Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

CARCRAFT WARRANTY NOT PAYING OUT -GEARBOX BUST-stating wear and tear!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3462 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

I bought a car from CARCRAFT 14 months ago-

I have purchased a @DRIVE HAPPY " warranty and paid £1000 for this!

 

 

Gear box is knackered in my 3 year old car

- that I've owned 14 months!

And guess what ... They are not paying out... And guess why .... Wear and tear!

 

I was sold this warranty by being took into a back room by a woman

- she told me that she had recently had lots of problems with her car

and the warranty covered everything!!!

She insisted this warranty was amazing best money could buy for " peace of mind!"

 

I am now told that it doesn't cover the gearbox of my 3 year old car that I have had for 14 months !

Because ...... It's wear and tear...., they have a "fairs fair policy" does anyone think that this is fair ???

 

I have seen my MP today who has asked for documentation from CARCRAFT LIVERPOOL

- went down guess what ..

. They can't give it to me - I have to write in!!!

 

I am a single mum with 21 month old twins.

I have been without my car for 15 days now .

They have told me that I can come and collect it but .. The engine is hanging out!!

The gearbox is in bits !!

And the suspension is not connected!!

If I do wish to come and collect my car in bits then I will have to pay near £500 pound for the pleasure ...

 

 

. Because they want paying this amount for taking out the gearbox to be inspected .

. FOR THEIR WARRANTY COMPANY.

And for the inspection to be done!!!!

 

Alternatively .. I can give them £1300 to repair the gearbox and get my car back .

 

 

I should have known better

when the first car I bought from them broke down as I drove out the showroom on the east lancs road

with my two babies then 6 months old but tiny having been 2 months premature !

I was stranded with the babies !!

Then the next day changed it for this one!!!

 

 

Now this one is not fit for purpose nor has it lasted a reasonable length of time .

. As per statutory rights and sales of goods act 1979.

Please think about this if you are considering buying from this company !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

calm down.

 

 

we have a carcraft rep who is very good

i'll alert them. to pop in.

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

What is the car and what is the mileage please.

 

Has it got a proper service history?

 

I can't imagine any car's gearbox failing after only three years of motoring – unless it has been putting on 30,000 or more miles per year.

 

I think that you should start to take a very robust attitude on this. Please let us know more about the car its mileage and its history and then we can help you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the car and what is the mileage please.

 

Has it got a proper service history?

 

I can't imagine any car's gearbox failing after only three years of motoring – unless it has been putting on 30,000 more miles per yea

I think that you should start to take a very robust attitude on this. Please let us know more about the car its mileage and its history and then we can help you.

 

Hi

My car is a 2011 vauxhall meriva it ha 52000 miles when I bought it 15 months ago , It has been in carcraft for 15 days,I had it 14 months before it failed and did 11000 miles on the clock making it now 63,000 miles.

Not sure about service history! Will check! I was talked into this after leaving the showroom with the babies and breaking down in another car within minutes in the a580 ( very busy road)

Thanks for your replies they are appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to start working pretty quickly. One of the problems will be that soon they will start badgering you about your car and threatening to charge you storage. This will increase the stress on you.

 

I think that you must get hold of the RAC and the AA and asked them how much it would cost to get a report on your car with a particular view to talking about the reasonable expectation for a gearbox.

 

Also start having a look around the forums and ask questions about gearbox life expectancy. Here is a link to one: –

 

http://www.vauxhallownersnetwork.co.uk/index.php?search/26059469/&q=meriva&o=relevance&c[node]=83

 

You need to try and get a report within seven days or so and also get as many forum opinions as possible over the Internet as to what the likely mileage should be. Make sure you print out everything.

 

I suppose that you are probably short of money, but the best thing to do would be to have the gearbox repaired and pay for it and then claim the money back. That way you get your car back as quickly as possible and you get the garage of your hands in terms of pressurising you to get rid of it to pay storage costs.

 

I would write a letter to the insurance company and tell them that you do not accept their finding that it is where a tear. Point out to them that this car has only got 63,000 miles on the clock and that you would expect at least 150,000 or so before a gearbox not to wear out.

 

Tell them that you do not accept the position and remind them that they have a duty to treat you honestly and fairly under ICOBS and also that they are contractually bound to have the gearbox repaired as clearly it is not wearing tear.

 

Point out to them that if Vauxhall – or any other car manufacturer – tried to reveal to their customers that their cars would break down simply through wearing tear after only 63,000 miles, that they wouldn't sell any cars. At the end of the day this is the acid test.

 

You have two avenues of complaint here. One is against the insurer and the second is against the supplier of the car. The supplier of the car has sold you an item which is subject to the Sale of Goods Act. Section 14 of the Sale of Goods Act requires that goods be of satisfactory quality. This means that they must last for a reasonable period of time given all the circumstances of the sale. Here you are dealing with a three-year-old car – whose mileage is a bit on the high side – but nevertheless 63,000 miles is well short of what one would reasonably expect from any modern motorcar nowadays.

