Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Appreciate your response BankFodder. I am aware that the Consumer Rights Act does not apply in my case as I operate a business and, instead, should rely on the Supply of Goods and Services Act and Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. I was a little unsure as, when I read the judgement of Hashim Farooq v EVRi Parcelnet, July 2023 I presumed that,  as Farooq had supplied laptops through Amazon,  the Consumer Rights Act would not apply but the judge refers to it in Section 22 as to why the claimant should be given judgment. Have I read this correctly? The reason for not offering full reimbursement was because I did not take out insurance for the full value.  In regards to correspondence from my customer,  I have emails from her in my timeline stating that she was waiting all week and that no one attempted delivery.  I have no doubt that she will be willing to corroborate the events with a written statement.
    • When you post information here you will have to post it in single file multipage PDF format. Follow the upload link. However, it would be more helpful if you could simply answer the questions that we have put to you and we can deal with paperwork afterwards if we think we need it.  
    • I was trying to post all the paperwork that I have, namely facebook ad, messages between the seller and my son etc . But I'm getting the message that the files are to large. 
    • First of all please can you tell us the name of the seller, something about the van – age/year, mileage, price paid. How far away is the seller from where your son lives? Who do you take it to for this inspection? Are they prepared to give you a written list of the things that they found? This is very important and you may well have to get an independent inspection from somebody such as the AA. This will cost you some kind of feedback we expect that we will be able to help you get it back. I would say that if you have to bring a court claim – which is likely – then your chances of success are better than 95% but the difficulty might be enforcing the judgement against the seller. We will have to no more in order to give you better advice. Does it have an MOT? What is the date of it and who gave it the MOT? I suggest that you start taking pictures of all of the defects that you can find.   Also I am going to say that I believe that you came over from Facebook where you were already informed that we would need at least all of the information which I have requested above. It will save a lot of time and effort for everybody if you can simply come up with the things that we ask without too much delay
    • My autistic son brought a van from a private seller. ( there was 5 other cars on his drive and another van, plus loads of machanic tools in his hallway,  so he probably is a unofficial dealer).  He gave the van a once over, he checked for any warning lights that might be on, there was none. He checked underneath for any rust etc, it all looked fine. The body was rough, but you'd expect that for the age of the van.  He got his brothers machanic to give it a pre mot check, as the van was old so he expected it to have a few problems. The van is a deathtrap, the seller had blacked out all the warning lights that were on the dash,  and I mean all.  He had also painted some kind of black stuff on the underside, to hide all the damage there.   My son drove it for over 2 hours to get it home. The machanic said he's surprised my son is still alive, and an untrained eye would not of seen what the seller had done.  Iv asked the seller for a refund and for him to have the van back, but he is refusing. Is there anything we can do.   
  • 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

Will we be in trouble - faulty pedgero **WON**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4769 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

Having thought about this overnight the problem lies solely with the dealers. They were in procession of a document that indicated the vehicle had worn front and rear pads, pitted discs and an oil leak. They chose not to rectify these problems and sell the vehicle as it was.

A short while later you had the rear pads replaced after pushing them. [although given the fact that they were so badly worn and the discs were pitted they should have been changed as well]

 

Given they had the vehicle returned to them I am sure they would have gone over it to try and find an obvious fault they could blame the failure on that was not covered. [i only ever worked for one dealership and the first thing we where told was to try and find user faults when warranty's came in I am sure this is still the case] It seems they then took the easy option of blaming you for no oil in the vehicle.

 

Now given the facts and quoting them "carefully chosen professionally prepared ones" while they prepared this one they missed the badly worn front pads the rear pads the rear discs the oil leak and the worn belts you had to have changed. I would think they would have checked the fluid levels? Give them the benefit that they did and that they never found an obvious failure to explain the loss of oil. Then were did the 6.5 or 7.8 litres of oil go in a little over 4000 miles.

 

We have two options it either went though the engine as in burnt [which if it passed its test in June would not have been evident at its test as using that amount of oil the emissions would have been well over] or leaked out. Either option would render the vehicle not fit for purpose.

