Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by gareth19

  1. 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.
  2. 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
  3. 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.
  4. 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?
  5. 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?
  6. 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.
  7. 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!
  8. 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 expla
  9. 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
  10. 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.
  11. 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 inc
  12. 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
  13. 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
  14. 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?
  15. 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
  16. It looks like they have complied with the court order because on page 1 their new POCs they state "amended Particulars of Claim pursuant to the order of the court dated 24th September 2010".
  17. As we are in the "stay", I must admit I am tempted to write to Morgan's and point out that the £2064 they now want has not taken into account £600 which the car sold for and also £200 which I paid between 2005 and 2008 (I have proof of all payments). If they then adjust the balance to approx £1200 then that is all I ever wanted and maybe there will not even be any need for court as I will happily resume payments. Is it worth writing to Morgan's as they appear to be backing down?
  18. yes gh I did use your suggestions for my directions. I basically said that their POCs didn't meet CPR rules etc and stated that they must amend their POCs and then I will sort out defence. Just a query, what is this "ws" you all talk about?
  19. Once again I have no idea if I am supposed to respond to these new POCs. Nothing says I have to respond but on the other hand I don't want to be caught napping if I do have to respond
  20. No idea if they applied to the court - I am assuming so as the court made the order then the next thing I know Morgan's are sending me a new POCs. All their covering letter said is "We enclose herewith by way of service Amended Particulars of Claim". Short and sweet
  21. Court order doesn't say about submitting new defence, it just says : "Any application by the Claimant to amend the POCs is to be filed and served by 28 days from the date of this Order (24th Sept) and thereafter the Court will consider the Defendant's proposed Directions". So no idea really where I go from here now they have changed everything.....
  22. ok the files above must be the POCs. Then I have page after page of other docs. As I said some of these other pages have things blacked out. Obviously I am happy to have succeeded in finally getting them to sort out the balance of the account but as I said it's still not correct. Not really sure on what I do next so any advice is welcome.
  23. Interesting. I would post up the new POCs but it's 68 pages long!!! I have submitted my defence some time ago and at present we are still in our "stay" period which was requested by Morgan's in order for "us to narrow our differences". In the 68 pages I notice that they have put in my original termination letter so they must have tracked it down from somewhere. And yes this was a "conditional sale agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act" according to the agreement
  24. Finally they make no mention that they are not going to pursue this matter in court anymore and still appear intent on a hearing. The whole reason it went this far was because earlier this year I refused to pay any more until they sorted out the correct balance. They were trying to pursue me for almost £9000 so I placed the account in dispute. Now they appear to be sorting this matter out finally I am more than happy to resume payments to them as I have told them numerous times. Surely they can not still proceed with a CCJ when I was in the right. I told them all along that when they updated m
  25. In their new POCs they state " The Claimant Claims 1) the sum of £2064.73 2)interest pursuant to sention 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at such a rate and for such a period as the Court sees fit 3) costs Whilst it is progress that they have finally admitted I owe 50% of the agreement there is still discrepencies over the figures. They say now that I should have had to pay £7367.80 (which is correct). However they say that I now owe £2064.73. This is much better but is still not correct. The new figures have not taken into account £230 which I paid off the account from June 2005 until Oc
  • Create New...