Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I disagree with the charge and also the statements sent. Firstly I have not received any correspondence from DVLA especially a statutory notice dated 2/5/2024 or a notice 16/5/2024 voiding my licence if I had I would have responded within this timeframe. The only letter received was the single justice procedure notice dated the 29.5.2024 this was received on 4.6.2024. I also disagree with the statement that tax was dishonoured through invalid indemnity claim. I disagree that the licence be voided I purchased the vehicle in Jan 2024 from RDA car sales Pontefract with agreement to collect the car on the 28.1.2024. The garage taxed the vehicle on the 25.1.24 for eleven payments on direct debit  using my debit card on my behalf. £62.18 was the initial payment on 8.2.24  and £31 per month thereafter the second payment was 1.3.24.This would run from Jan 24 to Dec 24 and a total of £372.75, therefore the car was clearly taxed before  I took the car away After checking one of my vehicle apps  I could see the vehicle was showing as untaxed it later transpired that DVLA had cancelled my tax , without reason and I did not receive any correspondence from DVLA to state why it was cancelled or when. The original payment of £62.18 had gone through and verified by my bank Lloyds so this payment was not declined. I then set up the direct debit again straight away at my local post office branch on 15.2.2024 the first payment was £31 on 1.3.2024 and subsequent payments up to Feb 2025 with a total of £372.75 which was the same total as the original DD that was set up in Jan, Therefore I claimed the £62.18 back from my bank as an indemnity claim as this payment was from the original cancelled tax from DVLA and had been cancelled . I have checked my bank account at Lloyds and every payment since Jan 24  up to date has been taken with none rejected as follows: 8.2.24 - £62.15 1.3.24 - £31.09 2.4.24 - £31.06 1.5.24 - £31.06 3.6.23-£31.06 I have paper copies of the original DD set up conformation plus a breakdown of payments per month , and a paper copy of the second DD setup with breakdown of payments plus a receipt from the post office.I can also provide bank statements showing each payment to DVLA I also ask that my licence be reinstated due to the above  
    • You know hes had it when they call out those willing to say anything even claiming tories have reduced taxes on live tv AS Salmonella says: The Conservative Party must embrace Nigel Farage to “unite the right”, Suella Braverman has urged, following a disastrous few days for Rishi Sunak. The former home secretary told The Times there was “not much difference” between the new Reform UK leader’s policies and those of the Tories, as senior Conservatives start debating the future of the party. hers.   AND Goves replacement gets caught booking in an airbnb to claim he lives locally .. as of yesterday you can rent it yourself in late July - as he'll either be gone or claiming taxpayer funded expenses for a house Alongside pictures of himself entering a house, Mr McGuinness said Surrey Heath residents “rightly expect their MP to be a part of their community”. - So whens farage getting around to renting (and subletting) a clacton beach hut?   Gove’s replacement caught out on constituency house claim as home found on Airbnb WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Social media users quickly pointed out house Ed McGuinness had posted photos in was available to rent     As Douglas Ross says he'll stand down in scotland - if he wins a Westminster seat - such devotion.
    • I've completed a draft copy to defend and will post up here for review.  Looking over the dates and payments this all stemmed from DVLA cancelling in Feb , whereby I set up a new DD in Feb hence the overlap, why they cancelled when I paid originally in Jan I have no idea. Anyway now stuck with pending court action and a suspended licence . I am also firing off a letter to DVLa recorded disputing the licence revoke
    • Thank you both for your expert knowledge and understanding. You're fighting the good fight by standing up for people like me and others with limited knowledge of this stuff. I thank you. I know all my DVLA details are good. I recently (last year) renewed my license, and my car's V5 is current with the correct details; the same is valid for my partner. I'll continue to ignore the love letters 😂 and won't let it bother either me or my partner.  I'll revisit this post if/when I get a letter of claim.  F**k ém.
    • Please check back later on today for a fuller response and some edits
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Used car purchase - now broken down :( **SORTED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5782 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

Hi all

 

Am a little unsure as to where I stand on this under the SOGA, etc.. so, I hope someone can help please:

 

12 days ago, I finalised the purchase of a trade/p-ex car from a garage & picked it up. It's a Rover 416i, T reg ('99) with 135k miles on the clock - cost £780, no warranty purchased or included. Payments of the deposit (£250) and the balance were put on my g/f's credit card.

 

The car came with a brand new 12 month MoT, and I was told that in addition it had "recently" (no, not sure just how long ago that was) had a new head gasket and starter motor - no proof of these as the service history isn't complete.

 

Tonight, driving home from work, the car overheated - I pulled over and let it cool down, filled up the coolant tank with water and tried to start it - but it wasn't having any of it, bump starting didn't work either. In short, I had to call my recovery service and get towed back home - when diagnosing the fault, the recovery agent said that the head gasket had blown (he took a look at the inside of the cap of the coolant tank & oil filler cap, both covered with brown-y froth - "cappucino" he said!). Not sure whether the overheating was caused by the head gasket, or vice versa - but the head gasket going would perhaps explain some difficulties starting the car in the morning. The recovery agent also said that perhaps the "recent" head gasket replacement was just that - only the head gasket (i.e. seal) and not getting the head skimmed....

