Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

A1 Approved Warranty - Problem


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2093 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

best you start a new thread

this thread is very old

and you wont get seen

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

best you start a new thread

this thread is very old

and you wont get seen

 

 

dx

 

Starting a new thread is the worst thing to do!!!

 

1) This thread comes up very high in Google's rankings

2) There is useful info in the thread

3) Surely this thread will now be near the top within this domain and so now it is active?

 

Creating a load of half baked threads makes it so hard to find meaningful information. Rant over, I used to lecture in IT including Netiquette.

 

Fair play Stuart Haskell has emailed me very promptly. My conclusion from my findings is a simple one.

 

Me, the consumer is at fault! The dealer Premier Motor Sales Cheltenham offer a non FSA approved warranty that covers sod all. A1 Approved indeed offer a service of no value, but I should have done my research into them before buying the car. If people refused to buy cars backed up by non FSA approved warranties then dealers would have to react. I may have suffered financial loss (I'm filing a Money Claim against Premier Motor Sales) but I wont buy from a dealer who use such a warranty scheme in the future.

 

Can I please ask anyone reading this to carry out two things:

Ensure you include the name of the dealer in town who sold you the A1 Approved Warranty and also leave a 1 star review on Google. This will ensure anyone googling their local garage will made aware that their future car purchase doesnt include a warranty of any value.

 

Online reputation is key people!

 

I'll update in here my outcome (another pet hate - people are quick to ask advice but rarely folloe up with a conclusion), hopefully Premier Car Sales in Cheltenham will either agree to settle out of court or if not the judge is a fair one who isnt influenced.

 

Many Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I have a car which is "covered" by an extended warranty from A1.

 

The dealer who sold it to me, when I asked him what was covered under the warranty said "virtually everything". I queried this as I am aware of "wear and tear" and then he explained items which could be construed as consumables which may go under wear and tear such as the clutch were not covered.

 

So the car now has 2 faults on it. One is an electrical fault the other is a seized calliper.

 

Looking at the only document I had from the garage it showed my registration number (it's a cherished number) but the car that I had traded in when buying the one that has gone wrong. A call to A1 sorted this out, along with a quick chat about the seized calliper. I asked about it being covered since I had never received any kind of policy documents or certificate detailing exactly what was covered. She confirmed it should be covered and emailed me a certificate with the correct car details on it.

 

Took it to the garage (not the one who sold me the car and the warranty) along with the warranty certificate. The garage confirmed that the calliper was seized and rang A1 to get authority for the repair only to be told it's not covered!

 

Brought the car home, rang them to be told the same. It's not wear and tear said the garage - it's a mechanical failure. A1's response: "A calliper is covered until it seizes and then it's not covered. No idea why it's not covered then but it's not." end of story. We disputed this over the phone and asked A1 exactly what is covered under their warranty then since we have no documents/policy booklet. It appears that very little is and as mentioned previously the warranty is not worth the paper it's written on.

 

We only took the warranty out as peace of mind because our previous car had developed faults which we struggled to pay for and we didn't want to be in the same boat again. It now looks like the car may need to be SORN'd whilst we save up for the repairs.

 

I think the customer service from A1 is dreadful. I feel incredibly let down. At the very least my premium should be refunded since it appears there is nothing that is covered under their warranty. My garage are pretty shocked it isn't covered.

 

I'm currently seeking legal advice to ascertain what, if anything can be done but for anyone reading this considering a warranty from A1: don't waste your money.

 

Stuart Haskell if you are reading this maybe you can explain the comments made by your staff as to the fact that the calliper should be covered but isn't and justify why it isn't covered. It's not wear and tear it's seized.

Link to post
Share on other sites

when did you purchase the car

when did it fail

 

warranties are totally worthless

 

consumer rights act [CRA] is your friend..

 

a calliper seizing is wear and tear, but the time span of ownership might be the important bit here under CRA

 

i'd be reclaiming the extended warranty

you don't need it ever ...CRA covers you for free

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Hi people

googled A1 warranties and found this thread high up on the list,

thought I would add my two pence worth.

 

Bought car from Audi VW Centre in Bromham, Chippenham.

