Wow! A lot of information there that I had no idea of. Although I webuyanycar'd it and they valued it at £10800 so I have no doubt the price was too good to be true!

Thanks.

Buyer has now sent me a cancel transaction request. He's obviously doesn't want to sell it to me but I thought this was a legal contract being formed. Is there anything I could do?

 

How's about...

 

I note:

 

1) your motor trade activity

2) the suspicious nibble-bidding on this auction lot

3) the undisclosed outstanding finance on this vehicle (B1 LYD aka YE58 UWT)

4) the odometer discrepancy (20,000 miles vs 33,000 recorded miles)

and politely request that you sell the vehicle for the realistic price of £3,750.

 

Thanks for the reply edwincluck, just a few questions as I'm a bit confused.

How can you tell the seller is 'in the trade'?

What indicates to you that there was suspicious bidding?

Where does the seller state a mileage of 20,000?

Did you do a HPI check (I thought you have to pay for them?)

Or is this one of those sarcastic forum replies in which case ignore the above...

Why would anybody buy a motor on e-bay?, your just asking for trouble. Don't do it.

 

Note the link below is for E-BAY USA, but you get the idea,

 

http://reviews.ebay.com/How-to-AVOID-[problem]S-and-Purchase-vehicles-on-eBay-Motor_W0QQugidZ10000000001618089

Hi rebel, you say don't do it yet refer me to a guide on essentially how to buy a car off ebay. I have sold two cars through ebay with no problems at all and assumed it would be just as easy to buy one, obviously not. I don't think your reply is very useful but thanks anyway.

Just won the following auction: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/220956740745?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649

The seller has just sent me an email stating:

'Sorry been offered an higher offer on another site for £11500 let me know if you can better it'

What would you suggest I reply with?

A noticable knocking noise was present at the time of the car going into Halfords. Although I haven't heard it myself the knocking noise is still present. How have you come to the diagnosis that Halfords did not put the cambelt on properly?

edit: Having re-read your first post oddjobbob, I think you may have misread read my OP. The car was faulty before going into Halfords, the diagnosis for the fault was defined as 'Cambelt jumped teeth, leading to 6 bent valves'.

Consumer Direct advise a pursue a claim against the garage. Now having already sent the garage a letter before action on new years eve, should I send another one now that the situation is slightly different?

Sorry just to clear something up, the fault the car went in with was EML light and knocking, not sure whether before it went in it would go above 3000 revs to be honest.

Hey guys, its a long one so please bare with me!

2005 Saab 9-3 bought off from a garage with 54K on 01/07/11. 3K later, car presents with EML around beginning of December and take it back to garage. They simply turn off the light with a diagnostic tool and advise to wait and see if it comes back on. Light is back on a week or so later and they advise us to go through warranty company.

12 months warranty was purchased at the time of the sale from garage but with no explanation of claim limit and whats covered etc.

Warranty coompany say take it to Halfords, car was driven to halfords on 14/12/11 and is still currently there. Long story short, cambelt jumped teeth leading to bent valves was the original diagnosis.

Warranty company tried to wiggle out but Halfords argued our corner and they sent oit an engineer in new year and repair work authorised (cost £1031) and completed by 13/01/12.

Expecting to pick the car up we were told that further issues were present namely loud knocking noise and not revving past 3000rpm. As we had been without a car for a month, Halfords gave us a courtesy car.

Car was stripped with no fault found so sent on a recovery truck to diesel specialist. Diesel specialist unable to find a fault so car sent back to Halfords. Halfords then discovered the fault to be throttle body (revving issue) and small end bearing (knocking).

On 17/02/12, Halfords tell us car can't be repaired under warranty as max claim limit of £1000 has been used. They want the courtesy car back and suggest we take it up with garage we bought it off. Garage are suggesting Halfords are incompetent and they have no responsibility to fix the car. Consumer Direct suggest I send a formal letter to garage which I will do.

Now it's been two months and the car is currently at Halfords with the engine still stripped. Forgot to say, Halfords recommend a replacement second hand engine rather than repair as labour will be less and poses less risk as further engine parts may be damaged. Halfords say we can keep the car there for free (they can charge storage apparently) although its not kept indoors. Desperately need a car so having to SORN Saab which Halfords are aware of and buy a runaround till it gets resolved.

Now on the 31/12/11, I presented the garage with a letter before action outlining SOGA and my consumer rights, while also making them aware of my outcomes and a time period of 7 days for reply. I know it's been nearly 2 months since the letter before action but can I proceed with action now or should I send another letter before action?

Thanks for any help guys!

Just sent the following:

To whom this may concern,

I am writing a letter of complaint in regards to the claim reference A1.

