Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by oddjobbob

  1. No. let them get on with it. the misdescription does NOT apply unless you expresslylied in the ad - eg 72000 miles and its done 100000. Not mentioning Cat D is not the same as lying about it. It doesn't matter what happened in the past, it was cat D which implies cosmetic damage, so forget about it, it makes no difference.
  2. 1. Did the ad say '2015 model' or was it just advertised as a 2014 car? If it says 2015 model then yes you could argue about it 2. it depends, is there a v5?
  3. If it was a private sale, then Cat D is for them to find out not for you to declare. If its a trade sale the reverse applies. However if it really IS a Cat D write off (HPI it yourself, don't take their word for it) , I would give them their money back out of good will. The seat belt matter is immaterial, they should have checked, tough.
  4. It happens, sorry its happened to you - the dealers always mention it in kind of 'small print' don't they?
  5. I don't agree with Bazooka I'mafraid. If the ad stated it was a cat D write off then that's the car you bought I'm afraid - Barclaycard won't simply hand you your money back. The dealer would be quite entitled to presume that you had read the ad properly. Although it is compulsory for a dealer to declare a write off prior to sale, they did in fact do so. Cat D is not really that bad, normally cosmetic damage only, and usually insurable at normal rates- and I think it quite likely that the car was advertised reasonably cheaply which helped in your decision to buy.
  6. +1. wear and tear item, just life...
  7. OP you said ex lease. you are now saying ex hire. there is a difference. ex lease = a company leased it and its had one driver from new, probably 2-3 years old ex hire = Alamo or someone rented it probably less than 15000 miles and 18 months old or less Either is ok, Alamo, etc have to give them back in pristine condition
  8. No they don't have to declare it. Ex lease cars are often a very good buy - they will have been serviced on time and at a main dealer, etc. Before I retired I dealt with lots of lease companies, and they were better cars than others offered within the trade.
  9. Can anyone tell me, is there any time limit for POPLA to hear this? I only ask as the last two communications I had from PE were one saying it would be heard on 22nd May 15 and another at the end of May containing various photos of their signage, etc saying that this was the evidence they were giving to POPLA and would I like to settle it Since then, nothing. Would be nice if they were out of time....!
  10. The contract included your old car so they must return that as well as a full refund. No I don't think so. If they've already sold it then all they have to do is give him the full purchase price back...eg if it was £6200 + £800 px then give him back £7000
  11. The contract included your old car so they must return that as well as a full refund.
  12. What Conniff said above. ^^^^^ You don't get a deposit back for buyer's remorse.
  13. Actually, you lost. get over it..OR... why not start your own political party that supports your view? If its that simple you are bound to win aren't you?
  14. if it was the one in the photo and it works then you've got no chance I'm afraid.
  15. Mm...probably worse than a caliper as the drag from it being stuck would show up on a brake test at MOT (although possibly not fail) If its not the tyres it's probably had a whack and the whole geometry is out. Walk away...
  16. A full refund He is trying to give you a car that is dangerous (ie pulls to the left) if you paid by credit card do a chargeback
  17. fight for the full amount. not your problem if it cant be fixed. you may find that swapping the front tyres from side to side will sort it out, as they have prob worn unevenly due to tracking.
  18. you seem to think I'm pleased about it. I'm not. I feel extremely sorry for anyone that's shelled out for a carcraft warranty / service plan etc. all I was trying to say was that, in the end, poor businesses with poor customer service and a 'rip off' reputation do not survive: from that aspect it is a good thing that no one else will be stitched up by carcraft. If Arnold Shark don't improve their reputation and customer service they will eventually go the same way. A terrible day for any Carcraft staff, but I'm afraid the writing was on the wall.
  19. Well... hang on a minute They (rightly) didn't release the car until they were certain you had paid... if you were selling a car, would you let it go like this? They have agreed to pay for the faulty boot lock to be repaired. And you have your second key. So I don't really see what your complaint is?
  20. Heard this on LBC news last night, and here it is... http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/carcraft-closure-thousands-motorists-left-9157732 unsurprising given their customer service. Perhaps Arnold Shark are next!
  21. £200 of food? That fridge must be as big as my front room then. Seriously, unless you were storing a load of finest scotch fillet steak, you couldn't get £200 of food in 4 fridges. But going back to Currys, just get your replacement from them and buy from ao in future, they are brilliant.
  22. after 7 months I don't think you've got any hope at all tbqh. They were only advisories on the MOT and NOT fails... things which, in the testers opinion may need attention soon. As for the EML, it happens, probably just a fault code that needs clearing, could be anything. But I would persist in getting the EML done under warranty if you can, sadly MOT advisories wont be covered.
  23. This is stupid. It means that if I live near Ascot Racecourse I can let someone park on my drive with an appropriate sign displayed, they can then go to the races but if they exceed the two hours by one second I can then charge them £85 as this is 'in line' with local authority parking charges? No of course I can't as I have NOT LOST £85. utter nonsense in my view.
  24. If they can't see them properly and believe them to be worn out then they HAVE to say so, otherwise if they were almost worn out and didn't tell you then that would most certainly be a cause for complaint. NB though that if they can't see them AT ALL then they have to presume they are ok - they do not dismantle anything on an MOT.
  • Create New...