Hello, I used this forum a few years back and it helped me greatly so hopefully I can get good advice on where I go with this problem. Basically I employed a car electronic/audio firm to fit a rear headrest DVD system into my car for the kids. This was back in May. Whilst the system worked lovely and I had no issues with it, it did however play havoc with my car's electronics. Within minutes of me driving off I had a tyre pressure system warning on the dash (which remained on) The reversing camera and the keyless door entry systems worked intermittently and the FM reception was poor. I messaged the guy a few times asking if anything he did could be contributing to these faults and his replies were basically to disable the tyre pressure system. I took it to the dealer and after plenty of visits and investigations they found the following : "disconnected DVD system. Found live wire wrapped around a fuse and pushed into fuse board for boot release. System earth wire was wrapped around a bolt. Advise wiring to be fitted correctly from a direct power supply". Basically the installation wasn't good by the sounds of it and it was interfering with my car's electronic systems. Anyway now they have left the DVD system disconnected and my car is all working perfectly again. Now however I am left with a system that I paid for not even connected. I paid for the DVD system by credit card but I am not sure what the score is here. Technically the DVD system worked ok and was not faulty. It was the installation that wrecked my car so are they still jointly liable or not? I am over £1000 out of pocket. Can anyone advise me on what I do and who is best to claim from. As I say it is not quite as cut and dry than if the system itself was faulty.

Yes it is 6 cd autochanger in the centre console. I have looked into taking it out and sending it to the garage as they suggested and it looks like a major operation including dismantling the dashboard. I have told him I am not willing to do this as I am not a car technician and may damage something. We have agreed that I will take the car to him and leave it with him for him to fix it so fingers crossed we may now get somewhere

The garage has phoned me today. They are naturally willing to fix the auto changer but he wants me to take it out of the car and send it off to him (he will refund postage he says). He will then get it fixed and he will post it back to me. Is it me or is this a harder way of doing it. I have looked into it and it seems taking the autochanger out invloves dismantling part of the dashboard etc.

Yes on the advert it actually says "Radio/CD". I mean if it was a job of say £50-£100 I would probably cut my losses and just get it done but when I took it to the auto electrician he said it is a "very expensive fix". I don't see why I should have to pay for an expensive fix when I was not made aware it wasn't working. Had he told me that I may well have rejected the car. Who wants a car without a CD player nowadays?

Just noticed in the small print he has actually written "30 day engine & gearbox warranty". So I am just wondering what the law states in my case. Is he liable to fix the fault and can I pursue him for it? If so how? Or shall I just hand him the car back and take my money back?

Yes they have not respsonded to my email either. As I said he did promise to "look into it and phone me back" when I rang him 7 days ago but not heard a thing. In my letter I pretty much outlined the situation like I did on the phone to him. I told him that I can either bring the car back to him to fix or I can get it sorted at my local garage and he can pick up the bill. Failing that I said I would return the car and take back my p/x car and my money and I will look for the car from somewhere else. Just really looking to know where I stand and what is the best way forward I guess.

Thank you. The Royal Mail website still shows that the letter is being progressed through their network for delivery. This is taking a long time as the woman in the post office said it would probably be delivered the day after I posted it. Anyway I am only concerned as the car dealer told me I had a 30 day warranty so I am just worried that the longer this drags out he can turn around and tell me it is over the time period. Anyway I will leave it a little longer as you both suggest. Thanks for your advice!

On 18th October I p/x my car for a Nissan Primera at a second hand car dealership in Warrington. However when I got it home and after reading the manual I found that the CD autochanger in the centre console was not working. I popped the car to a local auto electrician to see if what a simple matter of a loose connection etc. However he told me that in his view the processor was not working and it is an expensive fix. He advised me to take the car back to where I got it from. Now the garage is around 170 miles from where I live so it is a bit of an inconvenience. I telephoned the garaga explaining the situation and I was told "well I don't really know what to suggest". Then he told me he would get back to me (which he hasn't). On 24th October I sent him a letter via recorded delivery telling him the situation. I advised them I could either take the car back to them for them to fix the problem or I would do it in my local area and send them the estimates and bills etc. I have had no response to my letter. Please advise me on what I can do in this situation. Many thanks!!

thanks. what grounds would I have for unfair relationship? I have the mediator phoning me every few minutes so anything I can give her helps. Cheers

I am currently in court mediation. The claimant has substanially reduced the claim amount but there is now one small thing I'd like to check which we differ on. The £600 the car sold for at auction should not come of the balance of the account because I voluntary terminated. However other sources have told me that the £600 must come off the balance as it was returned and sold within the agreement guidelines. Any advice greatfully received.

Ok they are now claiming £2064.73. I have just sifted through all my payments etc and not only have they ommitted to deduct £600 which the car sold for but I also have proof of a further £490 I have paid between 2003 and 2008 which they have not deducted either. I make the true balance I owe to be £974.73. This is a far cry from £9000 which they have been claiming for 8 years. Now I believe £974 is adequate compensation for 8 years of being hounded for a ridiculous sum of money which was by far not correct and also the stress it has caused my family and I along with the small matter of the incorrect APR. Therefore I think I should apply for the case to be dismissed.

mmm makes you wonder. obviously something they'd rather i didn't see yet if its a record of communications between me and them presumably i'd already know so don't see what the secret is. odd

Ok just perusing the file of docs and there is the agreement between On:Line and Cabot for I assume when Cabot took over the debt. It is dated 30th Sept 2008 and it states "The vendor has agreed to sell and assign and the purchaser has agreed to purchase and accept the assignment of all of the vendor's right title and interest in and to the debts". So all letters I have from Shoosmiths state On:Line as the client up until January 2008 when suddenly it changes to GMAC (UK) Finance Plc. I had never even noticed until this case forced me to check all letters thoroughly. Then I also have a letter from Shoosmiths dated January 2009 when Cabot is listed as the client. From what I gather On:Line ceased trading in 2006 and effectively became part of the GMAC group somehow. I also now have discovered what docs were blacked out. They were exhibit "E" which the POCs state are "a redacted copy of the Cabot Europe Action History which details communications between Cabot and the defendant". Some of the pages are readable whilst other pages or paragraphs are blacked out

Ok. So I think I quite like your 2nd option. I have been messed around for 8 years now and finally Morgan's have proved I was right all along. Then as you say there is the APR which they entered incorrectly on the agreement and then the fact that On:Line had ceased trading in 2006 and yet the debt wasn't assigned to Cabot until 2008. Right then, so obviously my defence has changed now due to Morgan's chaging things so what do I do next? Do I write to Morgan's or the Court. Or neither and just wait for someone to contact me?

Interesting. Are you sure this is a statute barred debt? Since I took out the loan I have paid fairly regularly and thus acknowledging the debt. I certainly haven't gone 6 years without paying