I spoke to your colleague XX XX on 28/11/11 at around 4.15pm to resolve a problem in regards to the claim. After confirming with his manager, XX advised me it would be possible for the 3 passengers involved to claim for personal injury and this would be recorded as a fault claim, which I agreed to. I called back around half an hour later and spoke to YY YY to request some written confirmation of the outcome of the conversation with XX, however YY was unable to provide this but she advised me that the solicitors would have no problem with continuing with the claim. She also recorded the details of the 2 passengers which were not on file at the time and advised a file handler would be contacting them shortly to discuss their claim. I was made aware on 30/11/11 that the solicitors attempted to contact Admiral at which point they were advised that the passengers would be unable to claim. I contacted Admiral on 30/11/11at 1.00pm to try to resolve the misunderstanding at which point PP PP said that the passengers were unable to claim and he would call me back after reviewing the conversations that took place on 28/11/11. After waiting 2 hours I did not recieve a call back, I rang again and spoke to XX XX again who informed me what he had told me on 28/11/11 by his manager was wrong. I am unhappy with the way I have been treated and I demand that the resolution that was agreed on 28/11/11 is upheld to allow the 3 passengers to claim. If this cannot be resolved by Admiral within 7 days, I will have no choice but to pursue this matter through the Finanacial Ombudsman Service.

I can be contacted on 01234567890, alternatively email ...

Yours Sincerely

ABC

So I rang up on Monday and spoke to a chap at Admiral, who after half an hour and speaking to his manager said that they would allow the passengers to claim off my insurance but it would be a fault claim (which it already is!). The solictors have contacted me today stating that its back to square one and Admiral are again disputing the claim on the basis the accident was not my fault. So I rang Admiral and having confirmed Monday's conversation was in the notes, I asked what the hell was going on. I have just got a call back from the chap I spoke to on Monday saying he was misinformed and that he is sorry for the wrong information.

Be carefull beacuse your passengers can make a cliam against you personnely, which you will then have to pass on the your insurance company, could get sticky.

That's the whole point, my passengers have the right to make a claim against me and my insurance company as they were a thrid party. However my insurers will not allow them to claim as the accident was not my fault.

Hi cdti

 

I'm not sure if this helps, http://www.mib.org.uk/Company+Information/en/Default.htm

 

http://www.mib.org.uk/Customer+Services/en/Default.htm

It doesn't really address my queries but thanks anyway.

Wondering if there is anyway MIB can get my insurance to cough up.

i take it that the details the TP provided were false then? Did you get the VRM of the other vehicle and pass it on to your insurers?

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Yes the driver provided false details and I have photographic evidence of the other car and VRM and my insurers came back with the outcome being they cannot trace the other driver. Funnily enough, neither the police nor my insurance company have requested any photo evidence.

The solicitors who the accident management company are using say that my insurers are refusing to pay out anything for the third party injuries. Their reasoning for this is that the accident was not my fault, however they have deducted my NCB and recorded a claim against my name aswell as taking my excess. I am no longer with this insurance company. Because of this, the solicitors have forwarded the details of the passengers to the MIB to make a claim.

Can you advise if what my ex-insurance company are doing is a breach of law or their terms and conditions, it is Admiral Insurance.

In December 2010, I was hit by an uninsured driver whilst carrying 3 passengers. I was not aware at the time that the third party was uninsured and exchanged details at the roadside as it was late and cold, and as the car was driveable, I didn't call the police. After calling my insurance the next day, I was told TP was uninsured and I reported this to the police who after a few months couldn't trace the driver. My car was fixed immediately by my insurance company and I had to pay my excess for the repairs. I was told I would have to claim for personal injury through the MIB, the passengers submitted a claim for personal injury to my insurance company who have said they will not pay for this due to the accident being the fault of the TP. I thought that my insurance company must pay for any injuries to the TP even when not at fault such as in this case, is this incorrect?

There was an agreement of a free partial retest within 10 days, even if the car was removed from premises, and the emissions thing is a 'favour' he's doing so I don't have to faff about buying a cat and getting it fitted.

Frankly I'd go to another garage and pay the full fee and take along the failure note. Not in your interests to let VOSA to look at it.

 

Just a case of unfortunate timing me thinks and not your fault or the garages.

 

Problem here is if VOSA does inspect your car and there is a difference of opinion.

Two reasons why I'm not keen to do that, I'm scared my car will fail on other aspects that were missed by my mates brother, and secondly, he's doing it for just £15. If I was to take my MOT failur sheet to a different garage, would they just check them bits for me (it's easy money for them)?

PS: As I'm a mate of his brothers, he said he would 'sort out' the emissions failure for £50 extra (My car has no cat and has very high emissions as a result)

Spoke to him today again, and he said it's going through a 'change of entity' and I'm not the only person affected.

sorry, what i didnt make clear was that this garage does not charge anything for a partial retest and also they give the customer 10 working days to return. I complied with the 10 day notice, and was told it was OK to bring in today, but when I got there was told the above (post 1)

Im in a really messed up situation at the moment with my car.

