Taking a car garage to court without giving them a chance to fix the problem?

[emtom123]

Hi everyone,

 

I really need advice on this subject as I do not want to make the wrong choice here.

 

I bought a car a few months ago and to cut a long story short, I have found that the the car garage have forged the MOT certificate (not forged by the MOT centre itself, but the garage has put a blank square of paper over the advisory items and photocopied it) showing me the car had no advisories, when it actually had 9. When I got it home I realised it was leaking diesel (which I didn't notice when I picked it up as they kindly left the tank empty for me) and the windscreen had a crack (didn't notice because it was raining). Since then, I have found out the hard way that the fuel gauge was incorrect (they had put the fuel sender in backwards which was causing the leak also) and the car has been kangarooing and bouncing down the road (very expensive wiring fault which has been caused by someone trying to force a part into the car which is not the right one). Now it only drives in limp mode - fabulous! They have also taken £100 more out of my account than agreed.

 

I have reported the garage to everyone - VOSA, DVLA, Citizens advice, trading standards, the MOT centre etc.. and I have written them 3 letters asking them to pay for the repairs to be done elsewhere (I live a 45 min drive from them) and threatening court. They have responded staing they will fix the major problems but will not fix the advisories. Firstly, I do not want them to touch my car as I do not trust them, secondy, why should I accept that I have overpaid for a car I was told was in excellent condition, but later find it has 9 issues that will need addressing soon. Now consumer advice says I have done enough to take them to court but I had better ensure that I have enough proof.

 

My question is: photos of the parts they said they changed (but obviously hadn't), a copy of the forged MOT certificate, an email from the MOT centre stating that they have stopped doing business with the garage as other customers have reported faked MOT's also, a recorded telephone conversation with the salesman yelling at me that I don't understand how MOT's work and all MOT certificates are printed out blank first (that they come in 2 parts and I must have looked at the wrong one when I bought the car - which is not true at all), a conversation with the previous owner who says she traded it in with no problems (to a different garage), a letter from the car garage stating that they charged me £100 extra for a cam belt change (when I have the service reciept which stated all they did was change the brake disc pads and oil filter) - Is this enough to risk taking them to court without giving them the chance to fix the car first, as I do not trust them to fix the car properly or safely! I cannot take the car back here, they are not agreeing to do all of the work i am requesting and I shudder to think of the job they will do.

 

Thanks so much for your replies and experiences

[Conniff]

How much is the repair bill ?

[emtom123]

My boyfriend has changed the fuel filter and air fiter and the AA has changed the fuel line (as the pump was broken and I couldn't restart the car when I ran out of fuel). The windscreen cost me £30. The wiring part will cost £1200 plus a big chunk of labour (they reckon about £2000 in total). Additionally, the repairs for the advisorys comes to £1400 for new parts, but I have told the garage I am willing to accept £800 for this as I will get old parts. The car cost £4750 when I bought it.

[emtom123]

Additionally, I have stated that if they give me the £800 for the advisories, I will also forget about the £100 they over charged me. I cannot claim it back from my bank as the garage hand wrote the reciept and are refusing to give me a typed one.

[Conniff]

I'm afraid that advisories are just that, advisories. They do not mean the car is unroadworthy or dangerous, they mean that at the time of the test, they were showing signs of wear but were considered by the examiner to still have usefull service in them.

They will probably need replacing at or before the next MoT is due so something to keep an eye on.

 

You can visit any MoT station and ask for a copy of the MoT which will also have a complete version of the altered copy you were given and then the difference can be seen very plainly.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Conniff

[emtom123]

I know what advisories are, it's just that they purposely hid them from me when selling me the car even though I asked them the direct question 'does the car have any advisories?' and they purposely forged a document to back this up. Can anyone honestly say that 9 advisory items would not cause them to bargin for a bit of money off the car? One of the advisory items has now broken completly (steering does not lock) and will cost me a couple of hundred to fix by next year.

