would this count as costs? Or would this be a seperate fee they can claim i owe?

help with some advice Have tried to arrange collection of the vehicle as scrap but the dealer has said they will not release the vehicle back to me until i pay £700+vat for storage at £20 a week..or sign the car over to them and call it final During their initial response to the mcol claim they said they reserve the right to claim storage fees. They havent up to this point mentioned anything about it, i havent accepted any terms relating to it. During the court hearing, the legal representative asked at the end if they could claim costs and the judge said he wasnt going to award costs. Where do i stand on this? I feel that a contract hasnt been formed as i havent been given any details of terms and I havent accepted them. Although is the previous comment about them reserving the right to claim fees valid for my acceptance as i carried on with the claim? I feel like i am being blackmailed here to sign the car over to them for nothing

Yeah you are right and the judge wasn't very happy with the report either. Unfortunately AA cancelled their appointment and said they couldn't do the report and recommended this other company But it's fairly obvious that the garage have directed them to a certain conclusion so I should have just done one myself as well. Unfortunately I didn't know about this until the day final evidence had to be submitted

yeah i felt that it may have been a different decision with a different person. He laboured so hard that 116k miles was an extremely high mileage for a car so the bar for satisfactory quality was going to be much lower. 116k isnt that much for a used car in the grand scheme of things. High yes but not horrifically high In hindsight I am just annoyed that the process is such that you dont get a chance to rebuff what the judge is saying past your 1 allocated moment, just have to sit there in the summing up and accept it

Case dismissed Apparently driving off the forecourt and driving for 3 months is sufficient to prove that the vehicle was of satisfactory quality and time of sale and negate the CRA subsection 14 Oh well. Life goes on

thank you. So you dont think i would need to stand up and present my case again? Its just a case of clarifying/answering questions as needed and requesting time to speak to rebuff the points raised by defendants?

got my hearing date coming up shortly and was going through things ahead of time. Not sure what to expect as far as process is concerned though. At the last hearing I barely spoke and the judge basically asked to confirm details and then told us to get an independent report and then we left At this final hearing am I going to be standing up to make a statement and counter arguments etc or will it be another situation where I am mainly responding to questions from the judge? Should i prepare an opening statement of sorts? Should i expect the judge to have read my witness statement and attachments in depth? Its supposed to be up to 1.5hrs long but I am not sure what will take that length of time Also it states on Citizens Advice "If you lose you might have to pay some of the defendant’s costs - like travel and lost wages" Is this a realistic thing that might happen?

Should i send a copy of my witness statement to the defendant? The document i got from the court says i need to 'serve and file' by the date. I have already sent to the court but have just received the defendants statement so im not sure if i should forward mine to them? edit: nevermind, I have realised that 'Served' means to send to the defendant so i have done this

Apparently I tell them my number over email and someone then calls me at a random time to take paymebr over the phone. Waiting for someone to call me at any point now. 2023 apparently! Where are the online payment options??

I meant Thursday, Friday, and today but I will keep trying I guess. Hopefully don't have to resort to turning up unannounced as its about an hour away

Been trying on phone for last 3 days to get hold of the court to pay my fees. Emailed them and they say it will take 29 working days to reply to my email. Website says not to just turn up without an appointment... what a system!

Thanks Andy, So at this point final evidence and witness statements are due by 27th April. So I just send a pile of documents marked as exhibit a, b, c etc and then an index of them all? Or do I send a letter like 'I am bringing a claim against the defendant under CRA due to xyz...' and then reference my documents thought that statement?

That's really kind of you to respond in such a detailed way. I need to type up and send off all my evidence in next day or so and this has been very helpful Do you (or anyone else) know, when submitting my evidence ahead of the trial, am I also submitting my arguments and the story of the claim? Or is that done on the day? Not sure if I should be sending in just the documents or sending my full argument in writing... If that makes sense

The instruction from the judge at the last hearing was for a report to be arranged that would state what went wrong with the car and if this fault was present at the time of sale. They said it was to be an AA or RAC report and the cost was to be split between both parties. As the garage have had the car for the last 6 months and they are 50 miles from me it made more sense in my head for them to arrange the visit and send me the report once done.

