Jump to content

grmc

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About grmc

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. I have a friend in Germany looking into the process, but it appears the legislation for these emissions is strict liability and it is the driver and not the registered keeper who is liable for the charge. My claim against Sixt would be one of a tort as my contract with them was to supply me a car fit for purpose to drive in Germany, which they didn’t. It may transpire that the two fines can be consolidated into one, as the sightings relate to a single incident of parking on-street without the sticker visible, unless the fines are issued one per 24 hour period. However, it would still be
  2. I think if you approach the issue with the clear attitude that you just want to resolve the problem without any intention of personal gain, then you will always hold the moral high ground. The wording in your initial post could potentially be interpreted negatively, in that you are looking for some sort of excess compensation, which would mean you'd be very likely met with resistance. If they refuse to play ball and you've gone in with the first approach, it always makes you look like the more reasonable party when you have to escalate. Always remember that the basic objective/princ
  3. I think that in light of what you have just added, it is possible that "a reasonable person" would not have discovered this need for upgraded hardware. It all depends on how hard you have to search the internet for any similar stories. If you've been encouraged to have a remap that is not suited to the standard car setup, and that the alternatives were not adequately explained (i.e. the clutch upgrade with the mapping you had, or the alternative lower power mapping and leave the standard clutch) then you're in a good position to have the alternative remap applied (and refund or contribut
  4. I would agree with disgruntled2007 - under these circumstances, you can't expect the dealer to contribute to the upgraded clutch. This is on the basis that had you known about it, you would have had the upgrade done at the same time as the remap, meaning no net loss to you. However, if you can successfully argue that the information regarding the clutch upgrade is sufficiently 'secret' in that there are no openly reported accounts of this issue (a fact you would be obliged to prove) and that the engineers were negligent in failing to inform you, then you MAY be entitled to have the ca
  5. Hello All, I'm posting this as a form of warning or advice, but in turn hope to glean some extra information based on CAGers' own experiences of either this abysmal company, or other car hire company 'bashing head against the wall' experiences. Apologies in advance for the essay. Sixt, it seems, will live and die by their "Terms and Conditions" contract, which, not unlike many other global and arrogant companies, seek to impose very harsh terms on their consumer; terms which would, in a court of Law, fall foul of the Unfair Contract Terms Act (UCTA), or the EU Consumer Protection fr
×
×
  • Create New...