 

 

several weeks ago had what I thought to be a turbo problem

phoned A1 warranty and they said book into local garage for diagnostics then get them to phone us.

that's what I did,

 

fair play to the garage they have dealt with the warranty company the whole time,

the initial phone call was the only one I made.

 

 

The car needed a new cam shaft sensor and vacuum solenoid.

A new cam shaft sensor and used vacuum solenoid were supplied,

 

the garage fitted them and got paid the same day along with the £25 excess I paid.

Very good service so far.

 

Picked the car up on Monday was ok for a half day and problem has come back.

phoned A1 warranties and the car is going back to the garage tomorrow.

 

This may be due to using a second hand part, but will soon find out.

 

All is to say so far so good, I will let you all know how this story ends in due course!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I've just been reading this thread and it doesn't give me much faith in resolving an issue I have with a car I purchased 5 weeks ago.

I called A1 Approved yesterday telling them I have a problem with the gear box on my Nissan Qashqai they said to take it in to a local garage and get the garage to call them,

Sounds easy! But no garage I contacted will deal with this as warranty they all say it’s not worth the hassle, I’ve not called A1 back yet to see if they have a garage they deal with local to me but is it worth it?

I know for a fact the car will need a new gearbox being an ‘x’ car engineer

 

did you purchase from a dealer? if so go back to them they will have to rectify it

Link to post
Share on other sites

afcwben,

AJ1958 made his one and only post on 17th April, 2015 so I doubt that your post above, whilst correct, will either help him/her or receive a reply.

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Similar issue with them.

 

I bought audi a4 2010 from quick car credit in crewe.

I did get highest level of warranty with a1approved for 6 months or 6000 miles.

 

After 4 months(2000miles) i was getting ptoblem to change gears.

Took it to the garage and they said its dual mass flywheel and clutch plate.

Phoned a1approved and they said its fine, to take it to the garage and they gonna need the garage to contact them etc.

 

I took it to the garage, they stripped it off, phoned a1approved and they asked for pictures.

After the garage sent them pictures they called back and they said its wear and tear so they not gonna cover the costs.

 

State of the dual mass flywheel and clutch was in that state when mechanics seen it for the first time they were surprised i was still able to drive it.

 

I phoned the dealer i get the car from, explained them whats happened, and they said they will contact warranty about it and they will call me back.

 

They havent called back, they ignoring my text messages on faceebok even when they are reading it and not answering the phone.

 

I bought the car for £10k and after 4 months i had to spend almost another £1000 on it because warranty not covering the costs.

Have you guys have any solution for it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

I am having problems with A1 warranty also,

 

bought a car based on it having a gold warranty,

taken it to a garage as it suddenly had problems,

 

the garage had said something had broken on the inlet/outlet/swirl flaps,

I spoke to A1 who said oh its the swirl flaps which are not covered,

 

I then spoke to bmw who said its all the same and to buy the swirl flaps its part of the inlet outlet,

went back to the dealer who then spoke to A1

 

an independent mechanic was sent, every mechanic at Halfords had said this part has broken and caused all the problems.

two of them called A1 who have been really unhelpful.

 

I am now awaiting the report as they are now saying its wear and tear. even though the mechanic who fixed it and all of them in the garage have stated it broke and caused the problem.

 

I am really upset and will definitely be taking this further as I feel they are trying everything to avoid paying. its sad to see this company years on from the original post is still doing the same.

 

STUART HASKELL can you look at this case please as ive read the gold warranty and I should be covered

peter lye

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Bought 2006 VW Touareg, LE06 , from Junction 17, Nottingham for £3,975 + adminlink3.gif fee £129, gentle persuasion applied and we paid £599 for 18 months DRIVER CARE warranty - a marketing face of A1 Approved.

 

Car was fine for 6 weeks but we were only using it locally and back and forth trips to town etc. We moved house, 100 miles away, my wife tried to overtake a truck, there was a massive bang, car slowed dramatically, revs racing and no drive! The massive articulated truck behind her set it's brakes alight trying to slow, truck inside passed her and she swerved into the lane behind it inches in front of the artic! The car rolled onto the verge, she was lucky to be alive!

 

Car was in Limp Home mode an hour later so she crawled home. Garage couldn't find the problem but I found out what was wrong, it was all over the internet - power on down changes can cause this sort of thing and it gets worse. Engine was far noisier after this too, exhaust I think. We tried it again and reproduced the issue, it was terrifying the car basically did a dead stop, no brake lights so a big problem for any following vehicle.

