Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Mercedes Benz reposession


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4993 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 Emancole

 

I paid less than a third, the car was removed from a friends house where I was staying on a private driveway in the early hours of the morning, no itinerary done, no note through the door and no prior notification (they may have sent something to my old address but of course the repo people knew I wasnt there)

 

Car bought for 44k

They want 29k from me

I paid approx 7k before defaulting and losing my job

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ok, this isn't my best area but I do know that the repo can only be done without a court order when the vehicle has had lesss than a third paid and when its on public ground. If it was on a private drive they would have needed a court order to remove it from there. The problem is they'll say it was on the road and you'll argue otherwise.

 

You should definitely have had some kind of pre-possession letter and if they sent that to a wrong address and you can show (perhaps with earlier letters to your actual address for example) that they sent it to the wrong address knowing you weren't there I think that would make a huge difference.

 

If they've refused to provide docs to you you've got to ask and wonder why. Maybe they're aware that earlier letters were sent to the right address and are hoping you don't ask to see the letter sent out warning you of the repo intention that went to wrong address.

 

I'd suggest looking over the paperwork you have to see if you can prove they had your correct address, a letter from them dated before the repo happened with the correct address would be extremely valuable and provide you with the basis for good argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found this on another thread - have no idea if it's of use to you but would suggest searching for it and having a read...you never know.

 

Chartered Trust vs Pritcher - deals with repo and what is "informed consent" if the notice is bad then informed consent is not given.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Emandcole

 

I have had no notification of them knowing my new address. I can provide 5 witnesses that will state my car was on a private driveway (the people who i share a house with and my partner who was staying the night)

 

What recourse do I have - Do I need to go to court? - Is this a seperate issue to how much I owe (or what the final settlement would be) to MB finance

In other words - will this have any baring on how much my liability is or would be with MB finance (as they used a recovery company)

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a shame. As I wrote earlier this isn't my area but feel any number of witnesses may be unimportant, they'll just deny it even if you went that way and perhaps introduce their own witnesses - it'll just descend into a bun fight - the court probably siding with the claimant. Just my guess.

 

As for the figures and sums claimed I guess they would have a duty to have disposed of the vehicle responsibly and to have obtained a sum of money that the car was worth. I'd be very interested to find out who the car was sold to - eg that one of their directors isn't driving around in it now having got a cheap deal on it...yes it does happen more than people realise.

 

I can think of a great cagger who may be able to offer better insight into this having beaten claimants in the past - I'll PM them and see if they'd be ok dropping by. Really not sure about the law behind the figures they are claiming, the T&C's of the original agreement should be a good place to start - all of this I'm sure you've already looked at :|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent a PM but it may be that they feel they cannot help if they've not responded on the thread neutral.gif:|

 

Perhaps best to focus on the nature of the repo and ensure they provide all of the documents along with proof of postage. If they're being difficult you need to let the court know so that they are forced to provide them to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that the thirds and halves rules etc do not apply to unregulated agreements....??

 

That is true.

 

I've come to this late, can anyone tell me when this agreement was taken out?

 

The financial limits for regulated agreements were removed on the 6th April 2008.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...