Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So after much to-ing and fro-ing, I received notification from the court a couple of days ago that my case will now be heard on May 2022, which suits me fine😊. Any delay or wasting of time endured by Highview Parking is music to my ears, as it hopefully will get them to ponder and reflect whether it is worth their while having to wait an entire year for adjudication over some stupid and paltry PCN. Having said that, I look forward to the hearing as I'm 200% confident of my defence and for which I owe a great deal of gratitude to everyone who chipped in here with those awesome tips and advice. The battle isn't won yet, but the 1 year delay is itself a little moral victory for me. Thanks peeps 🙏🙏
    • Apart from the fact that it was getting too long, I don't think it is necessary to give them any further explanation. I've added a single line which refers to the increasing of your monthly payments by the adding of alleged arrears to the mortgage – and that this is in direct defiance of the ombudsman's direction. If I were you I would leave it there. Also, I think that you should keep it broadly in the same order as I suggested with the fact that their clients have only just woken up – as being the first line that they see and hopefully they will understand that they are dealing with somebody with a very bolshie attitude about this – which is what I think you need to project. Let me know if you really want to change anything else – but frankly I think that you need to keep at this point it is possible. You don't need to give them any further explanation of the ombudsman's direction. I think you've supplied them with a copy of the order already haven't you? If not – then attach the order
    • this is my draft   In reply to your email on Friday the 18th of June.                Firstly today I have received a letter from Barclays informing me that my monthly mortgage payments have gone up by £143 per month that when you calculate over the remaining term of the mortgage it equates to approximately 24k which is very near to the figure which was assumed by the bank to be my arrears. There was no explanation or calculation attached which I find hard to believe. So after contacting the bank and asking the adviser he confirmed that the bank had added on the amount to cover the arrears ( that don’t exist) so in reality I am going to pay the arrears twice. This below is what the ombudsman told your clients to do but unfortunately they obviously cannot read  I quote From the ombudsman to Barclays   My final decision is that Barclays Bank UK Plc should: · Restructure Mr A’s mortgage as if any arrears balance was added to the main balance of the mortgage and the arrears extinguished upon the inception of the mortgage set out in the mortgage offer dated 29 June 2019. · Amend Mr A’s credit file and any internal records in line with the above – so that any arrears were cleared upon inception of the new mortgage   I have asked the bank on numerous occasions for statements in relation to the so called arrears and  my overpayments  Which add up to a few thousand pounds so I can calculate what is also owed to me. They are refusing to give the statements to me stating that because I have missed payments they do not have to supply them , I don’t believe this is right and is not in line with the banking code of conduct.   The fact that your clients have only just woken up and instructed you is no concern of mine. It is simply a further demonstration of their poor attitude to the interests of their customers and also their disregard for decisions made by the financial ombudsman service.   You refer to a "short delay" but I notice that you are unwilling to give any kind of commitment. Your letter is littered with "as soon as possible" and "in due course". But the ombudsman's instructions are clear.  So are the courts powers under the FMSA 2000. There is nothing to consider no negotiation to be had and no compromises to be made - so why the delay?   Because you have made me feel sorry for you I'll give you an extra week. If it was simply a question of money that hadn't been paid, I would agree. There would be no question of prejudice. However, we are talking here about damage to my credit file which has gone on now for well over a year and a half. Your clients may not care about their own  reputation but I certainly care about mine.   The damage to my credit reputation is totally without justification. It is unfair treatment not to mentioninaccurate data processing. It is continuing and your clients are wilfully exacerbating the problem. It's not clear to me whether they are doing this deliberately or simply because of their ineptitude. Do you know? I'm quite happy that you share these documents with the court. Especially your admission that your clients have only just now instructed you despite the fact that this matter has been ongoing for a considerable time. Frankly I would have thought that it would be in your client's interest not to reveal how slack their attitude and procedures are – but that's a matter for you. And incidentally, there will be no question of costs if you simply don't try to put any response or defence. The ombudsman's decision is binding and there'sactually no reason for you to get involved except to hold a dialogue with your client and tell them to get a move on. If your clients instruct you to get involved, then it will be completely unnecessary. This is not a contentious matter. There will be no need for an injunction if your client simply did what they were told by the ombudsman – which they will eventually have to do anyway. I'm preparing the form N322 to apply for an ex parte injunction as we speak. Legal proceedings for statutory breaches of FCA regulations and also the Data Protection Act will follow once your clients have complied with the FCA direction – whether they do it voluntarily or they are forced to by the court. So don't come back and say you didn't know about that either.   Regards,
    • By the way, could you give us the actual email address of the motor complaints thing? You seem to have misspelt it twice so far. Can you doublecheck please
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

section 75 claim against faulty vehicle


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2194 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

Hello

I have an issue with a used car purchase I recently made.

 

 

I need some help in deciding which direction to move forward.

 

I recently purchased a used vehicle from a local dealer.

 

 

Vehicle was just over 4 1/2 years old with tick over 100k miles; it’s been maintained well with FSH. Purchase price was £11k.

 

I had the vehicle inspected at the dealers after it had a very unusual drive and it was diagnosed with a fault.

 

I raised issue with the sellers team and offered to inspect the vehicle by their mechanics and if faulty will repair, I happily accepted that.

 

Vehicle was inspected by sellers mechanic and fault relayed to the seller, but for same strange reason issue not fixed.

(i suspect the cost involved in repairing outstripped the profits)

 

 

Mechanic advised to take vehicle away and once go ahead received from seller will carry out work.

 

Unfortunately after various contact with sellers team, main decision making head is either on a call, away from desk, not in till…

.., busy with a customer or not working today and can only make that one decision.

