Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Apologies I hadn't seen that uploads need to be in PDF.   I have received the attached letter from STA which I assume is a standard letter as I've never spoken to them on the phone. I'm not sure what they mean by 're-commence recovery action'? Do I just continue to ignore them?   I have been in contact with the Uni who insist I need to pay the fees as I left the course after the first three weeks. They have not provided any evidence/documents that I signed an agreement to pay the fees or that I acknowledged that fees would be due if the course was left early. They referred me to their website which undoubtedly has changed since I was there.    I appreciate I shouldn't reply to STA however I'm not sure how to proceed with this overall.   I've read the claim form page and I'm not clear if I can request a copy of a credit agreement from the Uni as I'm not sure if its standard for a University to have required a credit agreement to be signed?    I'm not really clear what happens next and at what point I need to act. I've read about lots of different cases (fee related and non fee related) but can't find information on a case that is similar to mine. Do I wait until the Uni begins a formal action? I am concerned as I don't want the amount to increase from the already significant amount they are demanding.     Many thanks for any help you can offer.  staletter.pdf
    • I have now received some interesting responses....   Firstly - Lowell have sent a without prejudice letter offering a settlement of £3750 for a single payment or £4000 payable in instalments of £50pcm   Second - Lowell also sent a previous letter with the copy of the agreement saying it was the one they filed to court in 2018.  However I have not yet had it acknowledged from the court that they received a certificate of service for this.    Third - The court wrote to me today from the proper officer stating a video hearing will be heard 14 May 2021.    Dealing with each one in tern, I see the court hasn't responded to my email asking them to strike out the claim on the basis that Lowell haven't adhered to the order and that I haven't received the original documents and have now set this hearing date.    I note Lowell are willing to take an offer which is of interest. However I am inclined on the costs issue and trying to 'get rid' of the matter as cost effective and expediently as possibly to make a counter offer (at what level I am not quite sure yet).    Is there a letter template to use to draft a settlement or something that I can use to start with?     In Lowell settlement letter they are claiming it is not statute barred and that a payment was made to them for £200.  I have tried to go through everything and all I can find with the help of Santander who were my bank at the time, is a payment of £200 paid to Lloyds, but this does not have a reference on it only a s/c and a/c number.    How best is it to proceed?   Court Order 22_02_2021.pdf Response to Order.pdf Offer Letter.pdf
    • yes I have conversed over email and sent them forms both in email and by royal mail, firstly with erudio, then they sent it to capquest, then it went back to erudio and now with shoosmiths for a few years now.   And yes they are well aware of my correct and current address, I have only ever moved once since the loan and that was before Erudio and it was all plain sailing with Saas/slc.
    • 2 days now and the insurers have done nothing - just making it much more stressful.  
    • Pretty sure you are correct its not by royal mail either they are well aware of you correct and current address? so I'd ignore them.   Did you converse by email previously?? And or send your forms via email? Or royal mail?
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2361 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I recently bought a second hand car from a private seller.

 

I agreed with the seller that I bought the car "sold as seen".

 

I therefore fully accept that any problems with the car are my responsibility.

 

However I later discovered that the MOT certificate had been doctored.

 

Advisories had been erased.

 

The erased advisory stated smoking exhaust/engine worn.

 

The car has just failed it's MOT on exhaust emissions.

 

I contacted VOSA and Trading Standards regarding being given a doctored MOT certificate by the seller.

They both said that they cannot help me.

 

Do I have any legal comeback against the seller?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as you have the "doctored" MOT certificate, you could make enquiries at your local police station. If you can get them interested, the seller might be looking at a charge of fraud in either of the following two categories...

 

Fraud by false representation (Section 2, Fraud Act 2006) or

Fraud by failure to disclose information when there is a legal duty to do so (Section 3, Fraud Act 2006).

 

Out of interest, how had they erased the advisories? Could it be that what you've actually been given is a scanned (and edited) copy of the original MOT? In which case the seller could be looking at an additional charge of Using a false instrument (Section 3, Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981) which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, as you have the "doctored" MOT certificate, you could make enquiries at your local police station. If you can get them interested, the seller might be looking at a charge of fraud in either of the following two categories...

 

Fraud by false representation (Section 2, Fraud Act 2006) or

Fraud by failure to disclose information when there is a legal duty to do so (Section 3, Fraud Act 2006).

 

 

Out of interest, how had they erased the advisories? Could it be that what you've actually been given is a scanned (and edited) copy of the original MOT? In which case the seller could be looking at an additional charge of Using a false instrument (Section 3, Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981) which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years.

 

The doctored MOT certificate turned out to be a photocopy with the advisory removed.

