Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • 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

Vauxhall complaint


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4126 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

Please someone help me, brought a Astra may2011. Got 3ys warranty and life time warranty.

 

Gear stick hard to get in to1/2 crunch in reverse.

 

Garage saying its the clutch.

 

Saying its worn down blaming drivers error?...

 

... Only 28000 on clock want.

£800 to fix.

 

Brought it from Brinkley Vauxhall in Cannock very unhelpful.

 

Spent£250 on a full service in June.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SOGA or warranty fix

 

you should not have to pay

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A clutch is a wearable part so I doubt very much whether you will have any joy using either SOGA or warranty claim for this.

 

28,000 miles is not a massive amount of mileage for a clutch. I think 50,000 is more like most manufacturers would expect (but not guarantee). But equally 28,000 is not ridiculously low either to claim faulty. As a driving instructor I know we are always on a hiding-to-nothing ever trying to claim on such an item coz they always just say it must be the way the learners handle the clutch!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A clutch is a wearable part so I doubt very much whether you will have any joy using either SOGA or warranty claim for this.

 

28,000 miles is not a massive amount of mileage for a clutch. I think 50,000 is more like most manufacturers would expect (but not guarantee). But equally 28,000 is not ridiculously low either to claim faulty. As a driving instructor I know we are always on a hiding-to-nothing ever trying to claim on such an item coz they always just say it must be the way the learners handle the clutch!

Thanks for the reply. Just feel angry as paid garage£250 for a full service in June . To keep warranty. Paid so much over the years with this garage come back now with a lower price £530. But feel they should of done that the first time. Feel no loyalty been given to a customer who has spent a lot of money with them brought 2!cars one costing £18.000 and now this Astra £13.000

Just felt they think, woman driver riding the clutch. Feel any part that lasts that long must be poor quality. Been driving20 years with no clutch in any cars before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may not be the case at all

I have a 2004 Zafira where it did just this at 20K miles and the Local main dealer insisted that it was wearable part and not covered and would cost £1K to fix BUT I am very mistrustfull so I attended the Garage and insisted on seeing the clutch once it was out The fault was a broken spring BUT the foreman kept telling me this was not covered and I kept telling him " Show me what the warranty says."

This went on fo 10 minutes or so till he finally gave in and showed me. It said "friction material not covered"

Thanks I said now get onto Vauxhall and get it sorted under warranty which they reluctantly did.

I also informed him that I had run a garage and had probably changed as many clutches as he had which did not please him greatly .

The Dealer principal was not impressed and I was treated like Gold therefter

 

I have to say this was in 2007 and the Vauxhall warranty may well be changed by now but it is worth checking

Hope this helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

This may not be the case at all

I have a 2004 Zafira where it did just this at 20K miles and the Local main dealer insisted that it was wearable part and not covered and would cost £1K to fix BUT I am very mistrustfull so I attended the Garage and insisted on seeing the clutch once it was out The fault was a broken spring BUT the foreman kept telling me this was not covered and I kept telling him " Show me what the warranty says."

This went on fo 10 minutes or so till he finally gave in and showed me. It said "friction material not covered"

Thanks I said now get onto Vauxhall and get it sorted under warranty which they reluctantly did.

I also informed him that I had run a garage and had probably changed as many clutches as he had which did not please him greatly .

The Dealer principal was not impressed and I was treated like Gold therefter

 

I have to say this was in 2007 and the Vauxhall warranty may well be changed by now but it is worth checking

Hope this helps

 

Thankyou. Feel unless you know what your talking about its hard to prove. Just such a surprise when they said it was driver error. Feel something else cause it to wear down. Hard to prove.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to 2009 I bought a 2007 Zafira which had clutch problems. Apparently there was a manufacturing fault with the clutches that caused problems. I found this out from the Vauxhall Owners Forum and managed to obtain a copy of a Bulletin that had been sent to dealers about the problem.

 

They tried to put it down to driver error but backed down when I gave them the reference of the bulletin and replaced the clutch and flywheel.

 

Whats more is you dont need to have cars serviced at the main dealers to keep the warranty.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to 2009 I bought a 2007 Zafira which had clutch problems. Apparently there was a manufacturing fault with the clutches that caused problems. I found this out from the Vauxhall Owners Forum and managed to obtain a copy of a Bulletin that had been sent to dealers about the problem.

 

 

 

They tried to put it down to driver error but backed down when I gave them the reference of the bulletin and replaced the clutch and flywheel.

 

 

 

Whats more is you dont need to have cars serviced at the main dealers to keep the warranty.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Spoken to managing director. Who agreed to pay half. Still with the flywheel £450. Said a1clutches could do it for£300. Came back £350. I was so fed up by this point I agreed. But pointed out that it would be the last time they seen me as a customer. And would take my customer elsewhere. He then agreed to do it for free. A little confused about the flywheel as a1 clutches said my car doesn't need one. But Vauxhall said I did. Thanks about the service advise, must of misread the policy. I had a zafira lovely car . Had so many probs with the turbo and oil leaks. Had to sell it as couldn't afford the repairs had 2 turbos. And when I sold it there was still prob with car drinking oil.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as a point,

 

Nearly every Vauxhall I've driven, apart from Automatic ones, have a crunch going into Reverse. No idea why, but "they all do it".

 

Somewhere in the small print in the handbook, it says "Depress clutch and wait three seconds before attempting to engage Reverse". Worth trying this with your car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...