Have had this report through today. Court date is in June, I need to pay court fees in May, I need to submit my final evidence at end of the month. It says that I have driven the car when it was overheated causing further damage but also says that the vehicle is not fitted with a temperature warning gauge or temperature warning light. So how would i know if the car was overheating? I refer back to the lack of any guidance in the manufacture book about checking coolant. My first thought is that it still doesnt state that the issue that caused the breakdown wasnt present at time of sale which is what the law assumes to be the case....but i am not sure Any thoughts from anyone? Hankins Report 290323.pdf

Just finished in the court hearing. Seller came directly without lawyer for some reason. Really old and could barely hear what was going on. Frustrating. He is trying to rely on Mot being on the car when it was sold as proof of it being fit for purpose. Judge shot that down and said it is a snapshot in time and doesn't mean anything. Said we will need to get an independent report confirming the condition of the vehicle. Looked right at the defendant and said that unless that report specifically says that the bit that is broken now was definitely working when the car was sold then he will not win this case. So now to try arrange AA or RAC to inspect the vehicle and its 50/50 on costs but I can reclaim if I win. Since he hasn't replied to emails for months I am not sure how it will work but hey how, here we go Got until 8th March to get inspection booked and another month for the report to come back. All docs to be lodged with court by 27th April. Going to be a saga! But I won't give up

Do you (or anyone else) know if i need to/should prepare my case properly for this meeting or is it not going to go in to this detail?

Yeah thats all i could see in the book. I did a ctrl+f for 'coolant' and only got the results i already referenced and none of them mention regularly checking. I didn't get any warning lights or messages. I would assume that those would have shown in the history when the AA person plugged in to the car and it would have been obvious as the breakdown reason. The only evidence i have that these lights didnt come is the lack of a diagnosis from AA. Not ideal but better than just my word i guess. My fairly basic understanding of the CRA would suggest that the assumption lies in the coolant system being faulty at point of sale unless they can prove otherwise. They would also have to show that the warning light system was working at point of sale as if the coolant system broke but no lights came on then that would be a fault as well. Who knows how it will end up. I'm more annoyed by how they have treated the process than anything else. Basically ignoring my for 6 weeks then asking for another 4 weeks before claiming a mechanics report that i've not seen.

So you wouldnt expect this appointment to result in a final outcome? Sorry, got terms wrong. It was in the bit where it asks if it can be decided without a hearing. They ticked No as they wanted to cross examine me

@Manxman - yes I agree it will be a case of he said/she said. If i say i checked the coolant and it was fine then that shows there was no issue at sale, if i say i didnt check it then they will say i was being negligent. Ultimately I dont have much to lose at this point by seeing how the court case goes. Its not as if they have made me a decent offer to stop proceedings that i would consider. RAC says twice a year. - https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/car-maintenance/how-to-check-your-coolant/#:~:text=You need to check your,drops below the guide marks. Halfords state to check at the start of summer - https://www.halfords.com/motoring/how-to-guides/prevent-overheating.html Vauxhall manufacturer book doesnt state anything as far as i can see. https://www.vauxhall.co.uk/content/dam/vauxhall/Home/PDFs/owners/owners-manuals/zafira/zafira-owners-manual-january-2010.pdf On page 90 it states to stop the car if light comes on and check coolant level immediately. No light came on but that will be hearsay (unless i can use the AA breakdown report having no mention of it as proof that it wasnt on. You'd expect a roadside mechanic to notice that kind of thing but dont know). Since there was no light then i didnt check coolant Page 101 has another light about coolant level and to check the levels if this light comes on. Again no light so no check. Page 153 has a section about Vehicle Care which would be more relevant. This states to 'Check Coolant Antifreeze'. However this is under the section 'The following must be done if the vehicle is stored for several months' Page 154 has similar about putting car back in to operation after being off the road for extended period of time PAge 156 has a section on Vehicle Care and the Collant system. This states: If the cooling system is cold, the coolant level should be just above the KALT/COLD mark. Top up if the level is low. 9 Warning Allow the engine to cool before opening the cap. Carefully open the cap, relieving the pressure slowly. Top up with antifreeze. If no antifreeze is available, use clean tap water or distilled water. Install the cap tightly. Have the antifreeze concentration checked and have the cause of the coolant loss remedied by a workshop. There is no mention of regular checks here. Page 194 also mentioned coolant but just about the concentration to be used. No mention of checking it So i have driven the car in line with manufacturer guidelines. I havent checked the coolant but the manufacturer doesnt state that this is a recommendation. RAC state twice a year. I know that other sites state otherwise but I think this is enough for me to say that me not checking the coolant isn't overly negligent, the manufacturer clearly doesnt expect this to be done.