 

Now, I'd like to be 100% sure of my position before calling the garage tomorrow morning - I dunno if SOGA covers the sale of used cars with no warranty or not.

 

Hope someone can help - I only wanted something to last me 12 months - not 12 days! :(

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, babes!!! Typical, never writes, never calls until he's got problems!!! :razz:

 

Trading Standards Central - Consumer Advice Leaflets

 

tells you what's what, and yes, you should be covered under SOGA.

 

Same thing happened to me a few years back, and yes, overheating, great big globules of oil in the water system (as opposed to the water getting in the oil, which would give a great big smoking car), bla bla bla...

 

£800 should buy you more than 12 days of use, you're quite right, but a new head gasket/cylinder may well be too costly to make it economical to repair, so see what the trader has to reply when you contact him and take it from there. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, babes!!! Typical, never writes, never calls until he's got problems!!! :razz:

 

ROTFL - thanks darling :p

(says she, who never replied to my facebook post :D)

 

Seems that there are too many open/new problems versus solved problems at the moment *sigh*

 

Trading Standards Central - Consumer Advice Leaflets

 

tells you what's what, and yes, you should be covered under SOGA.

 

Same thing happened to me a few years back, and yes, overheating, great big globules of oil in the water system (as opposed to the water getting in the oil, which would give a great big smoking car), bla bla bla...

 

£800 should buy you more than 12 days of use, you're quite right, but a new head gasket/cylinder may well be too costly to make it economical to repair, so see what the trader has to reply when you contact him and take it from there. :-)

 

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction (as always ;) ) - I've never been in this situation before!

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must have the 'K' series engine - a wonderful engine, but very prone to head gasket failure.

 

You must take the car back and reject it. Do it in writing.

 

Don't accept a repair as this engine requires a mechanic that knows what they are doing and an engineering shop that is very careful with skimming the head.

If it is not done properly, it will let you down again, but if it is done by a proper engineering company then it can give a very long and satisfying return.

If you are happy that it be repaired then I would insist that the Rover dealer does it and no one else unless you live close to someone like 'Rovertec'.

 

If you want another of this type then see if he has one with the Honda engine, a completely different car and wonderfully smooth gearbox.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looky here:

 

Consumer Sales Directive & the Sale of Goods Act

 

SUBJECT

Sale of Goods Rights, Faulty Goods, Poor Service.

 

RELEVANT OR RELATED LEGISLATION

Sale of Goods Act 1979. Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations (following 31/3/03 transposition of Directive 1999/44/EC).

 

KEY FACTS

1. Rights have been enhanced when the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations was implemented on 31 March 2003.

2. The Regulations transpose EC Directive 1999/44/EC on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees.

3. Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale).

4. If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale a consumer can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances).

5. For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) consumers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).

6. At present, the onus is on consumers to prove the good did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years).

7. Now consumers have a six months reversed burden of proof and a right to seek a repair, replacement and a partial or full refund.

 

The following are subject to the transposition of the Directive 1999/44/EC via the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations on 31 March 2003:

8. If the consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract (e.g. were not inherently faulty).

9. After six months and until the end of the six years, it is for the consumer to prove the lack of conformity.

10. If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if the fault has meant that they have had only some benefit from the goods.

11. If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can claim a full refund, if the fault has meant that the consumer has enjoyed no benefit from the goods.

12. Where retailers or manufacturers offer free guarantees or warranties, the Regulations provide that they will now be legally binding.

13. The guarantees must also be written in plain English, must be available for viewing by consumers on request before purchase and must state that they do not affect the consumer's legal rights.

14. The Regulations do not impose an obligation on retailers or manufacturers to offer guarantees nor do they apply to extended warranties, which have to be purchased by the consumers.

15. The consumer has exactly the same rights with second hand goods as he does with new, however, with older goods it is increasingly difficult for the consumer to prove that a fault was inherent at the time of sale and the conformity criteria also allow second hand goods to be judged less rigorously than new.

 

Best Regards.:D

CaLL Me On INTeRNeT CaLLS @ "NoBBY_ONLiNE":D

 

NB: Any advice given ?(if any) is given freely and without constraints,it and any information is based upon personal knowledge and personal experiences and/or views it should therefore only be regarded as advice and not a statement of the law, for that you should seek professional legal advice!.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just wanted to post an update that this all got resolved - thanks everyone :)

 

The story following the above........

On Weds 30th July, I had the car towed to the workshop of the dealer that sold me the car. The workshop were really no help because they were so busy and didn't have a diagnosis by Tues 6th August. So, I wrote a letter to the MD of the dealer, giving the story and 2 options - full FoC repair or full refund & quoting SOGA, etc.. - sent this by Special Delivery.

 

On Thurs 8th August, I received a reply saying that apparently #4 piston had a hole in it causing a complete loss of compression and they didn't think it was the head gasket at fault - however, they'd offer me the purchase price off any other vehicle in stock.

 

By Fri 9th, I'd looked at their website and there was nothing else I wanted to purchase from them - rang the MD and told him so, he went off to see if a repair was viable. He rang me back later and said the repair's not viable so he'd get a cheque in the post for the purchase price.

 

Anyway, upshot is that on Saturday I went to clear out the car, transferred the V5 over, picked up my cheque and it's all sorted :)

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...