Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, hope you’re all well.   Just an update.    We still have the vehicle, the agreement hasn’t been defaulted or terminated yet (even though we’ve not made any payments since January).    After a lot of back and forth, the finance company agreed to pay for an independent inspection at a main dealer BMW workshop.    Workshop came back and the vehicle has £6,350 worth of urgent repairs, everything from rear brakes being worn to the point there’s no pads left, rear differential bushes are degraded completely, and of course the big one, the timing chain mechanism is defective and needs replacing, technician also stated that it’s best to have a new clutch fitted to the vehicle as the clutch is heavily worn and the gearbox will be detached from the vehicle so it makes sense to put a new clutch into the vehicle to avoid having to do this again in 5,000 to 10,000 miles.    Finance company has been really patronising and has said that they will only pay for the timing chain repair, and this is as a good will gesture without any admission of liability as they are of the opinion £5,000 timing chain replacements are “wear and tear”, even though BMW has admitted it’s defective and are contributing to the repair, I’ve declined this on the basis it’s not “good will” to withhold a repair for 7 months and try to pass it off as “wear and tear”, I want the finance company to admit they were wrong.    Finance company is refusing to put right the rear brakes (which the vehicle cannot be driven unless they’re done because the condition is dangerous, having seen the video of the rear brakes I’m disgusted at the condition they are in), the finance company will not repair the rear differential and will obviously not put a new clutch into the vehicle, expecting me to make £1,500ish in repairs out of my own pocket.    I’m unwilling to pay for any repair to this vehicle as we have had 4 months of use age out of it, it cost £8,000 and already has £6,350 worth of urgent repairs required, this clearly shows it was not fit for purpose, not as described and not of a satisfactory condition.   Finance and supplying dealership are refusing the rectify the poorly done paint repairs that have peeled off both the front and rear bumpers, even though these were pre-agreed and part of the condition of sale.    Financial Ombudsman Service has not yet ruled on our dispute, however I now have an independent report that shows the vehicle was not fit for purpose, and the finance company/dealership should have repaired it when I made the request under s.23 of the CRA 2015 back in November 2021, they acted unlawfully and unfairly in refusing this, and refusing to carry out my rejection in January when they failed to repair the vehicle.    I’ve written back to the finance company refusing their proposal to have just the timing chain repaired, as I disagree with the premise of it being out of “good will” and “wear and tear”, I also believe that they are liable alongside the supplying dealership for other defects that could not possibly have occurred due to my very limited use of the vehicle. 
    • The banking giant has declined to comment on media reports that Stuart Kirk has been suspended.View the full article
    • Are we to assume that the asthma is not new and your employer fully infomed about this. 
    • right so you being abroad or informing SLC you were Abroad as the last address plays no part in this at all, thread title updated. total red herring.   your case is the same as numerous ones here already which you need to READ  type in erudio backdoor CCJ in our enhanced google searchbox. get reading a good few of the threads that search points you too.   your mistake is you returned to the uk, you failed to update your debt owners of a change of address as legally you are obliged too, and you got a backdoor CCJ.    your issue now again is the same as most of the threads you'll read, your SLC loans were last deferred to SLC before the gov't sold them to erudio in 2013. that means that the court claimform was issued more than 6yrs after your last written acknowledgement of the debt and thus was already statute barred.   can't see any point in an SAR to anyone.   just ring northants bulk and quoting the CCJ number from your credit file ask for a copy of the particulars of claim ANd the judgement CCJ by email pdf   dx  
    • and neither can drydens hence their twaddle.  and you need to remember that places like cab and ndl etc are funded by the banks and the DCA's in commission payments for signing people up to dmp's without ever questioning the debts enforceability under the cca 1974.   your n244 already has the background..   The Default Notice was issued dd/mm/yyyy and served several months after the initial breach thus the cause of action delayed by X months and the Limitations period prolonged to 6 years and X months which in effect allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.        
  • Our picks

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...