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!  
  • 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

Category C write off


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5797 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

I'm thinking about buying a car that has been recorded as a Cat C write off.

 

It's been repaired and has it's VIC certificate, V5C and 12 months MOT which suggests to me that it has been properly repaired. The current owner says that the only structural damage was the front cross member, the rest was wings, bumper and bonnet.

 

Is it likely to cause me any problems with insurance companies. Obviously I'll declare it as cat C when I get quotes, I just don't want to buy a car that I can't insure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking about buying a car that has been recorded as a Cat C write off.

 

It's been repaired and has it's VIC certificate, V5C and 12 months MOT which suggests to me that it has been properly repaired. The current owner says that the only structural damage was the front cross member, the rest was wings, bumper and bonnet.

 

Is it likely to cause me any problems with insurance companies. Obviously I'll declare it as cat C when I get quotes, I just don't want to buy a car that I can't insure.

 

Get some quotes before you buy it then:rolleyes:

 

One thing that may come up - but won't be mentioned at the quote stage - is that in the event of a total loss, the value/pay out will be reduced to reflect that the vehicle has previously been a total loss.

 

The VIC test is nothing more than an identity check (to attempt to prevent 'ringing' of a written off vehicle). It is not concerned with the roadworthiness of the vehicle.

 

An MoT test only checks tested items and certainly is not a check of the quality of the repair.

 

For your own piece of mind, I suggest a detailed, expert inspection of the repairs to ensure that they are properly done. This will probably involve checking the car on a jig to ensure that the chassis is absolutely true. The parts mentioned in your post are all bolt-on parts (even the crossmember) are you sure that the underlying structure has been properly checked for alignment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Pat

 

I've tried to get a couple of quotes this morning but the companies were very non-commital about the vehicle status and just kept saying "as long as it is roadworthy" which a new MOT suggests it is but I'm seriously thinking about not bothering. It concerns me that a 4 year old car with 18000 miles on the clock would be written off with relatively little damage apparently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Having worked in the motor insurance industry, I can say that insurers are very quick to write off a vehicle these days. It's often the labour that costs more than the parts so easier to just w/o.

 

As suggested before, get a proper independent engineers report stating that the vehicle has been repaired to a high standard and that also the vehicle IS roadworthy (the broker or insurer should ask you for this anyway!). With this report an Insurance Company cannot refuse to insure you however it can impose terms (such as reduced value should another total loss occur) and also inflate the premium how it sees fit. Anyhow, you will find an insurer that is willing to insure at a reasonable cost - it's do-able and there are plenty out there.

 

Another thing to bear in mind is bumping the car on once you've had enough though - you may have been quick to buy it but finding someone else as eager may be tough - good old ebay I say!

 

Hope this helps!

I'm the Mummy and quite frankly, the CSA can kiss my butt!! :lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

we always ask for a independant engineers report before we will put a Cat c or d on cover, we can still quote but wont accept until the report has been seen etc and confirms that all repairs have been professionally carried out etc. new or used parts etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

we always ask for a independant engineers report before we will put a Cat c or d on cover, we can still quote but wont accept until the report has been seen etc and confirms that all repairs have been professionally carried out etc. new or used parts etc

 

Not arguing with your company's stance, but

 

a) Cat D is not reportable, so how would the owner know?

 

b) I can see no requirement for professionally repaired (ie somebody has been paid to do it); I can see an argument for competently repaired (ie anyone can do it - properly)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cat D doesn't always go on the register but it may do - I myself bought a car that was a cat d write-off (I knew this). Cat D is cosmetic damage only but value not worth repair.

 

As this vehicle is cat C, I would check with HPI to see if it is on register as I looked at a vehicle recently that was listed on website as Cat C. When I checked with HPI it wasn't registered as a write-off at all! So some cat c's don't make it on the register either!

 

Asking for an independent engineers report is standard practice by an insurer, they often want to know who carried out the repairs also - receipts etc.

I'm the Mummy and quite frankly, the CSA can kiss my butt!! :lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...