Motor Trader Issues on vehicle functions. Small Court Claim now issued ** Full Refund Given **

[rebel11]

If your rejecting the car, you must stop using it (immediately).

 

Have to sent a letter to the dealer rejecting the car for those reasons? Have you sent it Recorded Delivery?

[poor-boy]

I am typing the letter as I also type this reply.

 

I have contacted the Visa Debit card department and advised them also, they state it would be the easier option in the long run.

 

I am also sending an email to the Trading standards department for the area where the vehicle was purchased from.

[poor-boy]

Just an update, the letter was sent yesterday (03rd November 2014) explaining the SOGA 1979 and the options given to the trader / dealer of repair, replace or refund as was advised by Trading standards consumer advice.

 

The reasons for the above are that an independent engineer report has been carried out on the vehicle and it seems the DPF had been cut open, internals removed and welded back together (can hear the turbo through the exhaust) and the vehicle came with an MOT with no advisories and moted on 01st October 2014. This has now also been reported to DVSA (VOSA) thus opening a massive can of worms (more to follow later) for dealer / trader and MOT station.

 

So everything that has been highlighted in the report is -

*The vehicle was advertised as a 170BHP but is only a 103KW (140BHP). This would need bringing back up to the description of the advert.

*The Sat Nav system is broken and that Mr XX of XXXXXX Company stated it only required disks but in fact as stated by XXXXX Company in an email to myself on 22nd October 2014 the screen jams – this would need replacing as a whole unit.

*The clutch bite point is at its maximum and the dual mass flywheel vibrates so requires replacement.

*The vehicle jerks very badly in 1st, 2nd and 3rd gear causing whiplash effects to driver and passengers.

*The DPF has been cut and welded, signs of internals have been removed so requires replacement – Contravening the road vehicles (construction and use) Regulations 61.

*The turbo wines and causes smoke and requires replacement.

Costs to supply parts only - £5648.31 which is £348.31 more than I paid for the car.

 

I will post up the response from the trader but a bit of a nightmare right now dealing with Vosa, trading standards, Debit Card Company and full time job working miles away

 

 

[poor-boy]

Pic of DPF

[poor-boy]

The seller / dealer has now stopped responding to any letters.

[poor-boy]

The seller has contacted me by telephone although they were advised to communicate by email and letter only.

 

They have made an offer of £300 to get the sat nav system replaced. They have been advised to submit their offer by letter or email.

 

They have stated they see no point and it would be in my best interest to take the offer.

 

I have kindly rejected this.

[Conniff]

If you must take phone calls from them, then record the calls. Maplins do some voice recorders. If you can't arrange that, give them your mobile number to contact you on and record the calls on that.

 

 

If you have sent a proper letter of rejection of the car, don't back down now. Give them a date for the completion of a refund and stick to it.

Have you reported it to Trading Standards ?

 

 

Are you continuing with your chargeback on your debit card ?

Edited November 15, 2014 by Conniff

[poor-boy]

If you must take phone calls from them, then record the calls. Maplins do some voice recorders. If you can't arrange that, give them your mobile number to contact you on and record the calls on that.

 

I advised the seller anything they have to say must be done in writing and they have an option of either sending me an email or write a letter, the seller stated they see no point in that and would rather communicate directly but I refused to do so.

If you have sent a proper letter of rejection of the car, don't back down now. Give them a date for the completion of a refund and stick to it.

Have you reported it to Trading Standards ?

 

I have also taken advice from trading standards and my bank put three options to the seller -

 

Repair

 

Replace

 

Refund

 

As Trading standards advised I must give the trader the options and give them 7 days to reply with their proposal, the seller contacted me by telephone after 11 days but I have now sent a second recorded letter thus ignoring the telephone call.

Are you continuing with your chargeback on your debit card ?

 

I am still pressing ahead with the charge back and have provided all the evidence the bank required, I have been advised it could take upto 21 days till someone looks into the case and contacts me.

 

I have also got VOSA involved whom have so far started an investigation into the MOT station that MOTed the car.

[poor-boy]

I have to say Royal Mail offer a shambolic service!!

 

15 days to deliver the Second Recorded Delivery Letter but they do not guarantee delivery

[Conniff]

"My Bank put three options to them"

 

 

Method of conclusion has nothing to do with the bank. All they should be looking at is your story and the sellers. Visa gives banks a black mark for chargebacks so the banks try had not to do it.

 

 

Ask the bank, if the seller opts for the 'Repair', how are they going to up the brake horsepower, we would all like to see the answer to that one.

