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

My rights to hand car back to dealership


Lauren1302
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2033 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 guys,

 

Not sure if am on the correct part to post this so apologize if i am just looking for some advice this is my first post.

 

We bought a van 3 months ago on HP and every month the van has broken down on us we have been told by the garage that it has been injector problems each time so this time we decided we didn't want the van anymore couldn't trust it at all the garage tried to hit us 1300 quid usage fees it's done below average miles and nothing wrong with the van what do ever.

 

We have contacted the finance each time it's broken down they then told us the price of usage fees they are asking for was ridiculous and would put a complaint in. So this morning we had a phone call from the finance telling us they have spoken to the garage but they have told then it hasn't been the same problem 3 times it's been different problems so basically lying to them to cover themselves.

 

Every phone call with the garage is recorded and every phone call they have told us it's been Injectors again.

The finance company have basically said that the garage have covered themselves well knowing that they have lied yet we have to take the van back and be shafted again surely we have a good to stand on somewhere here?

 

Hopefully this makes sense

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be helpful if you can space and punctuate your posts so that it makes it easier to read for people who would like to help you.

 

Please look at the Consumer Rights Act and you will see that if a defect occurs within the first six months of the contract, you have a right to insist on a repair and if the repair fails then you are entitled to insist on a refund or a replacement at your option.

 

If you had reacted in the first 30 days then you would have had an automatic right to a refund or a replacement.

 

Write to the garage – email and also recorded delivery – and tell them that you are asserting your rights under the consumer rights act and that you are giving them a single opportunity to repair the van and if they fail to do so then you will be insisting on a refund.

 

Is the van working? Can it be taken to the garage? You will be able to claim the costs of delivering the vehicle to the garage and also any other losses that you have sustained during your period of ownership.

 

What is the name of the garage and also which is a finance company that you are using? They are all leading you around by the nose

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have suddenly realised that there is an important question to ask you – did you buy this van as part of a business or as an individual consumer?

 

If you bought the van as a business then you will not have the benefit of the consumer rights act, but you will still be able to complain and to make a claim – although it might be slightly less straightforward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The first problem was in the first month of having the van. The problems have been reported from the beginning to the finance company.

 

The van is in an individual customers name. They have never compensated the money we have paid for the van to be towed to them neither have they gave us a courtesy van.

 

The finance company have basically said we need to take the van back surely this can't be right?

 

Specially when there words were they've covered it well knowing that they have lied

 

The garage was bridgend group and finance company is close brothers

Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be suggesting that this van was sold to an individual consumer and not business. That's fine but you need to be sure of this because it could come back to bite you if it turns out that you are representing a trade purchaser as a private buyer.

 

It's actually not correct that you are responsible for getting the van back to the garage – but frankly to save a lot of hassle this might be the best thing to do and make sure that you keep all the bills relating to this and then claim afterwards.

 

If this van was sold to a private consumer then you should send the letter which I suggested above.

 

Is this the company? https://www.bridgendgroup.co.uk/

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'd hedge a bet and say this a Renault/Vauxhall Traffic or Movano shared chassis and engine type of Vehicle?

 

I would tell your finance company that

A: your intention is to reject it under the consumer rights act,

and that you're taking it back to the dealership on XYZ date,

where you will be leaving it at their premises,

and getting a refund at best

or a replacement vehicle at a compromise,

 

or

going down the small claims track at worse.

 

Either way THEIR asset will be at the dealership where you purchased it and that after rejection be expecting them to either take on new vehicle details or cancelling the agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't forget to fill out the V5c if you do too.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...