Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Used Car mis-sold? Outstanding safety recall


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2863 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, I am hoping someone can give me a bit of advice regarding a car that I purchased recently that I believe was mis-sold to me due to there being an outstanding safety recall that was not disclosed at the time of sale.

 

Here is a more complete background to my story...

 

I purchased a Vauxhall Zafira recently from a local dealer and a couple of weeks later discovered that the car had a safety recall issued on it due to a risk of fire. I was not informed of this when I purchased the car. I would not have bought the car had I known.

 

I have written to the dealer to complain and he stated that basically it is not his problem and that I should have known about it. I then wrote back to explain why I believed that the car was mis-sold and have recently had contact from his lawyer stating that the car did not have an outstanding recall (which it does) and that there are no advisories on using the car as normal. Vauxhall have advised me not to use the heater or blower motor and if it is absolutely necessary only use them on settings 0 or 4.

 

Having looked into it myself I have found guidelines from the DVSA that state that dealers should not sell cars with outstanding safety recalls on them titled "A guide to safety recalls in the used vehicle industry". Within the guidelines it states:

 

"The General Product Safety Regulations 2005 covers the areas of product liability and consumer protection in the United Kingdom."

 

"The distributor shall act with due care in order to help ensure compliance with the applicable safety requirements and in particular he…shall not expose or possess for supply or offer or agree to supply, or supply, a product to any person which he knows or should have presumed, on the basis of information in his possession and as a professional, is a dangerous product” DVSA considers that this identifies that a product with an outstanding safety recall should not be passed to a consumer. Producers and distributors are professionals in their field and should therefore be fully aware that safety recalls exist and that they can occur on any product. DVSA believes that this paragraph applies to the supply of used products in the automotive sector."

 

Having spoken to his lawyer and informing him of the outstanding safety recall he is saying that he still believes that the dealer has done nothing wrong.

 

My question to anyone more knowledgeable than me on such matters is do you believe that I have been mis-sold the vehicle and would I stand a chance by taking it to small claims. I appreciate this is a long post but any information would be greatly received and appreciated.

 

Thank You in advance

 

LBG

Edited by Lbg123
Editing due to formatting issues
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have moved your thread into the - Motoring - Motoring subforums - General Motoring Issues section Lbg.

 

You say you bought it recently, can you tell us the exact date please ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst it is true the recall is free there are other reasons for not wanting the car such as the massive depreciation in value and almost double the cost of insurance.

 

Also the thought of having my wife and 4 kids in the car knowing that these fires still occur after the recall has taken place does not fill me with confidence.

 

Like I said, I would not have purchased this car had I known of the outstanding recall

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without looking when I get home tonight I can not give an exact date but it was towards the end of April. I will look and update the post accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The recall will be free from Vauxhall

 

Just book it in, get it done, and move on with your life.

This contains some reasonably good advice but it is also unhelpfully abrupt.

 

You probably also have a basis for rejecting the car as well.

Their lawyer is wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It could have already have been inspected under the terms of a recall by Vauxhall. They issued a recall after investigations into there being the above average number of fires, the press picked up on this and it's been very widely reported.

 

They have subsequently issued another recall to inspect the already recalled vehicles again.

 

A franchised Vauxhall dealer will have knowledge of the identity of the vehicles affected, a non franchise car dealer won't know until the letter from Vauxhall lands on his door step.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst it is true the recall is free there are other reasons for not wanting the car such as the massive depreciation in value and almost double the cost of insurance.

 

Also the thought of having my wife and 4 kids in the car knowing that these fires still occur after the recall has taken place does not fill me with confidence.

 

Like I said, I would not have purchased this car had I known of the outstanding recall

 

Massive depreciation is part of motoring, and something to be considered before not after purchase. You can't reject it because it's going to go down in value

 

Likewise with insurance, you check that before buying not after.

 

It is extremely unlikely (or about the same as any other car) to catch fire once the recall work is done.

 

I sense a bit of buyers remorse here: this matter has been very very widely publicised i find it hard to believe you were unaware that Zafiras had this outstanding problem.

 

Like i said, the recall is free, it is no more likely to catch fire than any other car, get the recall done, move on

Link to post
Share on other sites

Massive depreciation is part of motoring, and something to be considered before not after purchase. You can't reject it because it's going to go down in value

 

Likewise with insurance, you check that before buying not after.