[poor-boy]

Well as luck would have it, No reply to the second recorded letter from the seller/ dealer so same as the first letter.

 

Need to call the bank for an update and depending on their response will see the next step.

 

Third recorded letter is ready to be sent also.

[Conniff]

Any further letter should be a 'Letter Before Action'. It sounds as if you are licking his boots to get a resolve, don't, take the bull by the horns and 'tell' him he has 7 days to refund or action will be taken in the courts without further notice.

And then do it, it can be started on line and will cost less that fifty quid.

At the moment he has the upper hand as you are not being decisive.

 

 

As regards the bank, you shouldn't be ringing to find out how it's going, you write to them and again 'tell' them they have a joint liability and you want your refund now or they will be named as co-respondent in the small claims court.

[Conniff]

they were sold as seen and not tested and you were made aware of this

 

No such thing as 'sold as seen'. That is an attempt to reduce your statutory rights and is unlawful.

[rebel11]

Hi poor-boy

 

There is a further letter that you can send to the bank regarding a Chargeback if they aren't playing ball.

[Conniff]

All that's required is the ad showing the engine size and the logbook showing it is not as advertised.

[rebel11]

Coniff, as you know, banks do 'nothing', even when a vaild claim is put before them, you need to persist to get anywhere.

 

All that's required is the ad showing the engine size and the logbook showing it is not as advertised.

[poor-boy]

Hi poor-boy

 

There is a further letter that you can send to the bank regarding a Chargeback if they aren't playing ball.

 

Can you private message it to me please rebel11? or add it on here?

 

It is a Visa Debit card that I used and not a Credit card

[rebel11]

No probs, just update when they get back to you, I'll update the thread with info.

 

Can you private message it to me please rebel11? or add it on here?

 

It is a Visa Debit card that I used and not a Credit card

[poor-boy]

The bank have called me back after my email to them and have stated someone will call me back within 48hours after a review of my case.

[rebel11]

Update the thread after they have called.

[poor-boy]

I have received an email from the trader / retailer after my letter of "Letter Before Action", the email is copy and pasted as is and any full stops / comma's missing are from the seller -

 

 

Dear sir,

 

 

Further to your letter in regards to purchace of this vehicle,please note that central motor company will not pay for any repairs carried out by yourselves without our permission as that would just violate your rights.those items that you claim are age and mileage related Fair wear and tear and are not considered to be a fault.these which are to be expected and were made aware prior to purchace and also was reflected in the purchace price.we have also stated on the bill of sale any faults which were apparent.needless to say that the vehicle was in unroadworthy condition as the vehicle had recently passed an mot test which would determine this.at the time of purchace you had opportunity to fully inspect the vehicle and test drive.upon your observations and comments you proceeded with the purchace.you also brought a mechanic with you who had a vehicle diagnostic computer which would read any faults present if any for your own satisfaction and informed decision.in the circumstances we are not able to accept your claims as these were made aware to you at the time of sale and it also seems like you have 'unrealistic expectations'.

 

I have not yet sent a reply but do not think I should reply either as my next action is court and have started to fill the online forms out.\

 

 

Not really sure that how does a car being advertised as 170BHP but is only 140BHP is related to wear and tear?

 

The DPF filter being removed, cut open and having internals removed then welded back together down to wear and tear.

 

The sat nav system jamming and going off being wear and tear.

 

The seller states these faults were mentioned on the receipt but there is no mention except when making the Visa Debit card payment the seller wrote "customer aware of engine fault" and folded the paperwork up and put it in an envelope.

 

The person whom went with me was my uncle and we had borrowed a code reader and as we tried to test the vehicle as a 170BHP and not 140BHP, I beieve the seller had cleared any fault codes before hand.

[poor-boy]

Oh an the bank have not called back as promised

[Conniff]

170 / 140 you need no other evidence that the car was mis-described.

 

 

Why not send the bank a letter before action and give them 14 days to refund. Again mention that the car advertised was not the car supplied. Oh, and remind them of the engine size. You could send them a copy of the advert and one of the section of the log book showing the engine size.

 

 

And if they come up with the crap that they need a signed note from the garage, remind them the law say they must collect it.

[poor-boy]

Thanks Conniff, I have sent every copy of every letter I sent to the bank inc advert, garage quote and full engineers report.

 

The service history book and V5 state 103KW which is 140BHP.

 

The bank are trying to fob me off and I understand they will try to do so.

[Conniff]

More reason than ever to get a letter before action off to them.