Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

Advice - Used Car


asd120273
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4353 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

Could anyone please give me some advice.

 

My other half purchased a Second Hand Mini Cooper for £8995 in the middle of June for a local car dealer.

 

This afternoon we had some mechanical problems with the Gearbox, now the garage give a 30 day warrenty on the car when it was bought, but as we are outside that now, I was wondering if the sale of goods act covers us? From what I can gather, goods have to be fit for purpose for a reasonable amount of time after purchase. Would you class 2 months as a resonable amount of time? And should we expect the garage to pay for the repairs?

 

Thanks

 

Anthony

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its a sale made in the course of a business then yess.....your ok. But act quick...and you've accepted the goods so are only entitled to repairs etc...

Before you take any legal action, please read through the

FAQ's, then if you dont understand something, please ask for advice ;) .

 

If theres a thread in which you think I could help, please PM me using the Private Messaging facility in the top right hand corner of the screen.

 

Advice & opinions of tom3131, The Consumer Action Group and The Bank Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you ha

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tom,

 

You are a star!

 

Glad I could be of assistence :oops: .

Before you take any legal action, please read through the

FAQ's, then if you dont understand something, please ask for advice ;) .

 

If theres a thread in which you think I could help, please PM me using the Private Messaging facility in the top right hand corner of the screen.

 

Advice & opinions of tom3131, The Consumer Action Group and The Bank Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you ha

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Trading Standards Website:

 

Used Cars - consumer rights

 

 

The Law

When you buy goods from a trader, you enter into a legally binding contract governed by the Sale of Goods Act 1979, as amended by the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 and the Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002. The law gives buyer and seller rights and responsibilities and applies to the sale of used cars in the same way as to other goods. When you buy from a trader, you have the right to expect the car to be:

  • of satisfactory quality;
  • fit for its purpose, including any particular purpose made known, and
  • as described.

The law defines goods as being of ‘satisfactory quality’ if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory – taking the description of the goods into account, the price (if relevant) and all other relevant circumstances. So, when you have bought a used car, you must consider its age, the price you paid, the description which was applied to it and anything else which is relevant when deciding whether it is of satisfactory quality. Your expectations should be different when you are buying a low mileage, two-year-old car than when you are buying a high mileage, ten-year-old one, for example. However, it must still be:

  • fit to be used on the road;
  • in a condition which reflects its age and price, and
  • reasonably reliable.

When you buy as a consumer from a motor trader, your legal rights under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 cannot be taken away or reduced. An example of an attempt to do so is a notice such as ‘sold as seen’. Such phrases are meaningless and cannot alter your rights. If you see a sign of this type, report it to Consumer Direct on 08454 040506. A warranty or guarantee can only be given in addition to your legal rights, not instead of them. You can take legal action under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 for up to six years after the date of the contract, but it is unrealistic to consider legal action for defects on used cars – especially older vehicles – once you have had them in use for a reasonable length of time. Each case is different, so it is best to take advice before you decide what to do.

 

You don't say how old the car is. That really is the benchmark you need to consider. If it is an original Mini Cooper, I wouldn't give much hope of your chances. If, as I suspect, it is one of the more recent ones, the age of the car is very much what you need to have in mind, but seeing the price tag, I assume it is quite a recent car.

 

The other problem is that gearboxes are tricky beasts. Nevertheless, because of the way SOGA is set up, I think you have a very good case, especially as the fault happened in less than 6 months, which means it will be up to the dealer to prove the car was not faulty rather than the opposite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since March 31st 2003 if purchased within the last 6 months the buyer does NOT have to prove the fault has only just occured.

 

It is assumed that the fault existed at the time of purchase (whatever the age new or old) & its for the seller to prove it didn't. The purchaser is therefore entitled to a full refund. a same cost alternative, or repair if the fault is relativley minor

 

30 day warranties are nothing more than a ploy & meaningless. You have more rights under the "Sale of Goods Act" Also if they do not state "this warranty does not affect your statutory rights" then it is illegal to even display them.

 

"accepting" the car on delivery does NOT affect these rights in any way

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a mini cooper from a BMW dealer and 2months out of its warranty the gear box went.

 

I managed to get BMWs to pay for the gear box as a gesture of goodwill Sounds familier !!! which was about £1400. I still had to pay for the labour of about £600.

 

This is def. a manafacturing fault with the older BMW mini coopers.

 

Im still contemplating some sort of legal action against the dealer who sold it to me but I figure after 14 months Its going to be struggling.

 

Keep me updated

 

are there any other Mini cooper owners out there who suffered the same problem

7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a mini cooper from a BMW dealer and 2months out of its warranty the gear box went.

