Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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
        • I agree
      • 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

Dealer being sued!!


commaman2
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5606 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

Ok, so I'm an independent sole trader!! Here is the story. I sold a car in December 2007. The buyer wrote to me in April 08 and said he found some bubbling of the paint on the bottom of 2 doors. Said it was rusty and took it for a quote at a main dealer. £2000 to replace two doors. Car is 2001 with 103,000 at time of sale. Demanded I pay in full or he'll sue for misdescription. I took advice from trading standards and consumer direct who both told me it was fair wear & tear. I replied quoting this and then a few days later recieved county court papers. He stated on this that when I sold him the car I "deliberatley concealed a significant defect and gave a false written description of the vehicle" He say's the false written description was because I said the car was free from "any dings or scrapes" Well it was!! I'm not being cocky here, but take into account age and mileage, the price paid was 7k, a new one is 45k. He inspected the vehicle twice before he paid for it. no mention was made by him about this alledged defect until some 5 months later. Where do I stand?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. Personally I wouldn't worry. My interpretation of a "ding" would be a typical car park dent, and a scrape is a scrape i.e. a very deep scratch that has removed paint. Obviously the vehicle didn't show any of this. (I asume you had the doors painted before advertising the car?)

Rust on the bottom of a door is not a safety issue, and is purely cosmetic.

Did the customer get the work done? Obviously you must attend Court, or else the other side will probably win by default. I cannot imagine any Judge finding against you on this. It's an old car, and it will be considered as fair wear and tear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sent one of my body repair people to look at the car, no work has been done as of yet. He says there is some bubbling and some rust coming through and said it would only need shot blasting, preparing and painting upto the lower door moulding on 2 doors. The owner wants 2 complete new doors from Jaguar, and the whole side of the car repainting. He only wants a main Jaguar dealer to undertake the work, no one else. the claimant also states that the car has had 2 door skins fitted previously and this was done badly. (I never had anything done to the car) The result of this "poor workmanship" has resulted in the contamination. He has told the court in his letters that the best way is for me to settle his claim in full and then I pursue whoever did this work! I have no idea who did this, no idea when and no idea where!! He is also constantly on the phone to me asking me to settle, almost harrassing me with his demands!

It also might be worth pointing out that when my chap went to see the car it has sustained a nasty scrape on one of the affected doors and a rear wheel arch! I have suggested to him the reason he wants me to pay for a full respray on this side is to pay for either his uninsured losses or for him to avoid paying any insurance excess his polcy may have. It is surely against all reson to expect me to pay for damage he or someone else has done to his car!!

 

Trading Standards have told me that being a motor dealer I'm already 70% liable in the small claim court! I have been in business 7 years and sell on average 100 vehicles a year. Never had a complaint or a court case before so this is one big learning curve for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will be OK, did you take photos of damaged doors?

7 year old jaguar with some rust sounds about right to me for its age. would help if you got some particulars of other similar aged cars with that sort of problem, should not be hard to find. Also did he ever give you the opportunity to comment or offer to repair it if felt inclined to.

If you were just presented with a pay this bill or else then I think thsi will help you as well; so you have atwo pronged defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, commaman. I too am a Motor dealer, and have been for nearly thirty years. I can honestly say that if I were in your position I would have no worries over this whatsoever. It might be in your interest to offer to have your painter to repair the doors. Put this in writing and keep a copy and present this when you go to Court. No Judge is going to insist that a 7 year old car with over 100,000 must go to a Main Agent for body repairs. Technically the car is at the end of it's life anyway. Paintwork is purely cosmetic. Your customer ( I assume) inspected the car before buying, and the paintwork must have been acceptable to him otherwise he would not have bought. Did you sell this car on the internet using photos? If so, you could use those too.

Personally I would get back to Trading Standards and ask the person who told you that you are 70% to blame just for being a dealer if they would put that in writing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE

 

The guy has now obtained an independent bodyshop quote. He got them from random out of the yellow pages. He sent me a copy up, it is for £1000 and basically quotes to repiar the rusty patches and respray the whole side of the car! The funny thing was, he called me up the next day and said he wasn't happy to use them because "their body shop is in a rough part of town and is dusty and untidy inside" Yep, that is what he told me!! What did he expect a bodyshop to look like, an operating theatre!!!

 

Anyhow, i wrote back saying I rejected this quote and his claim on the basis that there is aditional impact damage to the car, which under his claim would be repaired by me!!

 

He has written back saying that when he phoned me (recorded) I was unhelpful and not willing to try and settle out of court. Well I'm not being unhelpful, trust me!! I do not want to settle at all, I think he has no claim against me and I'm not liable. Simple. I have written back asking for a copy of the phone call he alleges he recorded. I doubt he did record it, we would then hear him saying about a body shop being from a rough part of town, etc, etc.

He went on to say that this "cheap quote" just reinsated his belief that only a Jaguar dealer should carry out the work.

