Dealer supplies new defective motorcycle which the did on PDI

[Leo Jantz]

Nlr

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[raydetinu]

good luck.

[Leo Jantz]

Nlr

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[raydetinu]

Hi, there is always a risk in court action.

but I think if you present your case in a clear and concise unemotional way and have the facts listed in chronological order, with supporting letters and notes of conversations etc. you should fair well. As you used the bike on such a long trip without it being repaired may go against you. You should certainly not continue to use it once you have rejected it.

[Leo Jantz]

Nlr

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[Conniff]

When you rejected the bike it was, theoretically, no longer yours but you continued to use it. You should not have used it and this could be your biggest downfalll.

[Leo Jantz]

Nlr

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[Conniff]

Lets put this in some sort of order.

 

At first service the slack was taken from the clutch cable but the lock nut and water shield not replaced.

Carelessness - Why did you not walk back in an ask them to complete the job.

 

Oil leaking from the sump drain bolt.

Carelessness, no new copper washer fitted to the drain plug - again why did you not ask them to complete the job.

 

Removed tank to fit comms lead, noticed sheared bolt and cable tie in it's place.

Carelessness - should have been noticed at the PDI and corrected.

 

Chain not lubricated during first service.

First services are usually free and do not always include a 'full' service. Check the handbook for what is done on the first service and if you should have paid for it. Special oil is used for the running in which is why it is called back in after a set mileage but it is usually free to change.

 

Sump overfilled with oil.

Gross negligence - This could have resulted in the crankcase splitting, you should have called them immediately you noticed and got them to rectify it.

 

You attempted to reject for a full refund verbally.

Rejections should be done in writing.

 

You agree to repairs

This will probably have recinded your right to a refund

 

You had a feeling the PDI was not carried out correctly.

Feelings are no good, you would need proof of this.

 

You again try to reject the bike and get a refund for an incomplete service.

You have gone from rejection to repair and back to rejection, you were right to try for a refund for the poor service.

 

Contact with the manufacturer. They queried the part ex bike.

The part ex bike has nothing to do with it, it is up to the dealer to inspect and assess the part ex and give a fair price unless you told him it was a UK bike in which case he should have come back to you and offered a reduced part ex allowance.

This whole affair has nothing to do with the manufacturer, your beef is with the dealer who sold it to you only.

 

You cancel the pick up for repair from the dealer.

This could be taken that you are now accepting the bike and want no further contact with the dealer.

 

Manufacturer would not comment on faults or a resolution until a full inspection had been carried out.

This is their right and you cannot deny them this right.

 

The dealer would not comment on the faults or a resolution until they had the chance for a full inspection.

You make an accusation that the dealer would back track on anything he had said in the past.

Again, they have a right to do an inspection.

You shouldn't make accusations unless you can substantiate them.

 

You make it known that you are unhappy that they want to inspect it.

They have a right to do this and you cannot deny them this right.

 

Owners club say 'problems must have been caused by the dealer after it was uncrated'.

Unprovable accusation and should not be put into print or conveyed to a third party.

 

"So with this knowledge of knowing it was actually done by the dealer themselves".

Heresay and again no proof.

 

Another verbal rejection attempt with the dealer.

They have still not been given a chance to inspect the bike.

 

Written rejection letter to the manufacturer.

As above, this has nothing to do with the manufacturer.

 

Contact with the dealer again asking for a repair and loan bike.

You are jumping from one thing to another and no-one will know exactly what you want. Do you want the bike repaired or a refund?

In the meantime you are continuing to use the bike so reducing it's value.

 

One week later you ask the dealer why they have not collected the bike.

Probably because they were confused and expecting you to ring again and cancel the collection and repair.

 

Dealer arrives to collect your bike and hand over a loan bike, the road fund license had expired.

The age is immaterial, you cannot expect a brand new machine. The road tax is another matter and they should have checked this before offering it to you. You could not have ridden this bike legally.

 

You ride the bike to Le Mans and back adding around a 1,000 miles to the clock.