 

I managed to get BMWs to pay for the gear box as a gesture of goodwill Sounds familier !!! which was about £1400. I still had to pay for the labour of about £600.

 

This is def. a manafacturing fault with the older BMW mini coopers.

 

Im still contemplating some sort of legal action against the dealer who sold it to me but I figure after 14 months Its going to be struggling.

 

Keep me updated

 

are there any other Mini cooper owners out there who suffered the same problem

 

Whilst you don't say how long the warranty lasted or if the car was new or used I'm assuming new & one year. Unless you were rallying or taking part in some kind of speed trials you have a very good case against the dealer under the Sale of Goods act.

 

It is unreasonable for a major component to fail after only 1 year or even longer & the supplier not to fix it FOC

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
I

are there any other Mini cooper owners out there who suffered the same problem

 

 

Hi

just seen you post and after visiting numerous mini forums i found the old midlands gearbox which was fitted to BMW minis from 2001 - 2004 are very common for problems.

The problem seems to be well known but Mini UK won't admit liability and replce boxes out of warranty.

Have a search on - MINI2 - Fuel For Your MINI Obsession - MINI Cooper - S - One - Diesel - Works - Cabrio to see the numerous posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst you don't say how long the warranty lasted or if the car was new or used I'm assuming new & one year. Unless you were rallying or taking part in some kind of speed trials you have a very good case against the dealer under the Sale of Goods act.

 

It is unreasonable for a major component to fail after only 1 year or even longer & the supplier not to fix it FOC

 

The mini I bought was 3 years old but low mileage.

 

I was relieved at the time that BMW provided the parts free. I also contacted the original garage which sold me the car who were not interested in discussing compensation. I havnt done anything about it to date but the more I read makes me think I should at least write a couple of letters.

7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its a sale made in the course of a business then yess.....your ok. But act quick...and you've accepted the goods so are only entitled to repairs etc...

 

If the goods where purchased withing the last 6 months (new or second hand & in the case of car age is not very relevant when you talking about such a major component) then you can demand either a replacement of equal value or a suitable repair & you don't have to prove the fault appeared AFTER purchase. In law it is assumed that the fault existed prior to sale

 

& this is why

 

"reversed burden of proof"

 

Means that for the first six months the consumer need not produce any evidence that a product was inherently faulty at the time of sale. If a consumer is seeking any other remedy the burden of proof remains with him/her.

In such a case, the retailer will either accept there was an inherent fault, and will offer a remedy, or he will dispute that it was inherently flawed. If the latter, when he inspects the product to analyse the cause, he may, for example, point out impact damage or stains that would be consistent with it having been mistreated in such a way as to bring about the fault.

This reversal of the usual burden of proof only applies when the consumer is seeking a repair or replacement. After the first six months the onus of proof is again on the consumer.

 

If you have already advised the dealer of the fault you must act now!

 

Incidentally the 30 day warranty you referred to is a load of bull & con by the dealer. The dealer can't limit his liability to 30 days & if the dealer suggests or advertises otherwise he is committing a criminal offence under the trades description act............unless (& I have mentioned this before) he adds "This warranty does not affect you statutory rights" in writing that can be read & is in plain sight

 

Also being of low mileage I suggest you contact the previous owner as you may find the low mileage is the result of the car being in for repair all the time & if so it would certainly help any claim you might be forced to bring

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much what everyone else has said, really. The Sale of Goods Act does still apply to second hand goods, including cars. It doesn't cover normal wear and tear - if you bought, say, a car for a couple of hundred pounds that had done lots of miles, you'd not really expect a perfect motor. But in the cases above, there's no way I'd expect a gearbox to go wrong on a low mileage car or within the first few years, so you would still have rights to redress (likely to be a repair, in the first instance).

 

Of course, something else to consider is how you paid for the car as this may alter or give you additional rights.

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rosie

 

Try the Mini dealers in your area. This is a common fault and there was a recall. You need your details, chassis number etc to give to them to check if it got through the recall.

 

BBC NEWS | England | Gearbox on Minis 'may be faulty'

 

http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/searches/search.asp

 

Hope this helps

 

Uk. . .

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hijack your thread a little anthony but the answers may also help you.

 

The car I brought was 3.5 years old. had 12 month warranty provided by MINI. milage was 20,000 ish cost just under 10 grand. I obtained a loan to purchase the car from an In house scheme where I work. There was no amibuity on what the loan was for and they paid the dealer direct for the vehicle. This was purchaced from a dealer some distance from my HA

 

after 14 months ( 2 months outside the warranty) the gearbox and drive shaft started making noises and my local dealer stated they needed replacing and not to drive it ). The local dealer contacted the origninal seller but not surprisingly they were not interested.