 

Strangely the MOT was valid despite the serious advisory being removed.

 

I therefore also suspect that the MOT was a bent MOT.

 

Interesting to note that the suspect MOT was carried out before the seller owned the car.

 

However, the seller gave me a servicing receipt for a service that was carried out when he did own the car.

 

I later discovered that the service was never carried out. I therefore suspect that the seller was using deception.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd certainly be tempted to pop into your local police station then chiefmegawatty. It might not get you anywhere as I can see it might be difficult (if not impossible) to prove who's done what, but it's got to be worth an ask at the very least. You certainly won't be any worse off.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd certainly be tempted to pop into your local police station then chiefmegawatty. It might not get you anywhere as I can see it might be difficult (if not impossible) to prove who's done what, but it's got to be worth an ask at the very least. You certainly won't be any worse off.

 

Thanks DragonFly for your good kind advice. I will ring 101 and report this.

I will report back any result I obtain.

Should the Police decline to help me I will tell them that I intend to sell second hand cars with doctored MOT

certificates and not expect any comebacks from the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Should the Police decline to help me I will tell them that I intend to sell second hand cars with doctored MOT certificates and not expect any comebacks from the law.

 

As tempting as saying that might be, IMHO, I'd gloss over that part lol.gif

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The doctored MOT certificate turned out to be a photocopy with the advisory removed.

 

Strangely the MOT was valid despite the serious advisory being removed.

 

I therefore also suspect that the MOT was a bent MOT.

 

An advisory is just that, the MOT will be valid either way with or without it. It's doubtful that the MOT is bent, compare the receipt style certificate to the actual MOT result stored in the database. It's quite easy to photocopy a 'certificate' with a bit of white paper covering the advisory section. It's more likely that the seller is of dubious integrity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The advisory was smoking exhaust / engine worn so it would have failed the emission test. Anyway, I have just reported all details to the Police.

They are going to get Action Fraud to contact me.

In the fairly recent past I have contacted Action Fraud on another issue and

never heard anything since. I am therefore not holding my breath.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The advisory was smoking exhaust / engine worn so it would have failed the emission test. Anyway, I have just reported all details to the Police.

.

 

It should have been given an emissions test (spark ignition) or smoke test (compression ignition), as it passed the MOT it must have passed the emission/smoke test. I can't see how you can make the judgement that it would fail such a test purely based on an advisory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A petrol engined car that's burning oil won't pass an emissions test.

I recently had the car MOT tested and it failed the emissions test due to smoking exhaust.

The car has done very few miles since it's previous MOT which is why I suspect the previous MOT was bent.

The seller erasing the advisories from the MOT certificate is a sure indication that deception has been employed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

wont make any difference to the car per se but will get the seller a criminal conviction if the police follow it through fully. The car passed it MOT so it was for for driving that day. Doesnt mean it would pass the next day or a month later.

How did you see the car advertised? I would take a bet on the seller has sold a few cars over the past year or so and is thus a trader and then open to other sanctions. you can look into the history a little, for example, how long did he own the car for? Obviously less than a year but was it 11 months or only a month?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where the police are concerned, you need to chase them up, if they aren't responding, escalate your complaint. Keep on doing that until they respond.

 

 

The seller owned the car for two months. The car was advertised on a Facebook group. The Police have failed to get back to me so nothing will happen.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke to the Police who said that it isn't a Police matter and therefore cannot

persue the matter. Thay also said that Trading Standards could only help me if I had bought the vehicle from a car dealer. I have to accept my loss and be more careful in future.

So there we have it, if anyone wants to make money selling cars with doctored MOT's, then go ahead. The law will leave you alone and let you get on with it.

The "crime doesn't pay" principle doesn't apply because doctoring MOT's obviously isn't a crime.

Therefore if you wish to sell a car that has a valid MOT with advisories, photocopy the document and blank out the advisories to get a better price.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go to any MoT station and for tenner you can get a copy of the complete MoT certificate.

If you think you can prove that it was the seller that altered the certificate, then you can sue for you money back if he refuses to refund.

 

 

Getting proof will be the tricky part.

 

 

How was the car described as mis-description is the only real chance of getting redress in a private sale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean an additive that just thickens the oil, one that purports to clean out the gunge.

 

 

Next suggestion is buy a set of cord rings and get out the spanners.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know what cord rings are. Do you mean piston rings?

 

 

Yes, piston rings with a special oil control ring. It really is prudent though, especially at that mileage, to start with the cheapest and that would be additives that clean the engine and remove carbon.

 

 

Replacing piston rings is not a small job and shouldn't be taken lightly, rings are very brittle and can break very easily.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...