You cannot reject something and continue to use it especially for such a long trip.

 

You return from France and again try to reject the bike, this time in writing as is required.

I think you have totally lost the plot here and your right to your money back. You can't say you have lost confidence in it after taking it on a thousand mile round trip to France. In any case you would not get it all back as you have benefited from it and any repayment would be reduced taking this into account.

 

You have gone about this completely wrongly and are now trying the court route.

You have confused everyone with your on/off repair/rejection.

 

I would say the counterclaim stands a better chance of succeeding than your claim.

 

I thank you for your reply, can I ask why you also see the importance of the facts past the point of them refusing my right for a refund?

 

Your rejection has no substance until put into writing.

[Leo Jantz]

NLR

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[raydetinu]

Leo, good luck!

[Leo Jantz]

Nlr

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[Conniff]

Sorry Leo, you have not read my post correctly.

 

The first five points are all to enforce the lack of care and professionalism of the dealer and in one of those cases (overfilled sump) the dealers gross negligence, this could have written off the engine.

 

I have not indicated they are part of the claim, but points that you have disregarded when you should have refered it back to them.

 

As soon as I sat on the machine outside the dealers, I noticed straight away the cable freeplay adjuster on the clutch lever was wound out more than half way, without the locking spindle securing the adjustment, and the ribbed black rubber cover which was supposed to go over the adjuster, was pushed half way down the cable. I can only assume this is what was meant by the adjustment of the clutch!

Anyway, my initial thought when I first noticed it was not of concern, I knew it was wrong, but I just brushed it off as something an inexperienced parts guy had did, because he thought it was the right thing to do and he was helping.

 

You were still outside the dealer, why did you not go back inside and ask them to complete the job?

Did you know that "an inexperienced parts guy" had adjusted the clutch cable or is this an assumption?

If you 'knew' then at the same time as asking them to come and complete the job you should have asked for a trained mechanic to check the clutch adjustment and not brushed it aside.

Why was the 'parts man' road testing the bike and not a trained mechanic?

 

You attempted to reject for a full refund verbally.

Rejections should be done in writing.

An official letter of rejection hadn't been made until my return from the trip. But an official letter was given as my post states.

 

To the manufacturer, this has nothing to do with the manufacturer, it is between you and the dealer. The dealer is the one to take it up with the manufacturer.

 

I noticed a patch of oil on the floor, this was coming from out the sump drain bolt. Thinking it was just a minor issue which would be easily rectified,

In this case is was easily rectified, but oil leaks should never be treated as a minor issue.

 

It was at this point when inspecting the tank for what I had to do, I noticed the that one of the fuel tank bolts that secure it to the frame, had been sheared off inside the frame (with surface rust on the exposed piece of the torn metal), and a small plastic cable tie had been used as a fixing.

This is when you should have immediately stopped any further work on the bike and gone inside and penned a letter of rejection also quoting the other faults you found. You made a verbal rejection on the Monday (which would be fine for a first move, but should have been backed up with a formal letter of rejection).

 

You had a feeling the PDI was not carried out correctly.

Feelings are no good, you would need proof of this.

Feelings are very good, even tho your comment has no resemblance, to anything.! And I do have proof.....very good dated photos and witness. ( I have said I will pay for an expert witness to inspect the machine and testify, they said they wont)

 

I'm sorry, but feeling are no good, fact is good. Nowhere have you said you have proof that the PDI was not carried out properly, you said "I was thinking It obviously didn't have an inspection from the dealer when they accepted out of the crate. With this feeling.......".

A feeling is not fact either, he could have done a perfect PDI and decided to ignore the cable tie

An inspector can only give an opinion that the PDI was not carried out correctly, unless he was watching it being carried out.

 

You again try to reject the bike and get a refund for an incomplete service.

You have gone from rejection to repair and back to rejection, you were right to try for a refund for the poor service.

Please read my post....I am not rejecting the motorcycle on the basis of a service.

I did not say you were trying for a rejection on the basis of the service, there is a comma where I agreed you were right to attempt a refund for the service.

