Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Heres a point, while we wait for @theoldrouge to condemn rather than promote and support right wing bigots spouting genuine and clear monstrous antisemitic rhetoric ... Isn't it actually specifically unlawful to promote violence against politicians on top of laws to criminalise such things? ... As is reported happening in these closed facebook groups run by Tory staff and where a Tory police minister and the Tory London mayor candidate are members and post?   .. or do the Tories (seemingly like tor) only promote laws for protecting the hate spouting hard right ?   "“Some of these (Tory facebook groups) posts constitute the most appalling racism and I would urge the Conservative Party to swiftly distance itself from these hate-filled groups and urgently investigate what role any Conservative politicians and officials have played within them. “Susan Hall and the Tory MPs who have belonged to these groups need to come out and explain why – and to denounce the content they have tacitly endorsed by their membership.” "Reporters found widespread racism and Islamophobia as well as conspiracy theories and celebrations of criminal damage on the pages, including sharing the white supremacist slogan and antisemitic videos. " "Unearthed found that 46 out of the 82 admins have clear links to the Tory Party, including a recent digital campaign manager for the party and a conservative activist. Conservative councillor for Haywards Heath, Rachel Cromie, is an admin on all the groups. "     Also interesting that Facebook groups opposing 20mph speed limit in Wales are being run by English Tories   Conservative-run anti-Ulez Facebook groups hosted racist and Islamophobic posts - Unearthed UNEARTHED.GREENPEACE.ORG Tory staff running Facebook groups described as 'cesspits of vile racism' WWW.THENATIONAL.SCOT TORY staff and activists are running Facebook pages which are riddled with white supremacist slogans and Islamophobic attacks... Conservative-run anti-ULEZ Facebook groups are rife with racist and violent posts   Conservative-run anti-ULEZ Facebook groups are rife with racist and violent posts - London Post LONDON-POST.CO.UK A coordinated network of 36 Facebook groups opposing London’s ultra-low emission zone (ULEZ), run by Conservative councillors and...  
    • Morning dx and thank you for your message.   With regards to your comment about them not needing to produce the deed, the additional directions ordered by the judge included 'a copy of any assignment o the debt or agreement relied upon'  so that is why I thought that point was relevant?
    • Sorry for the long post but I don't want to miss out any relevant information: My wife bought a car from Trade Centre UK and have been having nothing but trouble with it. Unfortunately we paid of the finance used to buy the car as we weren't expecting this much trouble with the car as we we though we would have protection as buying from a dealer. We are wondering if we can still reject the vehicle since the finance plan has been paid off. Timeline is as follows: 13/12/2023 -15/12/2023 Bought car from Trade Centre UK for £10548 £2000 deposit paid on credit card on 13/12/2023 £8548 on finance from Moneybarn (arranged through Trade Centre UK). picked up car on 15/12/2023 Also bought lifetime warranty for £50/month 25/12/2023 Engine Management Light comes on. The AA called out and diagnosed the following error codes: P0133 - Lambda sensor (bank 1, sensor 1) Oxygen Sensor. Error Message : Slow reaction. Error sporadic P0135 - Lambda sensor heat. circ.(bank1,sensor1) Oxygen Sensor. Error Message : Component defective Due to it being Christmas took a few days to get through to them but they booked me in for 28/12/2023 to run their own diagnostics. 28/12/2023 Took car in to Trade Centre so could check the car – They agreed it was the Oxygen Sensor and Booked me in for repair on 30/01/2024. I was told they had no earlier slots, and I would be fine to carry on driving car when I said I was afraid of problem worse. During diagnosing the problem, they reset the Engine Management Light. During drive home light comes back on. 29/12/2023 - 29/01/2024 I carry on driving the car but closer to the date, engine goes to reduced power every now and again – not being a mechanic I presumed that this was due to above fault. 