 

What I cant understand is if I was asked to inspect a vehicle for a warranty claim with a reported total engine failure and I found it had insufficient lubrication then why would I or anyone add oil to it. Also given the fact that you checked the oil before you left, and given the mileage you have covered I assume you have done other longish journeys were I am sure you checked your levels and all was well.

 

A couple of quick questions did you see the advisory before you bought the vehicle? and have you sent the rejection letter yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Esmerobbo,

 

No I did not get the advisory with the documents they still have it. I hope they are stupid enought to produce it sometime in the future should this et to court. Yes the rejection letter was hand delivered and followed up by one sent registered post on 28th. They have acknowledged reciept. On the warranty document it is stamped underneath the heading pre delivery service and hand written across the stamp is levels checked. What really gripes me about these people is the Help for Heroes banner they use to portray themselves as caring proper people, these banners are all over the premises.

 

 

Eli

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems they care about profit more! I suppose the banners make them seem like a caring bunch!:razz:

 

Did the rejection letter list any faults or just reject it as unfit for purpose. They are advertising RAC warranty is yours a RAC or is it their own.

 

The Stamp and written statement looks like the reason their trying to blame you if you look at it. Their PDI/S cant be up to much. At the least it should be a oil and oil filter change,[so oil level should be right] although it should really be all filters [if they haven't cant really call it a service] and any safety aspects [like brakes] and finally any excessively worn items.[like fan belts]

 

Seems to me your case is getting stronger and they really have the only defence of you let it run dry which you know is rubbish. I would try and involve as many bodies as you can Trading Standards, the RAC seeing as they quote them on every advert, and any associations they may belong to.

 

PS Just to let you know why I am taking a keen interest in this I was a sole trader motor engineer for 25 years before I had to pack in though becoming disabled. I built a good profitable business up on doing good work and if I did make a mistake [and we all do] I put it right. It really tees me off when garages sell unfit vehicles or allow poor workmanship.

 

Keep fighting and I am sure you will get there.:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

My rejection letter went through each problem and the timescale they happended in, breaks, belts then breakdown also pointed out that the sales rep. said all vehicles were serviced before delivery and I made it known that anything I bought must be suitable for towing a two horse trailer. Refuted the allegation they made re the engine running wthout oil. Quoted them from their web site re the vehicle prep. and gave them 14 days to respond.

 

The warranty supplied was Graylands own on the front it says 'dealer guarantee feel safe in our hands'

 

I have contacted trading standards and have a ref no. just need to send them a letter with a copy of the one that went to Graylands.

 

Thanks for all your input I'm sorry you had to give up as your garage sounds like the type I thought I'd gone to.

 

One thing you can be sure of I will keep fighting all the way to the end, it has helped enormously just getting support from you and this site.

 

thanks

 

 

Eli

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi esmerobbo,

 

Thanks for the link, would you mind having a look for me to see what you think of the MOT history it seems this vehicle disapeared of the radar for a while as there is no MOT cert. from Jan 09 to June 2010 or am I missing something.

Here is the Doc. Ref. from the V5C

 

60208480656

 

thanks

 

 

Eli

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I can see Jan 09 to June 10 no MOT but covered 11000 miles. Can only assume it was out of the country, used on private land, or run without an MOT or off the road for some reason after it covered the 11000 miles. Going by the mileage the Garage that MOTed it done the repairs after it failed. They did not do anything on the advisory list.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well it's been 15 days since they received my rejection letter and they have failed to respond. I have spoken to trading standards who are going to contact Graylands in the mean time I thought I might as well get ready to take them to court, can anyone help with the necessary paperwork and were I might get it from.

 

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can make a claim via; https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome it takes you through the process step by step. Don't forget to claim interest which I think is 8% of your claim. You can claim intetest from the day the car broke down and it contimues to incur untill the date of judgement or payment which ever is sooner. You must include interest when making the claim.

 

I trust your rejection letter gave notice of possible legal proceedings. If not, youi may need to send a 'final letter before action' giving the seller at least 7 further days to respond.

 

By the way, the warranty is irrelevant and does not replace your statatoury rights under SOGA. Your claim is with the seller, not the warranty co.

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...