 

Manufacturer would not comment on faults or a resolution until a full inspection had been carried out.

This is their right and you cannot deny them this right.

I was not denying them that right, their dealer denied my my right to reject it.

Lets put it this way; if you bought a top from M&S and got it home to find a big hole in it. You took it back to the store and the manager says that they are not prepared to give you a refund, but they will repair it. Say you were unhappy with that and wanted a refund (which is your given right), but the manager insists they will only repair it for you....would you leave them the top and go home? I don't think so, nor would many others including myself!

 

Not at this stage he had not as you had not formally rejected it.

 

If I had bought a top with the sleeve hanging on by a cable tie, I would not have used it but rejected it right away.

 

You make it known that you are unhappy that they want to inspect it.

They have a right to do this and you cannot deny them this right.

I state at no point that I am unhappy with them inspecting it, and I am disgusted by your false accusation.

 

When I asked what solution they were offering, he said that they could not comment on that fault/s, until they had a report back from the dealership. This was a solution I was not happy with as the dealer would just back track any wrong doing they had done

 

That's is what your post says.

 

Owners club say 'problems must have been caused by the dealer after it was uncrated'.

Unprovable accusation and should not be put into print or conveyed to a third party.

Again....provable. And where are the details of the accused conveyed to a third party?

 

Not provable unless the person who connected the battery and refitted the tank is willing to state that.

Everyone who reads this is a third party.

 

"So with this knowledge of knowing it was actually done by the dealer themselves".

Heresay and again no proof.

?

 

Your only knowledge of 'knowing' is because it was said by someone else on a forum - heresay, not admissable.

 

Written rejection letter to the manufacturer.

As above, this has nothing to do with the manufacturer.

Starting to repeat now...

 

Just a response to your posting, you said you had rejected it in a letter to the manufacturer, I just reinterated that it is nothing to do with the manufacturer.

 

Where did it say I expected a brand new machine???

 

You didn't, but the intimation was there by you saying "they wheeled off a 10 yr old gs500".

 

You ride the bike to Le Mans and back adding around a 1,000 miles to the clock.

You cannot reject something and continue to use it especially for such a long trip.

As you have stated, 'a rejection has to be made in writing'.... my first letter of rejection was when I returned

You have made it clear to the dealer and the maker that you want to reject the bike and even put it on paper to the manufacturer, you should not have continued using it until the problem had been solved. You could have also claimed back the money for the lost trip to Le Mans.

 

Quote:

I thank you for your reply, can I ask why you also see the importance of the facts past the point of them refusing my right for a refund?

Your rejection has no substance until put into writing.

?

 

You hadn't rejected it until you put it in writing to them.

 

As I said earlier, the moment you saw the oil leak and the cable tie, coupled with the other errors they made, should have rung alarm bells, you should have written your rejection letter then and not used the bike again.

[LancerQRL]

hear hear conniff, the le mans trip is taking the pee a bit from the point of view of even the most helpfull retailer.

[Leo Jantz]

NLR

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[Leo Jantz]

hear hear conniff, the le mans trip is taking the pee a bit from the point of view of even the most helpfull retailer.

 

Providing a motorcycle with a defect such as this...........is taking the pee!

Refusing the customer his right to reject it....................is taking the pee!

Carrying out a service such as this..............................is taking the pee!

Not collecting the machine 3 days before the trip...........is taking the pee!

Supplying a motorcycle to take on the trip which is illegal.....

is taking the pee!

Writing a defence that I would not let them have it, when I have a letter from them that they are refusing the right to reject it because it is their right to repair it................is taking the pee!!

 

An helpful retailer would not have taken the pee in the first place!

[Conniff]

There was NO accusations of any kind so I don't see what you are having to defend.

I don't know you so it can't be personal.

I was attempting to point out the flaws in your claim, things you should be addressing.

 

You have obviously got everything under control and I will be interested to see the results of your claim should you care to come back and post it.

[Rob S]

Conniff appeared to me to be helpful in pointing out issues with your claim and it certainly wasn't a personal attack.