Took my car to MOT my mates brother's station on 4th, and it failed on brakes and emissions. So got the work done and I dropped it off today for the retest, to be told they wont be able to retest till Wednesday, because VOSA have to come down and do some checks because the MOT station is going through a change of ownership. nI was then told, I'll have to pay for a full test again, and the car will be fully retested again!

Ive already paid for the first test, but as I'm his brother's mate, he will do me the second MOT half price.

I don't see why I should have to wait 4 days and then pay for a full retest again (where it could be possible they point out more faults that may have developed or been missed)

Just looking for advice thanks

I spoke to the independant advice unit on monday, and they said 'can they prove you were driving', and when I asked them if they could withhold my degree for non payment, they said no.

had a preliminary meeting today with a residential manager. As stated, its an investigation into a possible breach of regulation 20. regulation 24 is regarding parking, you may want to look at that too.

20: Regulation 20: University Regulations

24: Regulation 24: University Regulations

Heres the sunmary of the preliminary meeting.

In response to the possible breach detailed against you, you have denied the allegation, therefore, as per Reg 20 sec 2; i formally give you notice of my intent to properly investigate the matter in response to your denial. You have stated that you choose to pay and display each time that you visit the university, and that as there are not enough spaces to accommodate everyone you park where you can find a spot to leave your vehicle. You have stated that you fell that you are being victimised from the security team, in that they follow you each time you come onto the campus and within 10 minutes of parking the wardens are present in that area. With regard to the allegation of dangerous driving, you have stated that you believe that the parking warden was to blame for this as he saw that you were going to reverse your car, and failed to move out of the way. You deny that you drove dangerously and wish to hold a formal meeting with regard to all allegations to formally record your views on the matters outline.

Once I have investigated the breach, you may be required to attend a formal hearing. If so, this will be formally notified to you in writing and all wirtten statements that I have collated will also be sent to your attention....At the end of the hearing you will either be formally charged or informed that the possible breach has been withdrawn.

oh right, i see!

can anyone point out any legality issues with the actual tickets that PPC's hand out.

sorry?

i wasnt aware of any of the advice that was on the internet at that time.

should i post up a pic of the ticket to see if there are any grounds for appeal?

Depends on the circumstances. You will need to elaborate?

clamping enforcement are a PPC that operate around where the mmu cheshire sit is in crewe. they stuck a ticket on mine and my mates car and now im wondering if i can re-claim the fine.

You have up to 6 years to make a claim.

 

Have a read of the clamping guide in the stickies section. It gives a starting point for the things to look for.

just to confirm, i didn't get clamped, i just got a fine. so do i still use this guide?

I have been called for a 'student' discipline meeting, for the following reasons.

Preliminary Disciplinary Interview

I am writing to inform you that you are required to attend an interview at 4.00pm on Thursday 17^th December 2009 with the Head of Security to discuss the following incidents:-

Allegations of persistent failure to comply with University regulations regarding use of vehicles on Campus and driving causing danger to staff on the Students Union car park on Wednesday 9th December 2009.

The interview will be held in the Darwin Building in the Boardroom on the top floor. This is your opportunity to inform and assist us with ascertaining all of the circumstances related to this issue, prior to the matter being considered for disciplinary purposes.

You may bring with you a member of the University community to support you. You are advised that it would be in your best interest to seek the advice and representation of the Independent Advice Unit in the Student Union.

If you choose not to attend the meeting, the Head of Security is authorised to make a recommendation about the action to be taken, despite your absence.

 

You may wish to refer to University Regulation 20: Student Discipline which can be found on the University’s website at:

http://www.keele.ac.uk/admin/ps/governance/acts/Regulations/REGULATIONS.htm

If you have any queries, please contact me on ...

I was parked in the university car park last wednesday, when the two parking officers decided to tap into their computers, so I saw this and got into my car, one of them said 'dont move it' and while i was reversing, the other decided to get VERY close to my wing mirror, and subsequently he hit it while stood right next to my car.

Secondly, I can imagine they are going to question me regarding the numerous unpaid tickets. In my first year of study, I would buy a ticket and display it, and park. I once got a ticket, but appealed and my appeal got rejected, at which point I stopped paying and displaying, and parked where i wanted without a care. Now I know that the PPC are unlikely to take me to court, but the university are threatening to withold my degree for unpaid fines, so what can I do?

They dont have any proof that i have been the driver for any of the tickets.

The ppc in question is liberty services.

Thanks in advance

March last year, I recieved a fine for parking in Crewe, issued by clamping enforcement crewe. Looked at my bank statement, and I made a payment of £71.40 made on the 25/03/08 to them.

Just wondering if there is anyway I can claim this back, maybe through small claims court?