 

The car garage keep trying to tell me that they are 'just advisories'. If they are so small and insignificant then why bother trying to hid them and lying when asked about them? That is dishonest and not good business.I want to know the honest answers to questions when I ask them.

[Conniff]

Where have you got the £800 figure from?

 

Where did the bit about a handwritten receipt being no good come from ?

[emtom123]

I took the car and the correct MOT certificate to my usual garage, they have given me a quote to repair the advisories (and the steering lock) and have stated that the total is £1400. However, some of that is for completely new parts (new tyres etc) so I have halved the price I am asking for (£700) in fairness to the garage who sold me the car as I understand that asI bought a used car, I would not expect the parts to be brand new. The other £100 is because they over charged me on the cost we agreed upon (what was written down and what I signed for). I have tried to retrieve this £100 by doing an indemnity claim with my bank. However, my bank will not do this as the only receipt I have for the car is handwritten. The bank will only accept a typed invoice to retrieve the money, so will not be able to get my £100 back (even though they acknowledge that the price signed for and the amount taken differ by £100). I have asked the car garage to type me an invoice but they have refused and are now stating that they changed the cam belt and charged me £100 for it (but they have not done this and this is not recorded on any of my paperwork)

[heliosuk]

Need to be carefull about accusations of forging the MOT certificate as you could find yourself on the recieving end of something very more serious for you. Advisories are as such, as is technically the MOT certificate as it does depend on the the testers opinion. The advisory notice is not a legal document and there is no legal obligation for anyone to show it.

[emtom123]

It's not just an accusation, it's very true. The car garage took the MOT certificate given to them by the MOT centre, they took a blank piece of paper and put it over the advisory items before photocopying it and showing it to me to 'prove' the car had no advisories. I have them on tape recorder then trying to tell me that MOT centres always give out blank certificates first (which is false). The MOT centre have confirmed that is not the certificate that they issued, and have also informed me that they have stopped doing business with that garage as I was the third customer to contact them with a query about a forged document. The MOT centre has since reported them to trading standards and VOSA, as have I. There is a legal obligation for them not to be purposely misleading when selling me goods, and this includes showing me the appropriate and correct paperwork when asked for it surely. I have the fake certificate here right now, and have them admitting, on record, that they gave it to me. There is no trouble that I can get into.

[Spirittamer]

Need to be carefull about accusations of forging the MOT certificate as you could find yourself on the recieving end of something very more serious for you. Advisories are as such, as is technically the MOT certificate as it does depend on the the testers opinion. The advisory notice is not a legal document and there is no legal obligation for anyone to show it.

 

 

heliosuk.

I have read some of your answers to other threads and must say you give some duff information. How can taking a legal document, altering/changing/copying that document as to not reflect possible repairs/faults in the future to aid the sale of an item, not be classed as forgery?

 

emtom123

Give em hell!

[Spirittamer]

I'm afraid that advisories are just that, advisories. They do not mean the car is unroadworthy or dangerous, they mean that at the time of the test, they were showing signs of wear but were considered by the examiner to still have usefull service in them.

They will probably need replacing at or before the next MoT is due so something to keep an eye on.

 

You can visit any MoT station and ask for a copy of the MoT which will also have a complete version of the altered copy you were given and then the difference can be seen very plainly.

 

Connif. You too seem to have missed the point. The MOT Certificate has been forged. It doesn't matter what the advisories were for. The Certificate has been altered as to deem the car mechanically 100% sound and to generate as much money from the sale using this forged document as a platform. It is not only deceitful it is illegal.

[Conniff]

It's probably the way you have worded you post S. I agree with heliosuk about not making an accusation until you can prove the fact. Have you been to an MoT center and got a copy of the advisory as submitted by the testing station, only by doing that will you be able to see for sure what has changed.

 

When you have that in your hand and still believe it has been changed, you must then be sure it was changed by them and for monetary gain.

 

Just be careful before you jump in with 'both' feet.

[heliosuk]

heliosuk.

I have read some of your answers to other threads and must say you give some duff information. How can taking a legal document, altering/changing/copying that document as to not reflect possible repairs/faults in the future to aid the sale of an item, not be classed as forgery?