 

It is extremely unlikely (or about the same as any other car) to catch fire once the recall work is done.

 

I sense a bit of buyers remorse here: this matter has been very very widely publicised i find it hard to believe you were unaware that Zafiras had this outstanding problem.

 

Like i said, the recall is free, it is no more likely to catch fire than any other car, get the recall done, move on

 

I have to agree with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see what the OP is saying but we need to clarify a couple of things.

 

 

If the car was bought from a non affiliated Vauxhall dealer then the OP has nowhere to go as the dealer would not have access to whether or not the car was affected or not.

 

 

If the car was bought from a recognised Vauxhall affiliated dealer then there would be grounds to complain however the OP would have to prove that the dealer had not carried out the recall already. It can take a few months to show on database records.

 

 

As per previous advice, take it to a Vauxhall dealer who will confirm if it's needed or not, if not then get on with your life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

It isn't about the value of the car it is about how much I value the safety of my family!

 

You can find it hard to believe if you wish but it was not until after buying the car that i found this out.

 

You seem to know a lot about the likelihood of this car catching fire, do you care to share the source of this information.

 

The reason I am not happy is that I believe the car was misold to me. I now have a car that is not used because i care about the safety of my family. If you have looked into this you will see that Zafiras are still going up in flames even after the recall has been carried out.

 

Why do people think that car traders are above the law when it comes to selling unsafe products.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any update for us Lbg123 ??

 

Yes,

 

I have taken legal advice on the matter and as far as I can see the car has been misold to me.

 

Also under the General Product Safety Regulations 2005 they had no right to sell me the car. The DVSA has issued a guide covering this. I can't post links but if you google "A guide to safety recalls in the used vehicle industry" you will find the guide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to know a lot about the likelihood of this car catching fire, do you care to share the source of this information.

 

I can answer that one. It's been extensively covered over and over again on every news broadcast for at least a year and on Watchdog.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I now have a car that is not used because i care about the safety of my family.

You can still drive it without fear of catching fire with the heater blower set to 0 or 4 as advised by vauxhall. The fire issue is with a dodgy batch of blower resistor packs which overheat and can cause a fire. With blower off (0) there's no power going through the resistor pack and with blower set to max (4) full blower power bypasses the resistor pack. The resistor pack is only used on the settings between off & max as it reduces the current flow to slow down the speed of the heater blower motor. Most resistor packs contain some kind of safety thermal fuse that blows when it exceeds a certain temp but for whatever reason the ones fitted to some of these motors are overheating and causing fire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,

 

I have taken legal advice on the matter and as far as I can see the car has been misold to me.

 

Also under the General Product Safety Regulations 2005 they had no right to sell me the car. The DVSA has issued a guide covering this. I can't post links but if you google "A guide to safety recalls in the used vehicle industry" you will find the guide.

 

Looking at the legislation that you have referenced to and the definitions that in the further legislation that is referenced:

 

“distributor” means a professional in

the supply chain whose activity does not affect the safety

properties of a product;

 

“producer” means—

(a) the manufacturer of a product, when he is estab

lished in a Member State and any other

person presenting himself as the manufacturer by

affixing to the product his name, trade

mark or other distinctive mark, or the person who reconditions the product;

 

I think that your basis for proposed legal action against the car dealer is flawed. The car dealer is not the producer of the car - it is Vauxhall and he is not the distributor of the car, that will be an approved Vauxhall dealer.

 

Why not just get the car booked in for the work and get it sorted out at no cost to you, other than a bit of time and fuel?

Link to post
Share on other sites

lbg, get a life and move on. You have no recourse against anyone apart from yourself for over reacting. The instances are very rare.

 

 

As others have posted, go to a Vauxhall dealer and get it checked for outstanding recalls (government) and campaigns (manufacturer driven) to see what is outstanding.

 

 

I doubt you'll get much help here unless you help yourself and the first step is to get it checked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's more to this than meets the eye, buyer remorse me thinks. When I read "safety of my family" and not taking heed of the good advice given here I read bollocks. Quite pathetic really for someone trying to reject a car because they don't like it!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's more to this than meets the eye, buyer remorse me thinks. When I read "safety of my family" and not taking heed of the good advice given here I read bollocks. Quite pathetic really for someone trying to reject a car because they don't like it!!!

 

Yes. THIS ^^^^

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...