Don't know much about cars but I believe it's the plastic cover on the engine.

Yes, there was a big crack on the engine cover.

I now wait for a new re-listed trial date for hearing. Will keep you guys informed in due course.

Conniff, very sorry for the late reply but no update yet. I am still waiting for the hearing which is due shortly. I will update you then. Best

Conniff, it was a trader.

Not at the moment. I have read documents now as why the car was remapped and it had to do with problems regarding engine/ fuel consumption. We will attend court soon and I will advise you of the outcome. I do not know all particulars. Kindest regards

The care was used aprox 2 months and then shortly later no longer used. Did approx. 1500 miles. Tyres were pass the legal limit when serviced but sold as new. Wrong bolts on wheels. Air conditioning faulty. Lighter faulty among the problems described above. Cracked engine etc.

Dear King12345, I believe you have it wrong. The car was faulty prior to having it remapped. It is not my car. Because of the problems a ecu remap was actioned with the manufactures settings intact. The reason for the engineers. We have been fully advised by the software provider etc. Ecu remap is completely reversible. It is a Sale of Goods Act claim. I believe some posters have it wrong due to the way I have written things. It is no different to routing your phone which is software and not hardware related. From what informative things I have read Conniff has it right.

heliosuk, thank you for your response. If only you saw the bundle you would not say the same. Indeed, it is the defendants who have made at least 8 excuses to date given each one the one proceeding 'failed'. Our claim has remained the same. We have not had the opportunity to discuss the case properly. I will let the solicitor deal with it. I wanted some information for my understanding and knowledge. I am sorry I am not clear. I did not wish to give to much information, indeed both me and my sibling who I am writing this for feel we have given too much information. With regards to my clarity, I am sorry, but I do have some disabilities. Thank you for your help.

No the case is very clear. Quite the contrary, we have a solicitor representing us but the barrister out witted and the solicitor barely had a chance to talk. Our case is very strong. As I said the case was postponed so an amended report could be filed. What I am after is the law aspects re contract element of my post.

As stated before car is under her name. She commenced legal proceedings. All the complaints to the merchant etc. from the start from her. Her debit card was used to pay some of the amount towards the car. Rest in cash. So I am sure I have it all covered since I have researching but just want reassurance re the law...kindest regards.

Dear Conniff, Yes it is, paid for. Fully qualified engineer. Both parties had to agree to an engineer. As discussed above the hearing was postponed for they disputed this and the defendants have claimed they have been prejudiced by not being allowed to provide some of their documents, namely their 'expert' engineers report (which is full of opinions and he has never had access to the car and not independent) and this engineer was not authorised by the court to do this. However, the documents will have to be supplied as requested by the judge and it is up to the independent engineer to make what he want of it. We have advised that this is a Sale of Goods Act claim but they have claimed so many things. Warranty, sold as seen, trade sale...the judges have not said that you can't say that to private buyers and now pursuing the contract element. Originally the claim was just under my sisters name, but then her ex was added on (he signed the papers) following the preliminary hearing. They got back together, he provided a witness statement, they have no split proper so he will no longer likely attend. The barrister has requested he, the ex, be removed from the case if he confirms he won't be attending and the new judge has made an order for this. So you can guess what's his trying. The car was fully paid with my sisters money and she was there but with the kids in the car. It is she who authorised the purchase. This is being rejected by the other side. I have read a number of things on this and I believe enough information to cover all this but want confirmation of the law &/or a link to the law confirm this stuff solidly re remap is irrelevant given the above, contract. Thank you.

That is documents to the independent engineer. I have been busy looking at these matters too including the law.

Dear Conniff, The manufacturer is aware the car is remapped and has stated in writing the warranty is not invalidated. The ecu software company provider has confirmed the correct software was applied. The independent engineers report as per court requests states the same that the ecu remap is not the reason for faults. It was for the is reason the report was requested. However, the defendants barrister has now tried to claim we have tampered with the car so have no come back. The hearing has been postponed again for the defendants have claimed they have been prejudiced by not being allowed to provide some of their documents, namely their engineers report (which is full of opinions and he has never had access to the car) and he was not authorised by the court. They have now been allowed to submit this so we feel that is unfair and in breach of the rules but don't we don't mind for the report is a good read to have a laugh. They also wished to add another document which does not mention the car but they claim these were undertaken. The car was bough by my sisters ex-partner and for her and the children with her money. Car is under her name too. We have evidence. They/the barrister are now disputing who the 'contract' is with. Her ex is unlikely to turn up. Any support here would be great to regarding the law. Many thanks This will now be in front a 4th judge beacuase of the defendants and their barrister. The barrister has lied blatantly on a number of occasions to our shock.

The expert engineer disagrees having looked at the documents. The manufacturer has advised car is still under warranty (with remap and in writing). We have this in writing. ECU remap is reversible. Car is not driven. Car had hardware problems not software. All manufactures settings intact. Problems prior to remap.