Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3951 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

Hi All,

 

Very quick question, I've recently bought a used car. It has a couple of niggly faults:

 

1. Wheel Bearing - this is being sorted by the dealer

2. Automatic Head Light Adjustment Fault

 

Its the 2nd part I need clarification on, it happened a week after owning the car, I've reported it to the dealer but they have stated that only major mechanical faults are covered under the warranty they have given me. They are only doing the bearing as it would have been bad before I took possession of the car.

 

Its a 06 Plate Citreon C4 2.0 HDi paid £3999.00

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the time scale you are in, all know faults with the car are the responsibility of the seller to rectify. The car should be as described, of satisfactory quality and fit for the purpose. The warranty is irrelevant and merely an extension of your statutory rights under the SOGA. The head light adjustment could be an MOT fail so get them to put it right.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree fully with Sams post especially the bit about an MoT failure.

 

And just to reiterate, the warranty does not come into it at all, that is just an enticement to bring in the buyers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Gone back with that and they are still stating that they will not pay for the fix.

 

Is there some official blurb I can throw back, if I quote line and verse they might start to listen?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case it is definitely an inherited fault. The relevant legislation to quote is the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended). That act states that any fault that appears within the first six months is assumed to have been there at the time of purchase. Also during that first six months, it is up to the dealer to prove it wasn't. After six months it is up to the buyer to prove it was.

 

You can tell him that if he doesn't fix it then you will take it to the main dealer to be fixed and bill him for the cost. It might be a good idea to get a quote from the main dealer to correct the fault before you tackle him again.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to what Connif says, tell the seller that unless he agrees to fix it, you will consider formally rejecting the car all together. In the time scale involved, you would have a good case to do so. My advice would be not to accept the car back unless it has been rectified satisfactorily.

 

Obviously the latter path of action may involve you progressing the matter to court under the SOGA. Again, time is very much on your side atm but it is important not to allow that advantage slip away.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi Guys,

 

Just an update, I've sent an e-mail to the seller -

 

Hi ****,

 

I’ve received the cheque thank you very much, most appreciated.

 

Coming back to the lighting fault, I’ve now discovered another fault which is related to the same system, the directional headlights do not work either.

 

The system was turned off and I didn’t even realise the car had it till I went looking.

 

I understand your point about your warranty however I’ve unfortunately been doing some research, according to Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended). That act states that any fault that appears within the first six months is assumed to have been there at the time of purchase. Also during that first six months, it is up to the dealer to prove it wasn't. After six months it is up to the buyer to prove it was.

 

I’ve checked with Trading Standards and if either fault is a MOT failure then the car is not fit for purpose which is when the above comment is applicable.

 

How would you like to proceed? I’ve already checked with my local garage and they have unable to help on this occasion, they have explained that it might be a main dealer only repair for both faults due to the system affected.

 

I don’t like complaining but having spent almost 4K on a car I feel that it should come without any faults.

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

 

Best Regards,

 

 

I've waited till the cheque for the wheel bearing cleared before going further (paranoia) I'm sure they will sort it they have been pretty good till this point (i hope)

 

Thanks,

Chuffter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I've had a response from the re-seller below:

 

 

 

A lot of cars come with a lot of things you don't need, which are not detramental or affect the driving or performance of your car

I have checked with a mot station and it is not a mot failure so that makes it fit for purpose.

I am also sure that you are aware that if something serious was wrong with your car we would have been looking at resolving the matter from first contact.

 

 

What do I do next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah right, so not having wheels on a car can't be classed as an MoT failure, but if the car is made with wheels you want wheels with it.

 

Ok, so the self adjust may not be included in the MoT, but if it means the beam can be out of adjustment, then it is, but beside that, if the car was supplied with it, you want it working.

 

You should respond that if he is unwilling to repair the headlights, then you will take it to the dealer to be fixed and bill him for it. I haven't seen the advert, but I would put my money on it not saying 'with faults'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks!

 

Really appreciate the help so far, never bought a car from a dealer before.

 

Anyway this was my response:

 

Hi ,

 

Thanks for the quick response.

 

I’ve checked with trading standards, their view is that if the car was sold with no faults being advertised or being brought to my attention then everything on the car should work, if it doesn’t their view is that the seller should pay for the repair. If I bought the car knowing these faults where there then it would be down to me.

 

I’ve checked the advert (I kept a PDF knowing that Autotrader get rid of completed ones quite quickly) and there is no mention of any electrical faults with the car, if there was, sorry to be blunt, I wouldn’t have wasted my time coming to see it being quite a distance from where I live.

 

If we can’t get this resolved, I will have no choice but to pursue the matter with Trading Standards.

 

 

I'm guessing its TS I'll need to go to next to do the main dealer repair? As I would imagine that the main dealer will need something from them to go ahead with fixing my car?

 

Thanks,

Chuffter

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the advice of the CAB, I've sent a letter recorded post asking that the car be collected, I be provided with a hire car and they are to fix mine at no cost to me.

 

10 Days to respond otherwise TS will take further action.

 

I'll update once I have got further along.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

**Update**

 

I've sent two additional letters one being a letter before action before I got any response from the dealer, they are trying to get the car back so it can be inspected.

 

Already told them that my local garage (part of the good garage scheme) cannot diagnose the fault and have said it will need to go to Citroen to be fixed properly. However they are trying to say they can't garente a courtacy (sorry my spelling is really bad) car while they have mine for repair so just digging my heels in with that at the moment. I'm hoping they will come back with the suggestion to go to a local main dealer to me to have it repaired which is my preferential way to deal with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

**UPDATE**

 

Phoned back and they are still saying they cannot gaurentee a car for me, said to the guy I was dealing with that I would leave it with him but I'm going to write to his boss and have another go.

 

Will update when I get a response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your being a lot more patient than I would of been. By now I would of either got it rectified myself, hired a car while it was being done and presented them with the bill, or i would of formally rejected the car and demanded a full re-fund. You should of maintained the cut off point in your LBA and taken the action indicated. You may be prejudicing your legal position by not doing so.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have the money to sort it myself or hire a car so I'm a bit stuck, I'm going to write another letter asking for a hire car at their cost or for them to let me go to a local main dealer and will keep the original time to respond.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Just found out something that might completely change how this goes, I took finance out by myself to get the car. The finance company paid the car dealer direct its hire purchase.

 

I didn't think this made a difference but apparently (according to trading standards it does, does this change what I am meant to be doing/complaining to>?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it makes a lot of difference. It means that the car doesn't belong to you but to the finance company. All and any letter sent to the seller should also have been sent to the finance company.

It's not too late to do this, the finance company are the ones who bought the car, not you so the problem is theirs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right spoken to the finance company, they have said that they would only need to get involved if the company refused to pay for the repair which is when they would step in to get the refund to cover the works but as the dealer has now said they will fix the faults they don't need to do anything but I should keep them up to date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...