Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Wait for more replies, but that letter to me can be interpreted as a letter before action. Ignoring it can have consequences. The court to impose sanctions for failure in responding to a letter of claim.
    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
  • 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

VW Polo problem


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5080 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

This is a draft letter I intend to send to my VW dealer head office it contains the problem any comments gratefully recieved

 

 

 

Dear Volkswagen

 

I am writing to complain about the poor quality of service I have received from the **** branch and about a number of problems which have beset my 2003 Polo with a mileage of only 10,000 miles. I purchased the car as I believed Volkswagen’s cars had a reputation for reliability and that their products would need very little, if any, maintenance for the first 20,000 miles.

 

Recently I took the Polo into *****Volkswagen’s garage as the emissions warning lamp had reappeared for the third time on my dashboard. I needed the car the following day and was forced to pay £500 for labour and parts to detect and replace a lambda probe sensor, a problem which should have been easy to detect via the electronic control unit.

 

This is the second time in less than two years a lambda probe had to be replaced; the last time being September 2005. In 2004 wiring to the original lambda probe had come loose.

 

I don’t think it is reasonable to expect a new Volkswagen vehicle to need two lambda probes to be replaced within a two year period when the car has travelled only 10,000 miles. Staff at ****** Volkswagen were unable to identify which lambda probe had needed replacing in September 2005, so in effect the part which was replaced during warranty may have failed within a very short space of time.

 

I have spent £300 on a service at *****Volkswagen and £50 in June 2006 on an MOT and am very unhappy that I have had to pay ***** Volkswagen a further £500 so soon afterwards.

 

After talking to local trading standards officers and taking advice, I feel that in respect of the terms of my statutory rights, The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (amended) which says that goods should be of satisfactory quality for six years from supply, meaning goods must meet the standards that any reasonable person would expect, taking into account the description, the price and all other relevant information.

 

Satisfactory quality includes the appearance and finish of the goods, their safety and durability and whether they are free from defects (including minor faults).In light of these facts and given the number of problems with the lambda probe, I believe the vehicle I purchased in July 2003 is not of satisfactory quality. An inherent fault in the vehicle has not been rectified.

 

I therefore believe that ******Volkswagen should reimburse the £500 charge to replace the lambda probe and that this fault is monitored and repaired free of charge as and when it should re-occur until the six years are up.

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours sincerely

Regards

 

Johnboy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

You understand the warranty issues attached to manufacturers, most have 3 year or 60,000 miles. Certainly VW do, also part carry I think 12 months or a certain mileage. Did you pay for the first lambda probe replacement? If it was done under warranty, it not under warranty if you see what I mean. Most Brands are more likely to be loyal to you if your loyal to them, try following up your letter with a phone call to VW customer services, they have a certain amount put by for good customers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I would recomend that you send the letter to VW customer services. And also i was a technician for VW and there cars are not reliable at all they have many factory defects which are not fixed on production line instead they let the dealership,s deal with them they are as you know warranty/recall issues. The most reliable cars on market are german/japanese.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Thanks for the advice one and all

 

the outcome was that VW responded with an offer of 70% refund of total price we paid and guaranteed new work for 2years

Regards

 

Johnboy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
I would recomend that you send the letter to VW customer services. And also i was a technician for VW and there cars are not reliable at all they have many factory defects which are not fixed on production line instead they let the dealership,s deal with them they are as you know warranty/recall issues. The most reliable cars on market are german/japanese.

 

 

At any point in your professional career with VW did they inform you that they WERE German built cars? :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Since when? and more to the point where? VW dont have a plant here.

"I am more than prepared to repay any money I have borrowed, IF they are prepared to refund any money THEIR agreement doesnt allow them to charge me." Tamadus

 

Thanks couldnt put it better myself :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Hi

 

I've been having problems with my polo too can anybody help!

 

I have a 2006, 3 door polo and I've noticed a patch of rust appearing on my drivers side door sill at the back and on the door in the same corner (its also started to scuff in the same place on the passenger side). When I took it to the dealership they told me i must have trapped my seatbelt in the door and that had caused the damage, I didn't agree so they took it to the body shop who said the doors had moved but that i must have let them catch in the wind so the problem wont be covered by my warrantee.

I have taken it to another garage to get a second opinion and they have said that the doors have dropped and are catching the sill when they shut. There is no evidence of driver misuse as was stated by the dealer.

Has anybody else had this problem or advise on the best way to put my case to Volkswagen as they dont want to accept responsibility?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the origional letter then.

 

On the plus side it is 6 paragraphs before you mention the Sale of goods act (1923) amended or whatever.

 

The downside is, £500 is waaaaaaay too much to pay for a Lambda Sensor :o . How did they force you to pay?

 

Hammy

44 years at the pointy end of the motor trade. :eek:

GARUDALINUX.ORG

Garuda Linux comes with a variety of desktop environments like KDE, GNOME, Cinnamon, XFCE, LXQt-kwin, Wayfire, Qtile, i3wm and Sway to choose from.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

I purchased a VW Polo in March 2003. The VW database ( based on reg number) shows it as as an earlier model engine as it really is. This has caused me problems in the wrong fuel pump and the wrong head gasket being fitted. Both faults cost me extra money any time without a car. The VW customer service refused to speak to me as they claimed as I was not the owner ( according to their data base ) . When I pointed out that my name was listed on the vehicle log book so accordoing to DVLA I was the owner , the jobsworth woman said they did not recognise DVLA registration. It is now looking as if the dealer I bought the car from, has changed the registration number from a differeent car to the car I bought from them - the impetus being that I wanted the car quickly. The woman from VW refused to tell me the owner (according to them) - presumably the person who should have bought the car with my reg number. The dealer was Abridge in Harlow - has anyone else had problems with them??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Diagnostic plug-in £70

New sensor say £80

labour to change it, say 30 minutes £40

 

You were ripped off and the refund offered by VW is a good offer. Take it and take your car elsewhere for service in the future.

 

Lambda sensors DO have a finite life and if the car is used for many short journeys and does not warm up or is never given an "Italian tune up" then the sensors can become dirty. They can be cleaned. Also they have a built in heater that, again if the car is driven very gently on many short journeys, can be working harder than expected, resulting in early failure. This is the same for any vehicle, not just VW.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...