 

I finally sent a 7 day letter under the SOGA act and demanded repairs.

 

However I purchased the vehicle with a small deposit paid by my credit card

so raised a section 75 claim for partial refund for repair costs quoted from dealer to put vehicle right.

Repairs have not been carried out yet.

 

Talking with the credit card it may take a while before it will be settled and maybe longer if forwarded to the ombudsman.

 

I am thinking of starting the small claims court procedure also.

 

Is it best to wait till the s75 finale decision is made?

 

What is generally reasonable time for s75 claim to be settled or a decision made?

 

I am just noticed another thread on this site about the same dealer,

and it seems the tacts are very similar to avoid paying costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It shouldn't go amiss that there are more complaints about and against car dealers than all other industries put together. They have no care for customers and just want a quick buck even if that means lying and conning the customer.

 

If you used your Credit card for part of the purchase, they are also jointly liable for the whole amount not just the bit paid with the card. How much did you pay using your card ?

 

I would write to the dealer using next day signed for, (a couple of quid but worth it). In it you tell him exactly what was said at purchase and tell him he has 7 days to contact you with a solution. You also say that should he fail to contact you by 7 days, then you will escalate it to a claim.

 

You can take it elsewhere for diagnosis but you will have to pay for that, (recoverable in a claim from the dealer should they not play ball), so only do that at a VAT registered garage and get a full written report. Without that it wont be worth doing.

 

Do you know what the fault is ? if not, what were the symptoms ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I paid £3k on c/card and rest by bank...

 

fault is difficult changing gears and clutch slipping,

 

 

dealer inspected it and confirmed clutch faulty and needs replacing.

 

I have written/signed for to the seller giving 7 days to repair but no reply from seller

and now escalated section 75 route for refund to cover costs of repairs.

 

what are your thoughts on starting a small court claim simultaneously or await section 75 decision?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would definitely send the dealer a Letter Before Action giving him a further 7 days or action will be taken without further notice.

 

 

If they aren't responding, especially knowing the problem is there and up to them to fix, it is because they think you won't go through with it. So many say they will go to court but get their bluff called because they don't take that route.

 

 

You can start your claim here - https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it have any bearing on the outcome that the part concerned is a wear and tear part whose life can be greatly affected by how it is used and that it could have already covered 100,000 miles?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Would it have any bearing on the outcome that the part concerned is a wear and tear part whose life can be greatly affected by how it is used and that it could have already covered 100,000 miles?

 

 

Yes it would actually and it would be easy for the dealer to put up a fairly robust defence on that basis however as usual details are sketchy. If it was top book then yes go for it but if the price paid was substantially below that then I'm not so sure it would be clear cut. At 100K miles the car is at the end of anticipated design life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes it would actually and it would be easy for the dealer to put up a fairly robust defence on that basis however as usual details are sketchy. If it was top book then yes go for it but if the price paid was substantially below that then I'm not so sure it would be clear cut. At 100K miles the car is at the end of anticipated design life.

 

So it's not clear cut then. There could be a case of the dealer asking for a contribution to the repairs as there would be an element of betterment by replacing a wear and tear part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes it would actually and it would be easy for the dealer to put up a fairly robust defence on that basis however as usual details are sketchy. If it was top book then yes go for it but if the price paid was substantially below that then I'm not so sure it would be clear cut. At 100K miles the car is at the end of anticipated design life.

 

 

Seller was aware of the problem and agreed to repair it. Wear and tear means nothing when the fault is notified at the time of purchase. It's probably a duel mass so more costly than just a clutch so they are trying to ignore you hoping you will go away.

 

 

You should take it elsewhere for a proper diagnosis so you know exactly how much it will cost to repair. You then have the choice of telling the seller he has 7 days to repair or you go to court or he has 7 days to repair or you will take it to the main dealer for repair

and make a court claim against them for the cost of the diagnosis, the repair and the court fees. It was not sold as Spares or Repairs.

 

 

Remember the car must be of 'Satisfactory Quality' and 'Fit for Purpose', with the clutch gone it is neither.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Would it have any bearing on the outcome that the part concerned is a wear and tear part whose life can be greatly affected by how it is used and that it could have already covered 100,000 miles?

I thought wear and tear can come in play if the item was fit for its purpose when purchased and fair reasonable period of use has been made taking in consideration the age and mileage, however in this instance it was reported back to the seller within 7 days , will this be a fair reasonable time of use?

if a vehicles is past it's expected reliability after 100k miles , will it be correct to assume all vehicles sold with 100k miles or above are deemed as spares or repairs?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So it's not clear cut then. There could be a case of the dealer asking for a contribution to the repairs as there would be an element of betterment by replacing a wear and tear part.

if a faulty part is being replaced by new and seller request partial contribution as its claimed betterment, i do not understand why I should contribute, it's the sellers responsibility to put the vehicle right ,warrants the repair is safe and reasonable.i

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
if a faulty part is being replaced by new and seller request partial contribution as its claimed betterment, i do not understand why I should contribute, it's the sellers responsibility to put the vehicle right ,warrants the repair is safe and reasonable.i

 

Did you make any progress with the section 75 or small claims court?

 

Currently in the process of doing a section 75 myself. These dealers think they can run a business and accept no responsibility or risk at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have started a section 75 claim with the c/c company and awaiting their decision.

I will update once hear anything back

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have started a section 75 claim with the c/c company and awaiting their decision.

I will update once hear anything back

Spoke with the case handler yesterday in c/c. Quite happy with all paperwork submitted and now ready to proceed with next stage, I believe starting the chargeback process with the seller.

Will update any further process has been made or settled.

Currently in 6 week time period from raising claim.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...