20/01/2024 Not expecting any more problems paid off the finance on the car using personal loan from bank with lower interest rate. 30/01/2024 Trade Centre replace to O2 sensor (They also take it on a roughly 60mile road trip which seems a bit excessive to me – I can’t prove this as something prompted me take a picture of milage when I handed car in but I forgot take one on collection – only remembered next day.) 06/02/2024 Engine goes in reduced power mode again and engine management light comes on – Thinking the Trade centre’s 28 day warranty period was over I booked the car the into local garage for the next day to get problem fixed under the lifetime warranty package. Fault seems to clear after engine was switched off. 07/02/2024 In the Morning, I take it to local garage who say as the light gone off – the warranty company is unlikely to cover the cost of the repair or diagnostics and recommend I contact them when the light comes back on. In the evening the light comes back on and luckily I manage to get it back to the garage just before it shuts for the day. 08/02/2024 The Garage sends me a diagnostics video showing a lot error codes been picked up by their diagnostics machine including codes for Oxygen sensor and Nox Sensors, Accelerator pedal and several more. Video also shows EGR Hose not connected to the intake manifold properly, they believed this was confusing the onboard system as it is unlikely this many sensors would trigger at same the time but they couldn’t be certain until they repaired the hose. 13/02/2024 Finally get the car back as it took a while to get approval and payment for the repairs from the Warranty company. Garage told me to keep an eye the car as errors had cleared with the hose but couldn’t 100% certain that’s what caused the problem. 06/03/2024 Engine management light comes on again. Fed up I go into Trade Centre as I was just around the corner when it happened and asked them how to reject the car or have the problem fixed. They insist that as it’s over 28 days I need to get the car fixed under the warranty package I purchased and they could no longer fix the car as it was over 28 days. When I tried telling them it appeared to be the same or related problem they said they couldn’t help as I hadn’t contacted them earlier. I asked them if they were willing to connect the car to the diagnostics machine and tell me what the problem was, as a goodwill gesture, which he agreed to do and took the car to the back He came back around 30 minutes later and said they took a look at the sensor they replaced previously and there was nothing wrong with it and engine management light went off when they removed the sensor to check it. When I asked what the error code he couldn’t give me an exact fault but the said it one of the problems I told him earlier (Accelerator pedal). I have this visit audio recorded on my phone – I informed the reps I was recording several times. As the light wasn’t on, local garage couldn’t book me for a repair under warranty. 07/03/2024 Light came on so managed to book back into local garage for the 12/03/2024 Whilst waiting to take car into garage, I borrowed a OBD sensor and scanned for errors on the car. This showed the following errors: P11BE – Manufacturer specific code (Google showed this to be NOX sensor) P0133 - Oxygen (Lambda) Sensor B1 S1: Response too Slow 12/03/2024 Took car to local garage and the confirmed the above errors. This leads me to believe that either Trade Centre UK reps lied and just reset the light or just didn’t check properly (Obviously I am unable to prove this) 22/03/2024 Finally got the car back as according to garage, the warranty company took a long to time to pay for the repairs 28/04/2024 Engine management Light has come back on. Using the borrowed OBD scanner I am getting the following codes: P0133 - Oxygen (Lambda) Sensor B1 S1: Response too Slow P2138 - Accelerator Position Sensors (G79) / (G185): Implausible Correlation I have not yet booked into a garage as I wanted to see what my rights are in terms of rejecting the car as to me the faults seem related. I can’t keep using taxi or train to get to work every time the car goes into the garage as it is getting very expensive. Am I right in thinking that they have used up their chance to repair when they conducted the repair end of January or when they refused to repair it in February ? If I am still able to reject the vehicle could you point to any sample letters or emails I can use. Thankyou for your advice on my next steps.
    • Ok noted about the screenshot uploads. In terms of screwing up I had one previous ticket that defaulted and ended up in a CCJ from Southend airport because for some reason during COVID I didn't receive their claim form just a notice of default. This hospital ticket was the 2nd ticket that went to CCJ due to a lack of knowledge of the process. Maybe it's easier just to pay them in future I'm thinking though, I don't get them very often anyway
  • 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