 

I'm sure he says things like this to try and convince me of how wrong I am, and to try to show to the court I'm un-cooperative!! It's almost like he is pilling pressure on me and wants to settle now because he maybe having doubts as to his claim now. I suppose any settlement outside of court is a victory for him, at least he gets his car fixed for free.

 

I have got around a dozen pictures of the car, including the new impact damage.

 

There where photo's on the advert, but I no longer have them. well it was nearly a year ago and it would be almost impossible to keep pics of every car I sold!!

 

He viewed the car at my shop before he purchased. He was here for around a good 2 hours. I then agreed to deliver the car 60 miles to his office a few days later. When I got to his office he insisted on another inspection and another test drive! This sticks in my mind as unusual because I'd just driven 60 miles to get there!! How did he think it got 60 miles without being driven I don't know!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I got to his office he insisted on another inspection and another test drive!

 

I have to say at that point I would have refused and driven straight back to base. Experience has told me that in the long run it is cheaper not to deal with a customer like that. I tell them straight, that I will not sell them a car.

Stick to your guns, and defend this case. Your customer is trying to turn you over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update. The guy has called my solicitor today, to say he was rude and arrogant would be an under statement!! He said that she was "an idiot, oblivious to the facts" and he would "make pig meat" of her in court!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The conversation was not recorded. She would not be allowed without the consent of the other party, unless it was for training purposes of course!! The solicitor could not belive his attitude!! Something has really rattled him.

 

He called her up because she wrote to him on 1st dec. I also called the court today to see if they had any more correspondence from him. They said he phoned up a few days ago to see if the case was still going ahead!! Well I can't stop it, only he can.

 

his whole attitude has been unreasonable throughout. I'm not just saying that with sour grapes either. Why did it take him 5 months from purchase to raise the issue in the first place?

 

The Court date is set for 22nd of December...Nice....

 

Well one of us is going to have a happy christmas....

 

If anyone wants to see the pictures regarding this case then drop me a PM with an e mail adress and I'll send them on. I'd most welcome more opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
The conversation was not recorded. She would not be allowed without the consent of the other party, unless it was for training purposes of course!!

 

 

Anyone can record a telephone conversation and you do not have to ask permission or inform the other party.

 

By not informing that the conversation is being recorded means that the phone call cannot be used in evidence in a court.

 

Anything further progress yet commaman2 ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

By not informing that the conversation is being recorded means that the phone call cannot be used in evidence in a court.

 

Not quite - the recording can't be used in evidence without the express permission of the Court. The fact of the existence of the recoding (rather than its content) can, of course, be used.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there was a recording of any converstation, surely he'd have to ask the court to allow it to be played?

I am, however, convinced that there is no recording of any phone call!! Just another way to try and put pressure on me.

 

The hearing is listed for 10.00am Monday 22 December 2008. Happy Xmas!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and another think. I sent pictures showing the damage to his car and the rust spots. He says the pictures do not show a clear representation of the rust!! I can't do anything right here!!

 

Well if photographs do not show a clear representation of the rust, it just goes to show how insignificant his problem is!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite - the recording can't be used in evidence without the express permission of the Court. The fact of the existence of the recoding (rather than its content) can, of course, be used.

 

If there was a recording of any converstation, surely he'd have to ask the court to allow it to be played?

I am, however, convinced that there is no recording of any phone call!! Just another way to try and put pressure on me.

 

The hearing is listed for 10.00am Monday 22 December 2008. Happy Xmas!!

 

As PD says, I just didn't go into the full detail in that post.

 

If he has a recorded call he can biring it to the attention of the court and the judge 'can' ask to hear it if he thinks it is relevent, but it cannot be put forward as evidence without the courts permission.

 

Good luck on 22nd commaman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were not so funny I'd belive it!!

 

The guy has just called up my solicitor to tell her that he has been on to the national press about this case and they are very interested!!!

 

Unbeliveable!!! Is this some pathetic way to intimidate me?

 

Interest rates plummet, people are dying in Uganda from disease, people are being killed in wars, and he thinks the national press are going to run a story about a guy who found a bit of rust on a 7 year old Jaguar.........

 

Well I'd better get on to the BBC and Reuters pretty sharpish...........

 

might even get on News at Ten monday night!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I'm flabberghasted! Is the Judge saying that a dealer is liable for the cosmetic bodywork on a seven year old car for a period of time after selling it? Considering most seven year old cars have had some paint in their life you cannot have any control over how that paint will fare after it has been through your hands. I hope you will appeal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is the possibilty of appeal, but I need the judge to allow it. My solicitor siad that he was unlikely to allow me to appeal, and it would only be considered if it involved a point of law. The problem being an appeal would undermine him as a judge, and they do not like that! I am devastated by the outcome, really devastated. I need to take some time out and consider an appeal though. I'll talk to the FSB and see what they think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...