 

Called A1, they don't pay for diagnostics, just parts and labour and our limit per claim was just £1000!

 

Spoke to VW, only a full transmission change would solve it and that wasn't economical in a 2006 car! We spoke to Junction 17, wanting to send it back, repair or replacement, they bitched like hell but told us to take it back, we reluctantly drove it 100 miles, very slowly.

 

I'm disabled and need a big comfortable car, they took two weeks before they told us that they would help us with the Warranty claim and get the balance of the work done at trade prices to reduce the cost to us. Having suffered significant inconvenience we rejected the car under the Consumer Act 2015!

 

They bitched for days about it but they were talking about putting reconditioned parts in it as a repair when the internet blogs and VW all said such measures only worked for a little while and a recurrence could KILL!

 

They then called me, the insurance company had come to the table with £1000, the bill was going to be £1800 and they would be willing to split the difference with me, the car would be finished on the following Monday! I told them I had rejected the car, it was up to them if they repaired it but the responsibility to repair the car was theirs not the warranty company using my policy.

 

They sent me a report from their garage, it was an old car with lots of miles, Wear and Tearlink3.gif! Then they sent me the invoice for the repair as information, it was Wear and Tearlink3.gif, this is the garage not A1 Approved but they work very closely together.

 

I filed a case with the small claimslink3.gif Court and sent Junction 17 all the details including the particulars.A few days later we agreed a refund of £4,000 for the car and they paid it immediately.

 

However, I was puzzled about the repair, Junction 17 said that A1 approved had paid £1000 towards it but I had told them that the repair had to be paid for by them not by my warranty right at the beginning of our discussion. I thought then that they would properly repair and I would get the car back but I wanted the full car value as the limit on the policy not reduced by this claim.

 

It seems odd and illegal to me, I pay for a warranty with A1 purchased off Junction 17, I reject the car and Junction 17 make a claim on my warranty, without our permission or knowledge for a repair that was done after I had rejected the car in writing. I asked A1 for a refund, the policy was not to my benefit it was to Junction 17's so why had I been charged for it.

 

Stuart Haskell replied trying to worm around the issue, he denied the claim had been made, they may make a goodwill payment to the supplier but we would not get a refund!

 

Policy was only three months old with 15 months to run, is stating that no refunds after 30 days an Unfair term of trade?

What should I say to the Ombudsmanlink3.gif and has anybody else met this switch of payments?

 

Sorry this is so long, I wanted everybody to know most of the facts!

 

One thing is clear, stay away from Junction 17 and Driver care (A1 Approved)!

Edited by honeybee13
Part of car reg removed.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your account is a bit complicated and also you don't tell us the date of the purchase and the date that all of this disaster happened.

 

However, I understand that you had a car, it failed, you rejected it and you were refunded but they won't refund you the cost of the warranty. Is that correct?

 

What I understand so far, you should be entitled to recover the warranty as well. Would you like us to help you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Purchase was 25 February, car failed 29 March - just over the thirty day limit but use had been limited to that date.

 

We rejected it and finally agreed a refund of £4000 for the car, after a couple of weeks of agro, the warranty company apparently paid the supplying dealer £1,000 from our policy for the repair without informing us that they were doing so, we didn't make a claim and under the Consumer Act 2015 the responsibly for the repair is the dealer not the Warranty. A1 Approved say their terms are no refunds after 30 days, this was an 18 month warranty and the risk must increase with time so this, I believe is an unfair term of contract!

 

Question is 'Is this legal?' we didn't claim, the warranty paid £1,000 after we rejected the car so are we the beneficiaries of the policy or is it the supplying dealer? If that is the case why are we not entitled to a full refund and if so how do we go about getting it?

 

I hope this makes sense, it is complicated but at the end of the day We paid £599 and received nothing whilst the dealer got £1,000!

 

Chris R

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I complained to the Ombudsman about this incident, they were very nice about it but couldn't act.

They explained, 'This is because A1 approved limited are not regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority which means we’re unable to look into a complaint against them.'

 

A1 Seems like a big fiddle from start to finish!

 

If you can help in any way it would be great!

 

Chris R

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...