I am being forced to buy a used car !


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4053 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

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Sad thing is i don't necessarily think this guy is dishonest , just peeved because the sale fell through and naive about trading rules . Nevermind , the car was re-listed for sale on ebay for sale AFTER i bought it and before i cancelled and it was never marked as sold on karhouse nor any of the numerous other websites on which it is listed for sale . So if a another buyer comes along maybe he will just refund my money .

 

Incidentally when i offered to let him keep the £150 delivery fee as a gesture of goodwill for his inconvienience , he replied that he would buy the car back off me for £650 less than i paid because he wanted compensating for putting the car through an M.O.T . Earlier emails stated the car had a current M.O.T but on checking it had only 4 months left to run instead of the stated 9 months so he would renew it .

 

My thinking is - if the car failed the M.O.T and cost £650 to repair to m.o.t standard , then he was obviously selling me an unroadworthy and illegal vehicle to start with ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regulations are regulations - that is the chance you take in business, some you win, some you loose. Don';t worry, he wont go without his bottle of wine tonight.

 

You have already offered him £150 so he probably thinks you are a soft touch, don't be, don't offer a penny more, just remind him the clock is ticking towards when he has to refund you by, and add, if it's not paid on time the statutory 8% interest will be added.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Initially he said he had already paid an outside company £150 for delivery , i made it clear i found that very unlikely but offered to let him keep that much for a quick and amiable ends to the matter . His reply saying he wants £650 resulted in my sending the rules and demanding a full refund including delivery charges .

Link to post
Share on other sites

A little more digging, Karhouse have spamed hundred of site with links to their website.

They were listed at companies house until they were struck off in May 2012.

That means he is trading as an individual (sole trader) and he is personally liable for any debts.

Edited by Master Tyke
Link to post
Share on other sites

They were listed at companies house until they were struck of in May 2012.

That means he is trading as an individual (sole trader) and he is personnally liable for any debts.

 

Actually that's not correct. It dosen't mean anything of the sort. The company could have been struck off just for failing to send in returns. It does not neccassarily make him liable for any debts associated with the company at that time or for future debts of the company depending on the nature of the entity he is trading under. Don't jump to conclussions!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually that's not correct. It dosen't mean anything of the sort. The company could have been struck off just for failing to send in returns. It does not neccassarily make him liable for any debts associated with the company at that time or for future debts of the company depending on the nature of the entity he is trading under. Don't jump to conclussions!!

 

The OP only made the purchase last week so its nothing to do with any Company that was struck off in May.

PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP only made the purchase last week so its nothing to do with any Company that was struck off in May.

 

So how do you know it is not a new company or a company winding up but still trading. There are many ways to dissolve a company and still keep on trading. Like I said, don't jump to conclusions that a particular person is liable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually that's not correct. It dosen't mean anything of the sort. The company could have been struck off just for failing to send in returns. It does not neccassarily make him liable for any debts associated with the company at that time or for future debts of the company depending on the nature of the entity he is trading under. Don't jump to conclussions!!

 

They were struck off for failure to file, the reason is not material. The fact is it (The Company) no longer legally trades.

 

Any trade carried out, since that date, is therefore by the individual as a Sole Trader.

Edited by Master Tyke
Link to post
Share on other sites

Their website is operating in breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regulations 2011 (UK Regulations) I will be reporting them to the IoC on Monday,.

 

In short they are breaking the "Cookie Law", since we already way past the information period they will likely receive an "Enforcement notice" requiring them to comply with a fixed period of time.

 

The homepage seems to be using copyright material, I will try to track the legitimate owner and report that next.

Edited by Master Tyke
Link to post
Share on other sites

Office of Fair Trading contacted me today by letter saying , and i quote "I have been led to believe that you are currently in correspondence with the seller of the vehicle . I would be grateful if you could keep me updated"

 

I replied via email that Court is my only option without Fair Tradings intervention and sent copies of the last 3 or 4 emails between seller and myself .

