Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you do NOT need to pay it and anyway that would not remove the ccj, its there on your file paid or not for 6yrs, a paid ccj even with a cert of satisfaction is as bad as a non paid one.   the ONLY way to remove it is to set it aside.   sadly you the very worst thing you could have done with ANY debt on your credit file or not that you last used or paid or wrote about to the debt owner in the last 7 yrs....you ran away,,,moved without informing the debt owner of your correct and current address.   erudio and drydens are masters at doing backdoor ccj's. they are ofcourse totally wrong that the defaulted date is the sb date...well not when your last written/signed ack of the debt was more than 6yrs before the claimform date.   now how do you remove it....go read that thread ...carefullly then comeback here and lets see if you understand how.   dx  
    • Thanks, having to move house and discovered this. It's causing a nightmare in trying to rent somewhere and mortgage was also refused by the bank.    Shortly after requesting info I got a warrant in the post from bailifs. Managed to halt that and pause any action till I get key dates to try and get this removed.   Not wanting to avoid paying it, just need the CCJ gone.   Appreciate your help. Will read fully although I am not great with law.
    • Write the letter. It's important that you put this in writing so that you have a paper trail. Send the letter by recorded first class delivery. Explain that because of the defect in the bundle which has manifested itself within 30 days – always refer to the bundle – you are now rejecting it under the consumer rights act 2015 and that you require a refund and you want to know what their arrangements will be for providing you with this. You can also send this by email – but do it straight away. This reserves your rights and after that you have some flexibility as to how you want to act. I understand that they are uncooperative. No surprises. Don't imagine either that they will be fazed by your letter – but the important thing is that you are able to show that you are asserting your rights. After that, they are acting unlawfully We will help you make a claim against them and I suppose that will involve threatening to sue them and maybe even going on to sue them. You will find interesting and you will acquire some transferable skills which will enable you to sue anybody else who gets in your way with a degree of confidence. However, it might be a good idea to mitigate your loss and I would suggest that you accept the money that they have put on the table but make sure that they understand that you are accepting it and you are happy with it and you consider that they still owe you the outstanding £70. If you are asked to sign anything then you should decline and then we will help you claim for the whole lot. However if they don't ask you to sign for anything, then make sure that they have a letter from you at the same time saying thanks very much do for the £250. You are accepting it but this should not be taken as an indication that you are now relinquishing your claim to the rest of the money. Tell us what you want to do – with you want to take the 250 or whether you want to simply reject the lot and claim for the lot. If you want to take the 250 – which I suggest that you do – and if they will give you the money despite the fact that you are still reserve your rights in respect of the balance, then come back here when you have that money and we will help you with the rest. If they refuse to give you the money unless you agree that it is in full settlement, then that becomes very interesting because it becomes very clear evidence that they are beating their obligations under the consumer rights act – and this gives you even greater leverage over them when you decide to confront them. The advantage of mitigating your loss is that there is less to sue for and that means that your court fees will be less – although you will get these back anyway when you win. Also, because they are only fighting to hang onto £70, they are more likely to put their hands up once they know you're serious. There is absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking the money that is available on the table subject to the reservation which I've indicated above.
    • Yes she might well have sunk the VCS ship, or put it on the rocks as it rehashes old stuff introduces nothing new.
    • Hello BF   As you caught, yes both items (console with digital game download) bought from GAME as an advertised bundle (still got screengrabs of the bundle/ad).   No letter sent but I did actually quote that specific 2015 act when trying to return it in-store. I was scrolling away online looking at consumer advice on my mobile as the manager was testing the console. It fell on the deaf ears of the store manager who wasn't entertaining the return/my query at all. They just kept saying there is nothing technically wrong with the console. I'd question whether the manager even knows about the CRA2015 considering their response/the lack of engagement.   I've not done anything formally but I'll write a letter. The store said I can pick up with customer services. I've went more along the lines of escalating from store to area manager. Their website is quite specific that in-store returns can only be made in-store. I'm awaiting a call from area manager next week but after todays update that they will withhold £70 I'm expecting a similar response.   It cost £250 in total. I traded in an old playstation as part of the deal. £100 trade-in value and £150 by debit card. For clarity I'm not expecting £250 back via debit. But £100 store credit and the £150 debit refunded was my sole expectation.   Thanks very much btw!
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Faulty Gearbox.


