Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Post #415 you said you were unable to sell it yourself. Earlier I believe you said there had been expressions of interest, but only if the buyer could acquire the freehold title. I wonder if the situation with the existing freeholders is such that the property is really unattractive, in ways possibly not obvious to someone who also has an interest in and acts for the freeholders.
    • i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.
    • Hello, I will try to outline everything clearly. I am a British citizen and I live in Luxembourg (I think this may be relevant for potential claims). I hired a car from Heathrow in March for a 3-day visit to family in the UK. I was "upgraded" to an EV (Polestar 2). I had a 250-mile journey to my family's address. Upon attempting to charge the vehicle, there was a red error message on the dashboard, saying "Charging error". I attempted to charge at roughly 10 different locations and got the same error message. Sometimes there was also an error message on the charging station screen. The Hertz 0800 assistance/breakdown number provided on the set of keys did not work with non-UK mobiles. I googled and found a bunch of other numbers, none of which were normal geographical ones, and none of which worked from my Luxembourg mobile. It was getting late and I was very short on charge. Also, there was no USB socket in the car, so my phone ran out of battery, so I was unable to look for further help online. It became clear that I would not reach my destination (rural Devon), so I had no choice but to find a roadside hotel in Exeter and then go to the nearest Hertz branch the following day on my remaining 10 miles of charge. Of course, as soon as the Hertz employee in Exeter plugged it into their own charger, the charging worked immediately. I have driven EVs before, I know how to charge them, and it definitely did not work at about 10 different chargers between London and Exeter. I took photos on each occasion. Luckily they had another vehicle available and transferred me onto it. It was an identical Polestar 2 to the original car. 2 minutes down the road, to test it, I went to a charger and it worked immediately. I also charged with zero issues at 2 other chargers before returning the vehicle. I think this shows that it was a charging fault with the first car and not my inability to do it properly. I wrote to Hertz, sending the hotel, dinner, breakfast and hotel parking receipt and asking for a refund of these expenses caused by the charging failure in the original car. They replied saying they "could not issue a refund" and they issued me with a voucher for 50 US dollars to use within the next year. Obviously I have no real proof that the charging didn't work. My guess is they will say that the photos don't prove that I was charging correctly, just that it shows an error message and a picture of a charger plugged into a car, without being able to see the detail. Could you advise whether I have a case to go further? I am not after a refund or compensation, I just want my £200 back that I had to spend on expenses. I think I have two possibilities (or maybe one - see below). It looks like the UK is still part of the European Consumer Centre scheme:  File a complaint with ECC Luxembourg | ECC-Net digital forms ECCWEBFORMS.EU   Would this be a good point to start from? Alternatively, the gov.uk money claims service. But the big caveat is you need a "postal address in the UK". In practice, do I have to have my primary residence in the UK, or can I use e.g. a family member's address, presumably just as an address for service, where they can forward me any relevant mail? Do they check that the claimant genuinely lives in the UK? "Postal address" is not the same as "Residence" - anyone can get a postal address in the UK without living there. But I don't want to cheat the system or have a claim denied because of it. TIA for any help!  
    • Sars request sent on 16th March and also sent a complaint separately to Studio. Have received no response. Both letters were received and signed for.  I was also told by the financial ombudsman that studio were investigating but I've also had no response to that either.  The only thing Studio have sent me is a default notice.  Any ideas of what I can do from here please 
  • 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

total loss - not my fault - shortfall


cazzajay
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3508 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 all

 

Long time again

(it's funny how you only seem to need these forums when something goes wrong! It's reassuring to know there's a place to turn in times of crisis!)

 

Situation is

 

 

on the 1st of this month I took delivery of a brand new mini, on PCP.

 

 

Today, I was in an RTC that wasn't my fault (police attended and are doing the other driver for driving without due care).

I am having the car repaired by the mini dealership, which means I have to pay my excess and recover it later. All standard.*

I spoke to the mini dealer today who have looked at the car and think it may be a write off.

 

 

My question is,

this is a car with over £5k of extras on top of the basic cooper price.

If they write it off and I suffer a shortfall between invoice price and the amount I get as a settlement,

can I claim the shortfall from the third party via the "uninsured losses" route alongside the excess etc.?

I don't have gap insurance.

 

Thanks for any pears of wisdom :)

Smile, you never know who's watching...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add,

the mini bodyshop haven't yet had chance to take the bonnet off to have a proper look and assess the damage costs,

this was just his guesstimate looking at the amount of work that will probably need doing

- all the airbags have gone off for example.