 

From what you guys are saying , Karhouse is not a company etc , it seems likely to me that there is no LEGAL way of getting either the car or our money back -

 

Do i understand you all correctly ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No you don't understand correctly. Just because he isn't a registered company dosn't mean he isn't a trader so wouldn't still be subject to DSR's

 

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 face to face 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

Karhouse is not a company etc , it seems likely to me that there is no LEGAL way of getting either the car or our money back -

 

Do i understand you all correctly ?

 

The DSR applies to any trading business. It doesn't matter if the business is carried out by a company, sole trader (or partnership).

 

The fact that he is doing this business as a sole trader is potentially better for you because a company has limited liability, but as a sole trader you can ultimatly send bailiffs after any of his assets, his house, car, tv etc. or even future earnings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK thanks guys , i will just wait and see how the fair trading people respond . I'm not sure how much power they actually have , i cant help feeling maybe i should just proceed to court without waiting . The very fact the fair trading letter came via my local council pretty much destroyed any faith i had in getting competent help .

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the worse comes to the worse, you can take him to court using the DSRs.

 

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 face to face 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

OK so i got a refund minus £350 which the seller says Trading Standards and his solicitor advised is a fair charge for his inconvienience . This has become almost a joke , when he told me he was keeping the 350 i replied that i would have to get advice as i believe theft is a criminal offence and so that makes it a police matter .

 

His response "call me a thief again and i will sue you for defamation of character" .

 

I nearly wet myself laughing ! . I wonder what he will have to say to tomorrow when Trading Standards call him on his personal mobile phone ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't leave this to TS, send him a letter by recorded asking for the outstanding balance and give him 7 days or you will take further action.

 

Under DSR, the cost of return is bourne by the customer only if it says so in the original Terms & Conditions of sale. As this purchase wasn't delivered, there was no fee.

 

After the 7 days, send him a Letter Before Action giving him another 7 days and reminding him that the amount will be higher than the outstanding as there will be fees and court costs added.

Don't do this if you don't intend to go through with it though. You can do it on line and the initial outlay will only be around £40.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Conniff but i told him i will continue to Court for the full amount regardless of the part refund . Trading Standards have only just got involved and at my request they have not "yet" made my complaint official . When they call him today they will simply explain the DSR to him and let him know they are keen to investigate his entire business dealings if i ask .

From some of the comments i've read on here i expect a full investigation will be something he is very keen to avoid so i hope to have all my money back soon .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be a bit negative, but Distance Selling Regs may not actually apply as I've pointed out on other posts. You see, if a company sells by distance means as a one off, or is only done exceptionally, then they are exempt from the requirements. If that's the case then you have a contract with the trader. If though the car is mis-described in some material way, or is faulty, then you could reject it immediately and claim a refund (but you'd have to do this pretty quickly). Why did you change your mind anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be a bit negative, but Distance Selling Regs may not actually apply as I've pointed out on other posts. You see, if a company sells by distance means as a one off, or is only done exceptionally, then they are exempt from the requirements. If that's the case then you have a contract with the trader. If though the car is mis-described in some material way, or is faulty, then you could reject it immediately and claim a refund (but you'd have to do this pretty quickly). Why did you change your mind anyway?

 

I think you are getting mixed up with custom made articles which are exempt. In this case DSR apply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are getting mixed up with custom made articles which are exempt. In this case DSR apply.

 

Agreed.

 

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 face to face 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

Agreed.

 

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 face to face 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.

 

Check the OFT guide: ...2.14 If you normally do business with consumers face-to-face, the DSRs are unlikely to apply to an occasional order that you take in these ways... Most car transactions are not done by distance means (because people tend to go and test drive them etc) so it could be that the trader can say that he normally does business face to face so the DSRs won't apply. I would if I was a trader!And it appears that a trader could do this occasionally and still the DSRs wouldn't apply. And no, I'm not getting mixed up with personalised goods thank you.http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft698.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...