 

You can say what you like Spirittamer but as Conniff says think first before jumping in with two feet. Obviously your vast experience and knowledge far exceeds other members of the CAG. Again, advisories are not a legal requirement, just advisories and if they have been changed does not necessarily make it an offence unless used to deliberatly deceive and the OP has to prove this.

 

One thing not mentioned throughout is what the car actually is, age and mileage. All that is known is that it cost nearly £5K. Theoretically it could be a 200 grand Bentley when new but now has 400k miles on it and is 15 years old. You need to get the right perspective as I repeatidly keep reminding, though doubt it in this case.

 

You will learn that objective opinion can only be given when in possession of the full facts.

 

There are a lot of dangerous accusations here which to give an opinion needs the full facts and wild accusations without understanding what the MOT and what advisories actually are exposes the OP significantly to any counter action, the costs of which are immense.

 

But of course this is also "Duff Information" isn't it.

[scaniaman]

I don't think your info is "Duff" heliosuk but i can fully understand where the guy is comming from eg. An MOT tester gives a car a "Pass" but it could have a whole page of advisories. In some cases, the MOT tester is only covering his back, as we all know that the MOT tolerances are open to interpretation between testers. In other cases, if the tester is under pressure to pass a vehicle, he can again cover his back by listing a heap of advisories.

Would you buy a car with years mot and a page of possible defects?

You actually covered this issue some time ago when you said that it would be better if all mot's were carried out at a Ministry centre, like busses & trucks, as oposed to the present system of private mot stations.

[sailor sam]

Apart from anything else, this could be a case of falsely describing the car. A court may be concerned that the OP was swayed into buying the car because it apparently had no advisories. The OP may well have not purchased the car had he of known the advisories existed. The fact that they are 'just advisories' is pretty irrelevant IMHO. If the OP is correct, this is miss-selling.

[Conniff]

Agree Sam, this 'could' be which is why I advised going to an MoT center and getting a copy of the certificate and advisory as input by the testing station that did the test. When an unadulterated copy is in the hand and the differences very obvious, then you can challenge the seller.

[Spirittamer]

You can say what you like Spirittamer but as Conniff says think first before jumping in with two feet. Obviously your vast experience and knowledge far exceeds other members of the CAG. Again, advisories are not a legal requirement, just advisories and if they have been changed does not necessarily make it an offence unless used to deliberatly deceive and the OP has to prove this.

 

One thing not mentioned throughout is what the car actually is, age and mileage. All that is known is that it cost nearly £5K. Theoretically it could be a 200 grand Bentley when new but now has 400k miles on it and is 15 years old. You need to get the right perspective as I repeatidly keep reminding, though doubt it in this case.

 

You will learn that objective opinion can only be given when in possession of the full facts.

 

There are a lot of dangerous accusations here which to give an opinion needs the full facts and wild accusations without understanding what the MOT and what advisories actually are exposes the OP significantly to any counter action, the costs of which are immense.

 

But of course this is also "Duff Information" isn't it.

 

In my opinion with my vast amount of experience and knowledge, having an Advisory Sheet, that has been deliberately altered, in my possession and the faults on the vehicle to match the unaltered copy from VOSA, proof enough don't you think? Please read my previous post regarding legality of Advisories as I find that I will have to repeat myself.

[Spirittamer]

Apart from anything else, this could be a case of falsely describing the car. A court may be concerned that the OP was swayed into buying the car because it apparently had no advisories. The OP may well have not purchased the car had he of known the advisories existed. The fact that they are 'just advisories' is pretty irrelevant IMHO. If the OP is correct, this is miss-selling.

 

My point exactly.

[heliosuk]

If you say so spirit. However whilst Sam has a valid point it is NOT the same as accusing a dealer of deliberatly forging without proof that they have actually done so which is what I am pointing out and is a very dangerous accusation to make, especially on a public forum.