 

 

I'm surprised they managed to get the car from the compound in the same day as the accident to be honest!!

Smile, you never know who's watching...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprised that you did not take out GAP Insurance as that is the norm these days with a new car. GAP Insurance covers the difference between write off value and what was paid.

 

Check your Car Insurance. Many will cover the new value of the car, if written off within the first 12 months of registration. This would be the new value that you paid for the car.

 

If you don't have Car Insurance that covers the new value, then if it is a write off you will be offered the market value to replace with a similar car. Insurers will normally look at the retail price shown in guides such as Glass.co.uk. If the offer they make is not acceptable, it would be up to you to gather evidence of what the car would cost to replace and Mini may be able to help you. They will have details of nearly new Minis of the same model that are in stock and can provide details.

 

If you can evidence a loss that is not insured, you can of course take the third party to court, but the claim may be disputed by the third parties Insurers.

 

I doubt that the car would be a write off. The repairs would need to be about 60% or more of the cars value and for a nearly new car, that would be a large bill. Your Insurers may not be happy with such a quote and will get an engineers inspection. The Insurers may want their own authorised repairers to quote for the work.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked and esure will give me a new car, problem is, I realised having gone through my docs that I didn't declare the factory fit options!

 

 

so, they will probably give me a basic cooper! crap!

Smile, you never know who's watching...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask the insurance company how much they will sell you the damaged one for. Don't let the bodyshop have it for pennies, do it up and make a fortune. Plus you get all those extras you paid for.

 

 

 

 

 

it will be a cat C write off. Worth about 50-60% of proper value as its so new. Unless the op can buy it for pennies, there is no 'fortune' to be made.

 

 

TBQH there are no fortunes in the car game if you do it properly, it was a decent living, no more, never will be more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked and esure will give me a new car, problem is, I realised having gone through my docs that I didn't declare the factory fit options!

 

 

so, they will probably give me a basic cooper! crap!

 

Be very careful with Esure. They have a bit of a reputation of finding ways to wriggle out paying a claim. These factory fitted options are modifications you failed to declare. Esure may try to void the policy and not pay out.

 

Now Esure should not void the policy, as the modifications should not be material as to whether you had an accident or not. Normally an Insurers is not allowed to void a policy to avoid a claim, if the non disclosure did not affect the claim event.

 

You may just not get the money for the modifications and they will only pay for a standard car.

 

So be careful when you talk to Esure. I just wonder whether you might get a better offer including the modifications from the third parties Insurers, than what you would get from Esure for a standard new car.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all - I am considering fessing up about the mods hoping the insurer will simply back-bill me for the increased premiums.

 

 

This is a non-fault accident surely there is no interest in them declaring my insurance void? The other party would still end up footing the bill surely?

Smile, you never know who's watching...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all - I am considering fessing up about the mods hoping the insurer will simply back-bill me for the increased premiums.

 

 

This is a non-fault accident surely there is no interest in them declaring my insurance void? The other party would still end up footing the bill surely?

 

You don't have to make a confession. You thought:wink: that the Insurance would cover the car as delivered, because these were just factory fitted standard options that anyone could include when ordering the car. i.e they were not modifications you had personally done and they are not specialist. They are just Mini options.

 

The question I have is whether Esure would backdate the modifications, pay you more and then try to claim the full price back from the third party insurers. I don't know whether they would do this. That would be up to Esure how they handle it.

 

So probably unlikely to be a voidance situation, but Esure have been known to act in a way that seems silly. They don't like undeclared modifications.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be very careful with Esure. They have a bit of a reputation of finding ways to wriggle out paying a claim. These factory fitted options are modifications you failed to declare. Esure may try to void the policy and not pay out.

 

Now Esure should not void the policy, as the modifications should not be material as to whether you had an accident or not. Normally an Insurers is not allowed to void a policy to avoid a claim, if the non disclosure did not affect the claim event.

 

You may just not get the money for the modifications and they will only pay for a standard car.

 

So be careful when you talk to Esure. I just wonder whether you might get a better offer including the modifications from the third parties Insurers, than what you would get from Esure for a standard new car.

 

An Insurer declining a claim for non disclosure of a fact that did not affect the claim is not uncommon and certainly something they're allowed to do if it fits the criteria

Link to post
Share on other sites

An Insurer declining a claim for non disclosure of a fact that did not affect the claim is not uncommon and certainly something they're allowed to do if it fits the criteria

 

As you are probably aware the FOS have issued notes on this before.

 

If the non disclosure has no bearing on the claim event and the Insurers would have covered the risk, then they can't really void the policy to avoid a claim.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...