The lawyer for lawgistics stated in their MCOL rejection that they wanted to go to court to be given the opportunity to 'cross examine' me. Not sure what he will try to pin on me. In my mind my argument is that the coolant system is broken and that caused a catastrophic engine breakdown. The coolant system does not form part of the mot so they cant say it was working due to having an mot. There was no checklist done on handover. They haven't shown anything that proves that the coolant fault was not present at time of purchase. I suspect their counter argument will be that I didnt check the coolant system so will say its due to poor maintenance. Given the fact their is no guidance from manufacturer or from any recognised trade bodies like rac or aa on how often to check coolant I would push back that expecting me to check the coolant every time i drive is unreasonable and would only be the case if they knew it had an issue.

court letter uploaded. Cropped my own name off the top line. Court Letter.pdf

I submitted through mcol although that's now closed since mediation failed. I haven't seen the mechanics report that they produced.

I have actually just had a note through the door about 10 minutes ago saying the preliminary hearing has been set for 23rd Feb. The letter is dated 22nd Nov 22 for some reason but ive got it now

Well I dont know what benefit there is in a timeline of events at this point but happy to provide if you feel you can add value to my process. I have typed it all out and uploaded to I cant bring myself to redact the dozens of emails but if it is of benefit then I will try find time. At this point i am in the stage of nothing to lose. If i go to court and lose then I will scrap the car and only get back what they offered me anyway And yes, I know I have done things wrong at various points and worded things in the wrong way so no point pointing out things i cant really change now. I have tried to be more than reasonable with them and in hindsight they have taken me for a ride 28th Feb – car purchase from Hankins car sales. 2010 Vauxhall Zafira 7 seater. 116k miles on it and 11 month MOT. Given 6 month warranty. Garage is about 1hr away from me 27th May- car broke down whilst driving. AA attended and stated the DPF was blocked and was not feasible to repair. Towed me to a local garage 8th June – Garage contacted me to say that the car was beyond any degree of economical repair. They would need to dismantle the engine to say what caused the fault but they could see there was no coolant in the reservoir and the engine was seized. They said that the AA report was incorrect and if it was his car then he wouldn’t take any further as the cost to give a definitive diagnosis was going to be very significant. On this date I notified Hankins that the car had broken and told them where it was for it to be collected for investigation as I understood I had to give them a chance to repair before seeking refund. 16th June – resent the email dated 8th June as no response. Included a LBA I made using template found online. The core is this is below: On 26/02/2022 I purchased the above Vauxhall Zafira from you. On 27/05/2022 I discovered that it was not of satisfactory quality: The engine cut out whilst driving and the AA were unable to get it restarted. On taking it to a local garage I have been informed that there are many issues with the car and they are unable to get it to start. They have mentioned potential oil issues, compression issues, and coolant issues. Essentially as it is they are unable to get the car started without a lot of investigation. The mechanic advised me that if it was his car he probably wouldn’t even start as it appears to have serious issues. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires dealers to supply goods that are fit for purpose, as described and of satisfactory quality. However, the vehicle is clearly not roadworthy. You are therefore in breach of contract. I am legally entitled to ask that you repair or replace this vehicle at no further cost to me. I requested this on 08/06/2022 by replying to an email you had previously sent to me and you have not responded. This invited you to collect the car to investigate the issues to your own satisfaction If you are unable or unwilling to do so, I expect to be reimbursed the original purchase price of £2470, minus an agreed amount for fair usage prior to the breakdown. If you fail to reimburse me or repair the vehicle, I shall have no alternative but to issue a claim against you in the county court for recovery of the money without further reference to you. 17th June – dealer acknowledged receipt and requested diagnosis reports. I explained that the garage said this would not be economical and I didn’t want to then seek these costs back from Hankins , I felt it best for them to collect the car themselves for investigation. Reiterated the contact details and location of the car 21 June – Hankins again asks for reports. I again explain the above. 28th June – I email again as no further response and state that if they are not willing to attempt a repair or replacement then to advise to I can start the mcol claim on the basis that the car was not of satisfactory quality. I told them I would do this on 1st July if no resolution. 30th June – received email from Lawgistics- solicitor working on behalf of Hankins. He requested I wait a ‘reasonable’ length of time for a resolution and stated that there is no definition of this and could be up to 3 months. 