 

I made a few phonecalls to BMW UK who to be honest were very good and within a day offered to supply the new gearbox and drive shafts free of charge. These were fitted promptly and I had to pay for the fitting charge of about 800.00.

 

I spoke to the original BMW dealer who sold me the car who after spending a few weeks considering my complaint declined to recompense me for the fitting. This was in the summer.

 

I did at the time consider the sale of goods Act but was put of by the 6 months bit. As I had the car for 14 months would I therefor have to prove that the gearbox was faulty when purchased which as you can imagine would be very difficult. At the time the fault developed I had done about 12000 miles in it and it had been dealer serviced just before.

 

I am still prepared to take the matter further but am not 100% confident on how I stand.

 

If this puts anyone off buying a mini dont let it. Best car Ive ever had and Ive had a few just make sure you get a warranty or extend it when you can and make sure its BMW serviced. This was a big factor in BMW providing the bits free.

 

Other than these problems the car has been fine and the new gearbox is much better.

 

Any advice welcome.

7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger, BMW did a good job there I have to say. The same couldn't be said of the dealer.

 

You could have argued with your dealer that the fault wasn't normal wear and tear and therefore covered by the Sale of Goods Act, and you could have been entitled to claim some redress from them, but you wouldn't have been legally entitled to a free repair and it would have been on you to prove that the fault was not normal wear and tear (I'm not a mechanic so you would have to get an expert opinion on whether a fault of that type would be considered normal for a car of the age and mileage, but I would suspect not).

 

I don't know how much the parts would have cost, but it's possible that after 14 months of driving the car, you may not have received a better offer from the trader anyway. That doesn't mean to say that it couldn't have been challenged: personally, if it had happened to me, I would have pushed for free parts and labour at cost. In my personal opinion (and I'm not a judge, it is just an opinion), that would have seemed fair to me bearing in mind the value, age and mileage of the car. I wouldn't have expected a £10k, 4 year old car with about 35k on the clock to have experienced a problem as severe as this.

 

It's going to be quite difficult to get any further compensation from the dealer now, though, as you have taken action elsewhere to remedy the problem. It really does depend on what you told the dealer at the time: whether you gave them a reasonable opportunity to put the problem right, and whether you informed them that if they did not you would be going elsewhere and pursuing them for damages.

 

Incidentally, there's some misconception about the "six month rule" of the Sale of Goods Act. It doesn't mean that a consumer is entitled to return faulty goods for a full refund at any time within the first six months. It simply means that there is a reverse burden of proof, i.e. in the event of a fault appearing within the first six months, the onus is on the trader to prove that the item is not faulty rather than on the consumer to prove that it is. Hypothetically, if the case were to go to court, a judge would assume that the goods WERE faulty at purchase unless the trader could provide evidence to prove otherwise.

 

The right to a full refund remains the same - a consumer gets a "reasonable time" (not specified in law, but in practice just enough time to check the goods for faults after purchase, often a few weeks) in which they can reject faulty goods for a full refund. After this time has passed, a consumer is deemed to have legally accepted the goods. At this stage, a trader can offer a satisfactory repair or a like-for-like replacement in the first instance, and the consumer cannot demand a disproportionate remedy (ie cannot ask for a replacement if it would cost little to repair). Only if the repair or replacement either fails or is not possible can the consumer then move on to rescission of the contract. This means a refund less an amount for wear and tear. In the case of cars, the wear and tear amount would very much depend on the use the consumer had enjoyed from it. Each case would have to be assessed individually, and ultimately only a judge can decide what amount of refund would be reasonable.

Please note I'm not insured in this capacity, so if you need to, do get official legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Advice please.

 

 

My Neice bought a used car 2 months ago, with about 80,000 miles on the clock.

 

 

She has drove it for about 1,000 miles.

 

 

The gearbox has gone, having read what is in this thread, am I right in thinking that the dealer must repair the car free of charge ?

 

 

She only had a 30 days waranty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have posted on a very old thread. You need to start your own. Click on the triangle in the bottom left and ask the site team to do it for you unless you can do it yourself.

 

When you are up and running we will need the following info; Make/model/age of car/price paid. Forget the warranty... SOGA applies for 6 months and in some cases, 6 years.

  • Haha 1

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have posted on a very old thread. You need to start your own. Click on the triangle in the bottom left and ask the site team to do it for you unless you can do it yourself.

 

When you are up and running we will need the following info; Make/model/age of car/price paid. Forget the warranty... SOGA applies for 6 months and in some cases, 6 years.

 

Many thanks, I have posted a New Thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...