 

As Conniff and others have pointed out to you previously, advisories are NOT a legal document or a legal requirement to be carried out but yes they could affect a decision to buy which is what Sam is saying.

 

The OP has no definitive evidence that the dealer did the alleged dirty deed or supplied any copies for objective opinion.

 

When making allegations of the nature that have been, you need to be on very sure ground as it can, and has been shown to backfire big time.

[Spirittamer]

If you say so spirit. However whilst Sam has a valid point it is NOT the same as accusing a dealer of deliberatly forging without proof that they have actually done so which is what I am pointing out and is a very dangerous accusation to make, especially on a public forum.

 

As Conniff and others have pointed out to you previously, advisories are NOT a legal document or a legal requirement to be carried out but yes they could affect a decision to buy which is what Sam is saying.

 

The OP has no definitive evidence that the dealer did the alleged dirty deed or supplied any copies for objective opinion.

 

When making allegations of the nature that have been, you need to be on very sure ground as it can, and has been shown to backfire big time.

 

 

I can only suggest you read this thread again from the beginning.

Also no names have been mentioned. All the opinions are conjecture but everyone is allowed such without threat of legal action.

[emtom123]

It's probably the way you have worded you post S. I agree with heliosuk about not making an accusation until you can prove the fact. Have you been to an MoT center and got a copy of the advisory as submitted by the testing station, only by doing that will you be able to see for sure what has changed.

 

When you have that in your hand and still believe it has been changed, you must then be sure it was changed by them and for monetary gain.

 

Just be careful before you jump in with 'both' feet.

 

Of course I have the original MOT certificate. How would I know otherwise. Like I said, I am in contact with MOT centre, they provided me with a real copy and they have also told me that I have been the 3rd customer who's certificate has been altered in some way. I wouldn't have started this post by guessing, I am 100% sure this car has advisory items which I did not know about at sale.

[emtom123]

Connif. You too seem to have missed the point. The MOT Certificate has been forged. It doesn't matter what the advisories were for. The Certificate has been altered as to deem the car mechanically 100% sound and to generate as much money from the sale using this forged document as a platform. It is not only deceitful it is illegal.

 

I want to really thank you for actually understanding what I mean. It is very infuriating when I am trying to complain t the garage, to trading standards or to the consumer action helpline and I am told that 'advisories are just advisories.' It's about exactly what you say, generating money from deceit, and this will cost m money by next MOT.

[emtom123]

You can say what you like Spirittamer but as Conniff says think first before jumping in with two feet. Obviously your vast experience and knowledge far exceeds other members of the CAG. Again, advisories are not a legal requirement, just advisories and if they have been changed does not necessarily make it an offence unless used to deliberatly deceive and the OP has to prove this.

 

One thing not mentioned throughout is what the car actually is, age and mileage. All that is known is that it cost nearly £5K. Theoretically it could be a 200 grand Bentley when new but now has 400k miles on it and is 15 years old. You need to get the right perspective as I repeatidly keep reminding, though doubt it in this case.

 

You will learn that objective opinion can only be given when in possession of the full facts.

 

There are a lot of dangerous accusations here which to give an opinion needs the full facts and wild accusations without understanding what the MOT and what advisories actually are exposes the OP significantly to any counter action, the costs of which are immense.

 

But of course this is also "Duff Information" isn't it.

 

the car is a renault megane, 55 plate, 65,000 miles roughly, diesel. The MOT centre have 100% confirmed that this car has 9 advisories, including brake discs, leak in exhaust fumes, 3 issues with tyres, play in steering etc etc. The MOT centre have also 100% confirmed that they have stopped dealing with the garage after 3 complaints of forgery and they have also reported them to trading standards.

[emtom123]

Agree Sam, this 'could' be which is why I advised going to an MoT center and getting a copy of the certificate and advisory as input by the testing station that did the test. When an unadulterated copy is in the hand and the differences very obvious, then you can challenge the seller.

 

Why would you think I haven't done this already? Why would I guess the car has advisories? Of course I know 100% what the MOT certificate should actually say. I would never have started a thread without knowing this.