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

Garage refusing to quote before starting work


kc89
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2427 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

Hi, I took my car in to a local garage to repair an oil leak around 2 months ago.

 

From what the garage have told me, it looks like there was an oil leak on the car previously which had been badly repaired. It appears that the engine ran low on oil at some point and I've now been told I need a new engine :|

 

The garage told me they would try to find a replacement engine but after waiting for a couple of weeks, I tried to find one myself.

 

I've been able to find a reconditioned engine with 12 months warranty which can be delivered to the garage.

 

I've confirmed with the garage and engine supplier that all required parts will be included etc.

 

The problem is that the garage is refusing to provide me with a quote (or even estimate) for the work until they have the new engine delivered.

 

As I have no idea what it could cost to fit the engine, I'm a bit hesitant to place the order for the reconditioned engine.

 

The old engine has already been removed so I'm unable to move the car from the current garage.

 

My only other option is for the garage to put the old engine back in the car and take it elsewhere, but this will still mean paying £600 labour for the old engine to be put back in the car.

 

Is it unreasonable to ask for a quote (or just an estimate) before paying for the engine. I'm a bit concerned that the garage could charge any amount and leaving me with no choice but to pay.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

 

Thanks.

Edited by kc89
Link to post
Share on other sites

Put the car on a trailer/towing dolley along with the engine.

 

Certainly won't cost you 600£!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine that they are wishing to see the new unit before quoting in order to see what ancillary equipment, alternator, power steering pump, air con pump etc needs to be changed over, which would affect the time required. When you say that both the garage and supplier of the replacement confirm that all parts needed would be included, I imagine that this related only to injectors, oilfilter, spark plugs (if petrol).

 

I can understand the reluctance of the garage to quote (legally binding figure) if they are not sourcing the replacement from a regular supplier with known preparetory work. The replacement could easily have no flywheel or ancillary belt pullys fitted

 

Remember that you will still be responsible for the time alreading spent in removing the engine for diagnosis, even if you did have the vehicle towed to another garage.

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

I don't know why some garages have an issue with offering quotes? After-all they are only estimates and can go up, and in some cases down. Main thing is that the customer is kept fully in the picture at all times.

 

We used to own a few garages over the years and often we would be asked for a quote to fit an engine which the customer wanted to provide themselves. We always gave them a quote based on the engine being complete and in good working order but we offered no warranty on the second hand unit as we didn't provide it. We would always assess the condition of the engine when it arrived and BEFORE carrying out any work, if it needed any new components we would always ensure the customer fully understood the costs etc prior to carrying out the job. Made no sense to keep anything from the customer as we wanted the work, also never made sense to carry out any work which the customer had never agreed to. Understandable that any customer would want an estimate before committing to anything, and so we always made it as easy as possible for them to make the decision, and if the job took longer than we estimated, then that was our problem. Likewise, if they decided not to have the work done because it was too expensive then so be it, saved everyone hassle and no need to chase them for payment when they couldn't afford it after all the work was carried out.

 

Key to it all is to work with the customer to get the job done and everyone is happy. If they can't offer you a quote without seeing the engine (based on it being in good condition) then go to another garage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

quite. an estimate is an estimate subject to. and shouldn't be a prob in most cases.

as you say if things change then they should let the customer know. time spent though wld usually be chargeable.

thing is, afaik legally, a garage agreeing to use customer supplied parts etc wld be under the same statutory legal obligation (re fitness etc) as if the garage sourced the parts themselves etc for use?

hence why they would need to inspect first to be satisfied that the customers supplied parts etc are fit/satisfactory etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never heard of any garage warranting a customer supplied part, I think only the parts supplied and work carried out by the garage is warranted? I might be wrong but I doubt any garage would carry out such work if that were the case because there are plenty of unscrupulous characters out there who would supply their own known cheap damaged engines etc and plead innocence when it doesn't work and hold the garage responsible for the repairs. When we offered a quote and the customer supplied their own parts, we always stipulated on the quote and invoice that we would not be responsible for the parts supplied by them, thus the customer always knew in advance where they stood. If they didn't agree to those terms then we wouldn't carry out the work and nobody looses out.

 

Basically if a customer bought an engine or gearbox from another supplier, then the contract of sale is between them and usually most suppliers offer a 12 month guarantee with the engine/gearbox. We wouldn't warrant someone else's engine because although you can spot a few issues when looking over it, it would not be possible to know if it is in full working order until it is fully fitted and up and running, that was a guarantee the supplier offered, especially if it was a reconditioned unit. If we sourced a second hand engine/gearbox from a supplier on behalf of a customer and fitted it, we would be fully responsible.

 

All our parts were bought from major motor factors and so if there was an issue we could refer back to them as they would guarantee the parts because the contract of sale is between them and us, not the customer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...