Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
I brought my car from acf on the 12/2/07, it broke down 8 days later with a faulty water pump. ACF took the car to their garage for repair 18 days later the car was returned. 2 weeks after that the car broke down again with a water pump fault. This time the finance company agreed that I could have the repair done locally at there expense, however when they done the repair they found that
a) the water pump had not been replaced
they had changed the head gasket
c) they had put the old cam belt back on
d) they had missed off a bolt
e) I had to front tyres nearly illegal
f) there was misting in the gearbox
g) my fog lights weren’t working
Local garage have said due to old cam belt being put back on, this car was a death trap, if the cam belt had snapped we would lose all electrics including breaks and power steering.
The finance co have said they will not cover the expense but ACF will, the car has now gone back to them for investigating.
During the first repair I had to hire cars as I work out of town at my expense. And now I am having to do this again.
Also on checking all through my papers I did not get the £1000 trade in for my old car this was reduced to 1 pence because of tax? Strangely this was after we had been persuaded to up my deposit to£1000.
The mechanical Breakdown I was advised to take out only covers £300 worth of repair and the list of things it excludes is longer than what is covered.
Hi, Sorry to hear of your problems. They're supposed to perform a million point check, aren't they! Can't you go for misrepresentation. Sure they must be in breach of contract. Did they finance you, or Welcome??? Interested, because I have pending court action with Approved C F and Welcome Finance!
Hi, Sorry to hear of your problems. They're supposed to perform a million point check, aren't they! Can't you go for misrepresentation? Sure they must be in breach of contract. Did they finance you, or Welcome??? Interested, because I have pending court action with Approved C F and Welcome Finance!
My pending court case is primarily for "misrepresentation" at time of purchase. However other issues have now arisen, and I will be considering adding these to my defense, so I am taking advice....
I brought my car from acf on the 12/2/07, it broke down 8 days later with a faulty water pump. ACF took the car to their garage for repair 18 days later the car was returned. 2 weeks after that the car broke down again with a water pump fault. This time the finance company agreed that I could have the repair done locally at there expense, however when they done the repair they found that
a) the water pump had not been replaced
Did they claim that they had, or merely 'repaired' it?
they had changed the head gasket
At least they looked at this after a water pump failure - many wouldn't in this circumstance. It is possible that this was the cause of the overheating, not the waterpump. Have you asked. or did they state this?
c) they had put the old cam belt back on
It is not necessary to fit a new belt every time. If in inspection, the cambelt is satisfactory, it can be refitted. So what you have is a difference of opinion between two garages as to the state of the cambelt
d) they had missed off a bolt
Carelessness or negligence perhaps. But was it actually there before they started work?
e) I had to front tyres nearly illegal
Easily seen by you before you bought the car. Only if they are actually illegal is the garage at fault. If you had noticed these, and brought it to the attention of the garage and they agreed to replace as part of the sale. then you have grounds to complain
f) there was misting in the gearbox
I am not sure what you mean by this, but if it is oil-misting then this isn't at all unusual when you have gears rotating at high speed in a bath of oil and it is actually providing additional lubrication
g) my fog lights weren’t working
Same as tyres above. Did you check them and ask the garage to fix them before you agreed to purchase. Non-working foglights (front) do not make the car unroadworthy
Local garage have said due to old cam belt being put back on, this car was a death trap, if the cam belt had snapped we would lose all electrics including breaks and power steering.
The finance co have said they will not cover the expense but ACF will, the car has now gone back to them for investigating.
Please see comments in red. I think that you have been exceedingly unlucky, but some of your points would not stand up in court - or even trigger a response from the garage/finance company
hi i bought a car from the same place with the same finance company in nov 06 mine had a fault with the water pump but i demanded i took it to a garage of my choice and they paid which i did and they did....i now have a thread going about first response who i am haing diffculties with.....a million point check my f****** a** they dont care just intrested in getting their sales
Hi thanks for the reply. Just an update, First response are paying in full to have it all fixed at the place of our choice, its being done as we speak! Took a long time but finally got it sorted. I suspect that they will be suing ACF for the money afterwards though. Good luck with first response.