driver21
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3290 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

I bought a 52 plate Renault Clio Automatic from a dealer in Jan this year. The day after I took it home a fault light came on on the dash and the car went into a safe mode. I looked it up in the handbook and saw that this was a gearbox fault and to go to a Renault dealer to have it checked. I Told the dealership of this and they said they would sort it for me. After about 5 visits to their workshop with no improvement they had it diagnosed at a Renault Garage. Renault said that there was a pressure problem and that changing the "EVM Valve" might help. I was then told, by the dealer that this part was not covered by the 3 month guarantee I had on the car and I would have to pay the £600 repair bill myself. I contacted Consumer Direct who said under the SOGA They were liable for the repair. I wrote to the dealer advising them of this and after a few phone calls I agreed to pay £250 towards the cost and they paid the rest. I probably shouldn't have done this but I just wanted to get it done. This seemed to have worked but 5 months later the fault reoccurred. I went back to the Renault Garage who replaced the valve because there was still a warranty on the part. They told me that if it had already gone wrong again that there was a problem with the whole gearbox and that it probably needed replacing. They also said that the dealer was aware of this and they had chosen only to have the valve replaced. I wrote to the dealer asking them to sort it out but they didn't want to know at first saying that the guarantee had run out. After speaking to Consumer Direct again I wrote to the dealer again saying that if they didn't replace the gearbox I would go to Court to get a judgement against them. I received a reply yesterday, they offered to put in a refurbished gearbox, at a cost of £1200, to which I should contribute £500. Does anyone think this is fair or should I hold out and file a claim against them. I just need a bit of advice as to what to do. Sorry for the long post but this has been going on for months now and I'm a bit frustrated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Have you now had the car longer than 6 months? SOGA only applies for the first 6 months from purchase, and although the problem clearly occurred within that time, I am not sure how hard it is applying the terms of SOGA once you are beyond that time.

 

No help now, but I don't think I would have paid anything for the original repair, and if the dealer had refused to pay for it I would have rejected teh whole car under the terms of SOGA and got my money back.

 

btw, the "warranty" he gave/sold you did not in any way deminish your rights under SOGA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had the car now since Jan this year, but Consumer Direct say SOGA is valid for up to 6 years after purchase. I've now agreed to pay the £500 for the repair, I might have had a good case in court but it all takes so long and the Judge might have said a part payment, after all this time, would be fair. I'm still very angry about how this has turned out because I went to a dealer so I would have more peace of mind and have been ripped off. I have learned a lesson now and won't make the same mistake again. I shouldn't have paid for the first repair but didn't know my rights properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Has anyone had a fault with an automatic gearbox on a Megane? My Dad's has one with an 02 plate but with only 20,000 miles on the clock. The developed a gear box fault in March 2009 and several visits to the Renault agenst failed to identify the cause, but he was advised to have the AVM valve replaced as 'experience' showed that was the solution. He shelled out £600 in repairs but the fault was soon back. He has now paid for a new gearbox. We suspect that this a recurring fault because, whomever we consult, including gearbox specialists, seem to say that they are familiar with the fault and it's down to this vavle. One Renault repair agent has even gone so far as to say that the replacement didn't solve the problem because it may have been wrongly fitted. We have, of course, written to Renault who deny that this is a recurring fault and claim that it has never been reported to them before!

 

Any supporting experience from forum members would be useful as we intend to battle on ............... !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked at many sites and forums and a lot of people are having problems with this gearbox. Most French car makers use this one as standard so I can't imagine that they don't know about these faults. :evil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you now had the car longer than 6 months? SOGA only applies for the first 6 months from purchase, and although the problem clearly occurred within that time, I am not sure how hard it is applying the terms of SOGA once you are beyond that time.A

 

Sorry, wrong.

 

SOGA applies for far longer.

 

What changes is the burden of proof. Up to 6 months, the retailer needs to prove that the fault was not present at sale; after 6 months, the buyer needs to prove that the fault was present at the point of sale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

hi, thought it was just me,..got same fault on my 02 scenic auto...when cold and over accelerate gearbox light comes on, restart and it resets itself,dealer will not honour warranty even though i said they sold it me with fault,..so far only had to replace a pulley flywheel,not working so dreading any thing major..lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...