement such as 'etc;' (which could cover every single fault you can think of or which you complain of and they decide comes under 'etc;') cannot be used to limit those rights.

 

Only if they specifically brought to your attention a fault which you accepted or something they could not have known about, can it be discounted, but not for really obvious things that you should have noticed without being told.

 

It is illegal to emit black smoke, so the van is not fit for purpose.

 

When did you purchase the van?

How old is the MoT?

Were you given the 'advice' sheet with the MoT certificate?

 

You can only reject it in writing and must not use the van again.

Hi, Thanks for that, I bought the van 21-6-08,A mot was carried out on the van 14-6-08 also a brake test result test sheet, and a Exhaust emission test result sheet passing the van with no advisory comments on the mot (which I find rather suspicious) the car sales center I bought the van from send all their vehicles to this Mot garage. I have contacted my local Trading standards office who sent the car sales center a letter with my concerns, they said I should take the van to the the garage who carried out the mot, which I am reluctant to do that bearing in mind this is the garage who passed the van with flying colours. I have taken the van to a Bosch OFT garage to have diagnostic carried out, who high lighted various problems, I am self employed so I need to use the van to carry out my daily business no van no work no income.I sent a strong worded email to the car sales center on Friday (no reply as yet if ever) informing them I be shall visiting my local citizens advice center to see were I stand legally, do you think I have have a watertight case?

Regards Kevin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes if you reject it undr SOGA, stating why etc. and ask for all monies to be refunded, This must be done in writing and you must not use it as you would be compromising the reason why you are asking for your money back; i.e. not fit and faulty, dangerous - no brakes!

I trust it was a cash sale no hp involved etc.

Youmay end up having to take them to court, how much is involved?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes if you reject it undr SOGA, stating why etc. and ask for all monies to be refunded, This must be done in writing and you must not use it as you would be compromising the reason why you are asking for your money back; i.e. not fit and faulty, dangerous - no brakes!

I trust it was a cash sale no hp involved etc.

Youmay end up having to take them to court, how much is involved?

Hi, because the brakes were so poor, this was disbuted by central car sales (well they must be they gave me a certificate to say they had passed) I replaced the front brakes and cleaned up the back ones, brakes are now ok.I was starting to bite the bullet not knowing the legal issues involved or where I stood hence my questions on here, the van cost me approx £4500 cash. So far it has cost me approaching £1000 with diagnostic checks (another thing central car sales would not accept from a registerd Bosch OFT garage findings)parts/labour and loss of earnings,

the potential bill to replace the fuel injectors (hence black smoke from exhaust) of £1400 is really the last straw and I want all my money back.

Forgive my niaivety in what I should have done and what I should do, but I am just a ordinary working man who just wanted a van to carry out my business. So now what do I send Central Car Sales a letter under SOGA or do I go down the citizens advice road, which will carry the most clout.The only problem I have got now is still the black smoke (another certificate to say it passed its emmision test) £1400 would just about wipe me out.

Oh by the way why did my trading standards not advise me about SOGA when I first contacted them?

Kevin

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your working on the van Kev will reduce or nullify your chances of rejection, it's not the same van they sold you, and as you have done work on it, they could even go as far as to say you caused the other problems as it was ok when you bought it and the MoT will show that.

 

I think the best we can hope for now is a repair.

 

Did the diagnostic garage do an emmission check and was it out of spec?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Coniff, If emmissions illegal and should not be on the road then the dealer must put it right at no cost to you.

Under SOGA not fit for purpose, write to them and give them 7 days to respond and if they refuse or dont respond you will get work done elswhere and take them to court for the cost.

If you reject the vehicle on the emmissions faiure ( probably sufficient grounds on its own ) you will have stop using it and may take some time to get it resovled, so you will be without a van.

So its up to you. You can report them to trading standards, may help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...