Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
    • Oil and gold prices have jumped, while shares have fallen.View the full article
    • Thank you for your reply, DX! I was not under the impression that paying it off would remove it from my file. My file is already trashed so it would make very little difference to any credit score. I am not certain if I can claim compensation for a damaged credit score though. Or for them reporting incorrect information for over 10 years? The original debt has been reported since 2013 as an EE debt even though they had sold it in 2014. It appears to be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 13 and this all should have come to a head when I paid the £69 in September 2022, or so I thought. The £69 was in addition to the original outstanding balance and not sent to a DCA. Even if I had paid the full balance demanded by the DCA back in 2014 then the £69 would still have been outstanding with EE. If it turns out I have no claim then so be it. Sometimes there's not always a claim if there's blame. The CRA's will not give any reason for not removing it. They simply say it is not their information and refer me to EE. More to the point EE had my updated details since 2022 yet failed to contact me. I have been present on the electoral roll since 2012 so was traceable and I think EE have been negligent in reporting an account as in payment arrangement when in fact it had been sold to a DCA. In my mind what should have happened was the account should have been defaulted before it was closed and sold to the DCA who would then have made a new entry on my credit file with the correct details. However, a further £69 of charges were applied AFTER it was sent to the DCA and it was left open on EE systems. The account was then being reported twice. Once with EE as open with a payment arrangement for the £69 balance which has continued since 2013 and once with the DCA who reported it as defaulted in 2014 and it subsequently dropped off and was written off by the DCA, LOWELL in 2021. I am quite happy for EE to place a closed account on my credit file, marked as satisfied. However, it is clear to me that them reporting an open account with payment arrangement when the balance is £0 and the original debt has been written off is incorrect? Am I wrong?
    • OMG! I Know! .... someone here with a chance to sue Highview for breach of GDPR with a very good chance of winning, I was excited reading it especially after all the work put in by site members and thinking he could hammer them for £££'s and then, the OP disappeared half way through. Although you never know the reason so all I can say is I hope the OP is alive and well regardless. I'd relish the chance to do them for that if they breached my GDPR.
  • 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

Sold car to trade - Their demanding a refund


DenR
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2420 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 am a private seller.

I sold my car to a garage (trade) and now they want to return the car and threatening legal action for selling car without telling them it was involved in an accident.

 

 

They did an HPI check and confirmed it was all clear of accidents and finance.

They paid a deposit online then came to view and try the car on a Saturday afternoon.

 

 

Price was agreed, they took the car and I gave them till Monday noon to pay the balance (accounts issue).

Balance was paid later that day (Saturday).

 

 

Monday they phoned saying that the car was un roadworthy and the roof airbags have been deactivated/removed which they could not tell on initial inspection.

I had no idea of the airbag situation as I also carried out an HPI check when I bought the car and all was clear.

Where do I stand?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are a private seller, they are the experts.

It is up to them to check!

 

You note that you weren't aware regarding the airbags, and had carried out your HPI check, and their HPI check was clear too.

As far as you knew there was no issue and no history of an accident.

 

They'd then have to show that:

a) you were aware of the issue, and

b) deliberately concealed it from them,

to be able to have a claim against you as a private seller selling to a trader.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're for Heavens sake.

 

They're...................... Short form of they are.

 

H

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

What made them check the roof airbags, especially if they couldn't tell anything about them just from a visual inspection? Seems odd to me that if the HPI check came up clear, and there was no visual sign that the airbags had been deployed then they were obviously looking for a reason to return the car. I bet they didn't pay retail price for it too ;)

 

I used to be in the trade for a considerable amount of time, and so my advice is to tell them to cease contacting you as it is harassment. There is no proof that the airbags have been deployed before they accepted the car, anything discover afterwards could have happened at anytime, besides you do not need any proof etc. We bought cars from the public, and we also traded a lot in and it was always up to us to ensure we did all relevant checks before agreeing a deal. Sometimes we got caught out by customers, but tough, we had the chance and the law is the law, private to trade or trade to trade there are no warranties etc.

 

It's tough on them, but that's the way it is. They are just trying it on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarification please. Did the (alleged) accident happen while you owned the car? If there was no accident while you owned the car were you aware when you bought it that it had previously been in an accident? You did an HPI check when you bought it and that did not disclose an accident? So you sold it in good faith and had no knowledge it had ever been in an accident?

 

If so I'd just reply saying exactly that (facts not law). "Dear Mr Buyer, I am a private seller and I have no knowledge of the vehicle ever having been in an accident and so there is nothing I could have disclosed to you. It was not involved in an accident while I owned it. No prior accident was disclosed to me or evident when I bought it on xx/xx/xxxx. I did an HPI check at that time and that did not disclose any prior accident damage either. I am therefore unable unable to accept the return of the vehicle or refund the purchase price to you. Yours sincerely,....". [The experts here might be able to suggest a better wording. I'd stick to a simple statement of the facts at this stage and not get into the legal principles involved].

Link to post
Share on other sites

i wouldn't worry your private how are you going to know if anything wrong as your not a mechanic or very clued up

 

 

also if hpi is clear of accident that would mean they either crashed it or they just making lies to get some cash back

 

 

we all know traders lie about faults because my sis brought a 2010 citron c4 and had pads worn out and disc and had new mot so it shows they pay mot people off

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...