 

Therefore it is reasonable to say that the dealer has sold you a car which is defective.

 

I would start complaining both to the dealer and to the insurer. You can point out to the dealer that if he is not prepared to report back to the insurer that the car is defective, then you will focus on him as the person with the principal responsibility.

 

You need to act robustly and you need to act quickly. I would not hang around on this. I would think about issuing small claims actions against both of these people as joint defendants. You will find that once the court papers are served, they will suddenly fall into line and take you much more seriously.

 

Get the reports I have suggested and do the research and get as much evidence as possible of what the reasonable expected mileage for your car should be. It will help enormously if you can show a proper service history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, do everything in writing. If you have to do anything on the telephone then record the calls. If you do anything on the telephone with either the dealer or with car craft and you don't record the calls – then you are being a fool to yourself

Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, do everything in writing. If you have to do anything on the telephone then record the calls. If you do anything on the telephone with either the dealer or with car craft and you don't record the calls – then you are being a fool to yourself

 

Thankyou for your advice and your time , I really appreciate it .

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you get the evidence you need, come back here and we will help you formulate your next step. If you need to begin a small claims action against Carcraft or the dealer then we will help you draft the papers. It will be very easy and I expect that your chances of winning are very high.

 

Car Craft are just another bunch of insurers who specialise in loss denial. They sell you an extended warranty which to a great extent covers you for rights which you enjoy anyway but they persuade you to pay for those rights even though you are entitled to them for free. It really is another kind of PPI. Then insurers such as car Craft – the others as well find ways to try and resist any claims.

 

This is the standard practice in the industry. It is grossly unfair.

 

Years ago I received a load of publicity inviting me to a very expensive one-day course in London – an intensive course on Loss Denial, intended for lawyers and for insurance companies. The whole thing is entirely scandalous.

 

We will help you in any way we can if you can get the information that is needed.

 

Also write to Carcraft straightaway and required them to provide you immediately with their written report of what they think is wrong with the gearbox and why they think that it is simply where and tear after 63,000 miles.

 

Tell them that if they refuse to provide you with this information then you will provide their refusal as part of your evidence bundle to the court when you start action against them.

 

You can also tell them that you will make sure that as many people as possible know about it.

 

I can tell you that Carcraft don't like this kind of publicity very much and they don't like being talked about negatively on forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Other sources of evidence might be for instance to find out what the warranty was in terms of mileage when the car was sold new. I have found one reference which I have quoted below but which refers to a new model which talked about 100,000 mile warranty.

 

You need to make enquiries. Post on the Vauxhall forums and also talk to some Vauxhall dealers.

 

Review

It has always had an "involuntary acceleration" problem which after 5 years the dealer has now acknowledged but do not know if they can cure. This has resulted in very poor fuel consumption. No major problems which you would expect as they now give 100,000 miles warranty.

 

 

http://www.carbuyer.co.uk/reviews/vauxhall/meriva/mini-mpv/owner-reviews

 

 

Also another source of pretty persuasive evidence to put before a judge would be to find advertisements for Meriva cars either the same age as yours or older than yours and with similar mileages or greater. If you can show a judge loads of cars being advertised with mileages between 60,000 and 70,000 – and upwards, this will also be very good evidence that a car which fails at 63,000 miles is not suffering from wear and tear. I have provided one link below but you will find lots of others quite easily

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/used-cars/vauxhall/meriva

 

I'm sure you get the picture now build up a very seriously large file of evidence supporting your position that the dealer has supplied you with a defective car and that Carcraft are simply trying to buck their responsibilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

Yup - I'm using outdated terminology, sorry. I meant that goods must be of satisfactory quality as per the 1994 regs kindly linked by DX

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup - I'm using outdated terminology, sorry. I meant that goods must be of satisfactory quality as per the 1994 regs kindly linked by DX

 

Thanks so much - can't thank you enough . Carcraft have not shown any empathy or interest , just told me to write in !! I am a single parent of twin babies and currently only working part time due to nursery fees so yes - cash is short !

Thanks again for ALL the advice you have given me and all your time

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that Linzi the Rep will have something to say about this

 

 

might be Monday now sadly mind

 

 

regards

 

 

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

Vauxhall Meriva 1.6 16V Enjoy 5dr

2004 (04 reg) MPV

Silver, Driver And Passenger Airbags, Full Size Spare Wheel, Green Tinted Glass, High Level Brake Light, Immobiliser, Remote Central Locking, Electronic Brake Force Distribution, Roof …

93,270 miles

Manual

1.6L

Petrol

£995

Used Vauxhall Meriva 1.6 16V Life

Vauxhall Meriva 1.6 16V Life 5dr

2006 (06 reg) MPV

Silver, Colour Coded Bumpers, Colour Coded Mirrors, Rear Wash Wipe, Tinted Glass, Air Conditioning, Immobiliser, Central Locking - Remote, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag, Full …

