Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • well done  thread title updated glad to help. please consider a donation. we are free we don't get paid but try telling that to our ISP and server hosters. dx  
    • Has anyone replied as advised to a Paploc from J&P and had any follow up or developments? I've read on other threads about cases of people ignoring paplocs  from J&P with no further action, or in some cases, the messaging reverted, but I can't seem to find cases of the opposite (ie replying to paplocs) I know the advice on here is not to ignore paplocs, but just wondering if there was much evidence about J&P taking court action. I've experience of a previous debt being chased via Moriarty (ADCB) and it was widely reported Moriarty wouldn't attend, and they discontinued my case. Less sure about J&P, hence the question.   I haven't decided which course of action to take yet (ie reply to paploc or not), still evaluating but haven't found many J&P threads, conscious there could always be a first time. For record, I have been receiving IDR on and off for a few years, then a few months back J&P took over, with sms/emails and then a few weeks back I received email notification from ENBD "appointment of third party collection agency" Thanks in advance for any feedback.  
    • Good morning DX 24th went well. Claim dismissed and expenses awarded. Sheriff did not grant absolvitor when i requested. It was all about no name, no wet signature & e- signature/tick box.  Im in Forfar today so will call into clerk’s office for assistance with expenses claim   thank you again for all your help  much much appreciated  UCM     2024-05-24 Order of the Sheriff -claim dismissed - no signed agreement - expenses awarded.pdf
    • She is absolutely right! As soon as a hearing date is set we will prepare this for her, and more.
    • So what happened in this case?
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Advice required regarding a dodgy car dealer


Gingerman
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6098 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello, I was hoping anyone could help with a little bit of a situation regarding a second hand card I bought in May 2007. I have included as much fact as I can, so apologies that it is a long thread to read, but I would definitely appreciate any feedback.........

 

I bought a car over the phone, and having spoken to 2 salesmen about it, they both said it was in "immaculate" condition. On seeing and buying car, there were marks and scratches that would definitely dispute the "immaculate" claim, plus rattling of the exhaust (which both my wife and I questioned) and this was said to be normal, and would dissepate after 15 minutes of driving. They also told me that if any work was needed on the car, I could get it done in London (the car was bought in Loughborough and I live in NE London). Subsequently, I took the car. On taking the car to a mechanic for another fault, he immediately said that the rattling of the exhaust was due to a faulty exhaust catalyst (and he noted how annoying the rattle can be). This is not what was said by the 2 salesmen. In early July 2007, I started calling the dealer to find out what I should do. They said to me to get a quote from a local mechanic, and fax it to them. I did as they asked. I was only concerned about 3 issues with the car (examine door hinges, a faulty CD player and leaking water), but when the mechanic told me of the faulty exhaust, I felt cheated, and so I added all the faults I could see on the car to the list. To cut a long story short, the warranty manager refused to return a single call of mine (20 calls made in total), and since end of August 2007, one of the director's has been dealing with me. It is now 3 months since I raised the issue.

 

The car was not moving, and sat on my driveway for nearly 2 months. Subsequently, we have had the work done at a cost of over £600 just to get it roadworthy. I have not had any extra work done, which the car would require to be in an "immaculate" state. I asked them to pay the £600 only, and we can forget about the remainder of the list of issues.

He is basically saying that it is the word of the 2 salesmen against that of my wife and I with regards to the rattling of the exhaust. Secondly, he ha snow reneged on the offer to let me get the work done in London.

(He has made a gesture to pay £300 towards the costs of these 2 items only. He refueses to talk about the whole list of items, and says he is making a fair gesture regarding the 2 items. What he won't admit to is that his salesmen have basically told lies against myself and changed their story.)

 

Having looked at Sale of Goods Act 1979, I am reading it such that allowing for wear and tear:

1. the car must be of satisfactory quality (this is what I am arguing for - the car is not "immaculate")

2. the car must be fit for its purpose (it took me to london from loughborough, but within 1300 or so miles, it packed up, and more importantly, within 6 months of purchase)

3. the car must be as described (when they say it is in "immaculate" condition, any person using parkers etc would assume that this is the equivalent of being in A1 condition - the car is not "immaculate")

 

Also, I was told that if a problem emerges within 6 months of purchase, it is deemed to exist at time of purchase - can someone clarify this for me too please.

 

This is the list of items that I am questioning:

1. faulty exhaust on purchase (dealer claims this is 'wear and tear', but we are saying it was apparent on purchase, so we did not cause this)

2. holes in dashboard (from a phone holder or something similar - definitely not 'wear and tear')

3. cracked wing mirror casing - is this 'wear and tear'. I say it is caused by someone's driving ability.

4. faulty CD player - surely they can provide evidence of checks being made on this system

5. long scratch on bodywork

6. crack in bumper - definitely man made crack

7. injector harnesses failed

8. scratched up centre console - again, definitely man made crack

9. worn out driver's seat

10. door are not sitting on hinges correctly

 

The car was 3.5 years old when I bought it,and had done 82,418 miles

 

It is very stressful to date. I do need the car. I have had work done on items (1) and (7), and sent the invoice to the dealer. They said their gesture is simply to pay £300 i.e. how much it would cost them to do the work in Loughborough, but they are refusing to acknowledge the other items on the list. Surely this must account for something. The director is telling me that it costs half the amount because they can get discounted parts and cheap labour.

 

I have said to the dealer that I would forget the full list if they would pay for items (1) & (7). They seem to think that it is just these 2 items that we should be concerned with. This is not the case.

 

I have asked for evidence of their costing and also of the checks made on the vehicle, but the dealer is not forthcoming in this respect.

 

Does anyone think I have a strong enough case to get something back. I am not being greedy when I ask for full payment of 2 items rather than the full list (I am aware that a couple of items may come under the 'wear and tear' category) - and should I also include the cost of road tax and insurance payments that have been wasted?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice. :confused::sad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chesterexpress, I did see the car before I paid the cash. I was aware of some faults, but what was annoying was that they refuse to acknowledge and repair the faulty exhaust catalyst and faulty CD player. They go on to deny that discussions about the exhaust and CD player had not taken place, which in reality means my wife and I are not telling the truth. The other faults, I can live with.

 

Demon x Slash, thank you. I will take a look at this now and let you know what happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the items were disregarded as being 'wear and tear'. It is only after reading other consumer web-sites etc that I would consider some of them as man-made rather than 'wear and tear' e.g. the 4 holes in the dashboard, no one can say that this is from 'wear and tear' - at the time of purchase, my concentration wasn't on this as much as it ought to have been.

As for exhaust, we did ask them about it, and they said it was normal for a diesel car, and would quiten down after about 10-15 minutes. As this wasn't the case, I then started investigating about the other faults in more depth. This is how the full list came about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chesterexpress, I forgot to say also that the CD player was only used when we got the car back in London, so I could not ask them about it. Also, the water leaking above driver's door only happened on the weekend when it was raining. On the day I picked up the car, in the afternoon, there was blue sky.

 

Therefore, when you add the cost of these two items to the faulty exhaust (which I felt cheated on), I ended up including the full list of items to show the car is not "immaculate", which is how they described it to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...