Hi all im new to this site well here is what has happend to us so far with approved car finance,we brought a car from them about a year ago now,it was 3 years old at the time,we were told that the repayments would be over 3 years and that the total repayable would be about 11 grand,we canceld the warrenty shorty after because it was well expensive and the sales man advised us to cancel,the salesman also promised us a cheque in the post to cover six months tax which we never recived and then when i rang about it stated he never rememberd saything that (the liar),well six months after we had the car it broke down,the clutch went and the fly wheel which cost us about a thousand pounds to get fixed,anyway after recently speaking to the funding corporation which is who approved used for the finance ive found out that the car is not over the three years we thought its over five and that the total repayable is seventeen thousand pounds i cant belive it the car is only ten grand new and its now four years old i dont know what to do there is no way im paying that for the car,and at the time of buying the car we did not see anything that had seventeen grand written on if we had there is no way we would of took it,i dont want to loose the car as we have paid so much on it already but they have conned us big time and something needs to be done surely they cant go around conning us out of thousands,and also ive found out that they are linked with yes car credit which they stated they were not when we asked,any advice i would be really glad of and i really do feel for anyone in the same situation as us.
Hi trading standards,i rang them today approved are liable for repair costs not you,our car went wrong within 6 months of buying it and cost a fortune,i wish i knew that back then but hopefully trading standards are going to investigate if everyone rings them then surely something will come of it goodluck
Approved Car Finance really don't have anything to do with Yes Car Credit. Yes Car Credit was the trading name for a company called Direct Auto Finance. Approved Car Finance was the company that "rose from the ashes" of what was once Direct Car Finance.
I brought my car from acf on the 12/2/07, it broke down 8 days later with a faulty water pump. ACF took the car to their garage for repair 18 days later the car was returned. 2 weeks after that the car broke down again with a water pump fault. This time the finance company agreed that I could have the repair done locally at there expense, however when they done the repair they found that
a) the water pump had not been replaced
they had changed the head gasket
c) they had put the old cam belt back on
d) they had missed off a bolt
e) I had to front tyres nearly illegal
f) there was misting in the gearbox
g) my fog lights weren’t working
Local garage have said due to old cam belt being put back on, this car was a death trap, if the cam belt had snapped we would lose all electrics including breaks and power steering.
The finance co have said they will not cover the expense but ACF will, the car has now gone back to them for investigating.
During the first repair I had to hire cars as I work out of town at my expense. And now I am having to do this again.
Also on checking all through my papers I did not get the £1000 trade in for my old car this was reduced to 1 pence because of tax? Strangely this was after we had been persuaded to up my deposit to£1000.
The mechanical Breakdown I was advised to take out only covers £300 worth of repair and the list of things it excludes is longer than what is covered.
Do we pursue legal action? Will a solicitor take this on? Or do we allow them to look at car and then fix it, possibly sending back a death trap?
Please help.
With the issue of not getting the £1,000 for your part exchange, you need to check the paperwork. The common practice of "writing back" deals does not mean that you are having to spend more money. Infact, depending on whether you have any finance outstanding on a part-exchange, "writing back" a deal can often be the only way to get the best deal from a garage. Any garage that sells a car is liable to pay VAT on the difference between the selling price of the car, less any costs (warranties, RFL etc), and the price that the garage paid for the vehicle in the first place. If they give you £999.99 less for your part exchange, you should find that your top-line cost of buying the vehicle has also dropped by £999.99, so that the balance payable is exacty the same figure that they agreed with you when the deal was done.
Approved Car Finance
I was advised to take out only covers £300 worth of repair and the list of things it excludes is longer than what is covered.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by shudntbhere1