 

I agree that you have not done yourself any favours with regards to issues that have previoulsy been pointed out and it could weaken your claim.

 

If you find an issue you need to bring it to their attention straight away. My wife recently took her bike in for a service and when she went to collect it the dealer advised her that a problem with the tickover could be a result of incorrect valve clearances. They stated they had not checked them and the bike would need to be booked in again. The earliest they were able to do this was 3 weeks later.

 

She phoned me up, relayed this and I then asked to speak to the dealer. I pointed out that the valve clearance was part of the service schedule and should have been done that day. He tried to say that they didn't have the necessary shims in and they would prefer to do it by booking the bike in at a later date and ordering the parts in. I pointed out that if they suspected valve clearance problems, by sending my wife away for 3 weeks they risked the possibility of engine problems if the bike continued to be used. Who would pay for repairs if the bike blew up?

 

The dealer tried to argue their way was best, but I stuck to my guns, reminded him of the manufacturers service schedule and pointed out their approach was wrong. They were able to get the bike booked in again within 2 days where they found 2 of the 4 valves were too tight. The replacement shims were ordered and the bike was serviced properly a few days later. The dealer charged for this, so we wrote to the dealer princicple, explained the chain of events and pointed out our disatisfaction with the level of service. He agreed and refunded the whole cost of the additional work.

 

It worked because we made an issue at the time and were not prepared to just not deal with it. I think you have made a rod for your own back by the way you have dealt with this issue.

 

You have been given some good advice by Coniff and I think it would be best for you to take this on board, especially if you are still going to pursue this claim.

 

I wish you good luck with it.

[Leo Jantz]

NLR

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[Leo Jantz]

Nlr

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz
NLR

[Leo Jantz]

Received a 'General Form of Judgement or Order' from the courts yesterday!

 

 

Before DISTRICT JUDGE ????? sitting at ???????? County Court, The Shire Hall, ?????

 

Upon the courts own motion. The Court has made this order of its own initiative without a hearing. If you object to the order, you must make an application to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days receiving it.

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

Unless the defendant files an allocation questionnaire with the court office within three days of service of this order, the claimant shall be at liberty to enter judgement.

 

Dated 07 August 2008

 

I think all it means is that the dealer failed to file the allocation questionnaire within 14 days.

Edited August 10, 2008 by Leo Jantz

[speedqueenbob]

Leo,

 

You came here looking for advice of which you succeeded but unfortunately your attitude to that sound and professional advice is such that I will be surprised if anyone offers you such advise again... Do not shoot the messenger just because he brings bad tidings my friend.....

[Leo Jantz]

Leo,

 

You came here looking for advice of which you succeeded but unfortunately your attitude to that sound and professional advice is such that I will be surprised if anyone offers you such advise again... Do not shoot the messenger just because he brings bad tidings my friend.....

 

Hello spedqeenbob, I didn't actually come on for advice...I came to read other peoples posts and maybe share stories!

What sound advise was I given, because it I could not see any?

I didn't expect to have someone trying to pick at everything I did (right or wrong) and post a load of false assumptions and accusations like wanting a new replacement bike when I said no such words!!

Then finishing it off with 'I think their counter claim has more strength than my claim'....that's not sound advise buddy....that's being an ass!

 

My attitude in response was off, I admit.....

I was caught off guard, and I lowered to it.

Edited August 11, 2008 by Leo Jantz
spelling

[speedqueenbob]

Good luck mate I hope you win because this happens more than we realise

[Leo Jantz]

Good luck mate I hope you win because this happens more than we realise

 

Thanks

[Leo Jantz]

Hi everyone,

 

I WON IN COURT ON FRIDAY

 

We all had a bit of a laugh ...... at the dealership, including the judge!! Their defence and presentation was a complete shambles, no dates on anything, no documents for anything, continuous contradictions throughout their entire statements .

 

It was awarded that they refund the total purchase price, the cost of the service, all my costs of taking it to court, and my costs for the day including my witness costs, including interest.

 

 

Hope all are well, Leo