87,233 miles

Manual

1.6L

Petrol

£2,295

Used Vauxhall Meriva 1.6 16V Design

Vauxhall Meriva 1.6 16V Design 5dr [AC]

2005 (05 reg) MPV

SILVER, Grey Cloth interior, Electric tilt/slide glass sunroof + tilt glass rear sunroof, Air conditioning, Cruise control, Steering wheel mounted audio controls, Style Pack - Meriva, …

64,000 miles

Manual

1.6L

Petrol

£2,500

 

Vauxhall Meriva 1.7 CDTi 16V Design 5dr

2006 (06 reg) MPV

FULL SERVICE HISTORY, 4 BRAND NEW TYRES, BRAND NEW BATTERY, 1 YEAR MOT, 4 MONTHS ROAD TAX. EXCELLENT CONDITION !!!, GREY, Electric sunroof, Electric windows, Air conditioning, MP3 …

But I would certainly be interested to know from Linzi what it is about Shazco's Meriva which makes it so different that it has failed through wear and tear at 63,000 miles when all of these other cars are still going strong – even at 112,000 miles in one case, and are being sold for quite reasonable prices on the Internet. And am quite sure that a cursory look around the Internet would find lots more examples.

 

I be quite interested also to note from Linzi why Carcraft are refusing to tell Shazco the reason why and why she must apply in writing to this basic information.

 

If there is anything which sounds like a company trying to shirk its responsibilities – then this is it. I suggest that Linzi doesn't bother to say much on this forum until she comes back with the answers.

 

In the meantime Shazco should keep on compiling the evidence and we will help her prepare the court papers. I think Carcraft will be easy meat on this one. I think that we will make sure that we also circulate it in our newsletter which goes out monthly to over a quarter of 1 million people.

 

I also think that a complaint should be made to Trading Standards

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been calling them carcrafty since I went there to buy a car, they valued my part exchange £2400 and wrote it all on a piece of a4 paper.

Next day I went there to seal the deal and after I was given paperwork to sign in a rush, I decided to read through this contract.

They were giving me £1400 for my part exchange!

I questioned this and was rudely told that my car was a scrap and should be glad to get £1400.

Called my wife at home to drop the piece of paper and an hour later here I am, holding the initial quote with my part exchange listed at £2400.

The manager simply ripped it and said if I was buying the car or wasting their time.

Thanks god I walked away!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really appreciate the amount of help .

I am really badly stressed about this and I have post natal depression. I just want them to be fair - they took my money and they took another £1000 and now when I go into there they are not interested seemingly once they have your money they don't do any after sales it all just impersonal over the phone and by letter- thus making it easier for them to fob you off. Meanwhile this is making me ill.

Edited by Shazco216
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are entitled to see and take possession of the parts they claim are worn, they belong to you. You 'must' ask them for the parts or if parts have not been removed, to be shown the wear and tear and take as many photos as you can of the worn part/s from as many angles as possible.

 

 

Have you actually been told what the problem is? because 'wear and tear' is not good enough.

 

 

How many years guarantee did you take out?

 

 

Have you had it serviced since you have owned it ??

Link to post
Share on other sites

I paid £1000 for a three year warranty,

they say that the person they had inspect it sent them a report stating wear and tear.

Some thing to do with 3 rd and 4 th teeth and bearings moving around .

 

Today at carcraft when I asked for a breakdown of the £480 they have said is to be paid to collect it

( with the engine unsecured, gearbox in bits and suspension disconnected)

my MP has asked for this information .

 

They eventually told me it included the inspection that THEY organised and THEY requested and arranged

( I don't even know who did this) so they are expecting me to pay for this!!!!

When this was for their warranty company

 

First I heard about them expecting me to pay for this!!!!

And only know because I questioned this bill!

 

 

They told me that i will have to ask my MP to write in himself for my purchase and warranty documents ?????

Because of data protection???

This is MY information and I am asking for it ????

But telling me they won't give it to me but they will give it to my MP if he writes in???? ( data protection - they ve got that one wrong haven't they!)

 

The mind boggles ant what they will try next!!

 

I will be passing this info in to my MP on Monday

 

By all accounts they weren't in the slightest bit interested or bothered that my MP is getting involved ,

nor where they bothered that I am contacting the Liverpool echo and the Manchester evening news!

Regarding both cars that have broke down within 14 months

( first one being the one that left me and my babies then premature 6 months 4 months adjusted stranded in the middle lane of the a580.

After driving it out the showroom again- not in the slightest but interested ..

 

 

. Telling me they can't help me I need to ring customer services!!

 

 

Appalling behaviour by anyone's standards!!

Edited by Shazco216
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask for a full report on paper of what the problem is, something with 3rd and 4th isn't any good, you need to know the exact problem.

 

 

What part is worn and why is it worn? Information that must be included in the report.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As advised earlier, don't ring them if you can't record the call.

 

 

'Have you had it serviced since you have owned it ???'

 

I am grateful for all advice and will be taking it all onboard Thankyou

Edited by Shazco216
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...