30th June – I reply to lawyer saying that I am only willing to wait as long as there is progress. I confirm current mileage which is now £120k and state that as Hankins refused to collect the car for investigation I have had to do this at my own expense and will be adding this to the claim as well as any ongoing tax and insurance costs. The car is now at my home. 1st July – lawyers confirms receipt of my email and says ‘I will discuss with my clients’ 4th July – lawyer requests reports from original garage. State what I have told Hankins multiple times 5th July - ‘I will discuss with my clients’ 13th July – ‘My clients agree, they do need to inspect the vehicle’. ‘Please return it at your convenience’ 13th July – I reply that as I am making a claim under the CRA then this process should not involve me incurring costs or inconvenience. I state that it has been 5 weeks since I asked the garage to collect the vehicle and this represents absolutely zero progress. I state that this is ‘really pushing things in terms of resolving the matter in a timely manner’. I copy section 9.24 from https://www.businesscompanion.info/focus/car-traders-and-consumer-law/part-b-your-obligations-under-consumer-rights-act-2015-cra 20th July – lawyer asks when it would be convenient to collect the vehicle 26th July – I apologise for late reply and say that I work from home and the car can be collected at any point 28th July – lawyer says car collection will be 29th 29th July – car collected no problems. 11th August – I email asking for an update as no further information since car collected 12th August - ‘I will chase my clients’ 17th August – chase again as no news or follow up since last emails 17th August – ‘I expect a response shortly’ 24th August – Chase again as no response from previous chasing. I state that this matter is causing massive inconvenience as school is about to go back and I need a car 3rd September – After no response to anything since the car was collected on 29th July I issue proceedings through MCOL requesting the value of the car as well as the insurance, tax, recovery costs. 13th September- Lawyer acknowledges that I have made a claim and says that Mr Hankins wife has passed away so asks for me to send the initial paperwork to him so he can leave the client to grieve. 13th Sept – Me – ‘Hi, I am sorry to hear of Mr Hankins loss. I have attached the paperwork to this email. I didn’t want to issue proceedings but I am sure you can appreciate with that after having no meaningful communication since 29th July I was left with no other choice’ (in hindsight I shouldn’t have provided the paperwork but the guys wife had just died and I’m generally a nice person) 13th Sept – lawyer replies saying he understands and I do what I have to do 15th Sept – I received note from courts saying that Hankins had been given an extra 14 days to respond. Deadline is 4pm on 10th October 10th October – 3pm on 10th October I receive note from court that Hankins has rejected my claim. They state that they have a mechanics report dated 13th August that states that the car was driven without coolant and this caused the engine to break so it was user error. I accept mediation as next step. In the midst of the rejection they state that they will come after me for costs of storing this vehicle if I choose to continue the claim 28th October – mediation scheduled. I have done a lot of research at this point and have confirmed that there is no manufacture guidelines stating how often coolant should be checked. RAC and AA both say twice a year or when car is taken out of storage. In fact the manufacturer booklet in the car states that if coolant is leaking then to take to garage to investigate this fault. I am confident that if the manufacturer states that looking coolant is a fault then we have to assume this fault existed when the car was sold to me. There is no firm guidance on how often I should check so I feel like I have a good case. I speak at length with the mediator and admit that to get it done and dusted I would take an offer and probably be ok with 50%. He goes off to speak to Hankins or the lawyer (I don’t know who was on the line) and comes back saying that ‘It appears that only one of you came here with the right intentions’. Hankins offer £300 if I sign the car back to them. Basically less than scrap value. I reject this. 1st Nov – email received confirming claim transferred to county court. 26th Nov- I email lawyer - Hi xxxxx, Hope you are keeping well In regards to the above car and the ongoing dispute with Hankins. I understand that the case has now been transferred to County Court in Peterborough and we await the next steps. Realistically this could be a while to get a court date arranged and during this point I am still incurring costs and your client are still storing the vehicle. Are we all in agreement that this vehicle will eventually be scrapped? If so then I do not see the point in prolonging that part of the process. This will minimize losses on my side and allow your client to stop storing the car. Are there any objections to this from your side? This would not be settling my claim in any way and if successful once we get to court then the scrap value already received would be deducted from the claim. Obviously I have rejected the car so if your clients would like the actual car back once this is all done then thats fine and we will continue with the current status quo. I do believe that during the mediation call the intention on your side was to scrap the car anyway so if we all have the same opinion on where the car ends up it may be better to do this sooner rather than later. Thanks 27th Nov – ‘I will discuss with my clients’ I do not chase this because in my head I have approached them to seek a solution to avoid them incurring storage costs. The fact that they have not engaged with me would make it harder for them to try claim against me (there has been no discussion on storage terms anyway so I am not overtly worried about any claim there) 28th Jan – I email lawyer stating that the MOT has expired and the tax renewal is due. Request confirmation of off road status and request update on previous email. 6th Feb – forward on above post mediation emails to the garage directly as no communication from lawyer. No response as yet