Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Tangliss, if you can't upload the letter, could you tell us what the heading is please? My understanding is it should say 'Letter before claim' or similar. HB
    • Do you think I should send the CCA request now then instead of waiting? I really can do without the stress. Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you for responding.
    • How was the "receiver" appointed and what is their role? Appointed by the lender under the terms of their security on the loan (sometimes referred to as "LPA Receiver")? Or are they acting for you in insolveny? What's the current role of the agent?
    • Wait for more replies, but that letter to me can be interpreted as a letter before action. Ignoring it can have consequences. The court to impose sanctions for failure in responding to a letter of claim.
    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Ford Evans Halshaw dealership refusing to cover vehicle with warranty **WON 100% covered**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2640 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

Incidentally, if they suddenly come up with an offer then I think that you should insist that they put anything in writing and that you will need time to consider it.

 

I suggest that you then come to us and we can have a look and see whether you think that it properly protects you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeah, that makes sense. If they got Ford to offer anything of like 70%+ contribution, I'd be in a situation of serious consideration - as you mentioned earlier in the thread, I have used a proportion of the engine's lifespan already.

 

Feeling semi hopeful - but not expecting too much at the minute. Just want this nightmare to be over with really, not being able to drive is quite a downer, specially this time of year.

 

My understanding of MCOL online, is that I can set up the claim fully, up to the point of actually sending it, and it is saved in the system for me to come back to - I will likely do this at the weekend so it is ready to fire come 28th. I'll be away from home at the time, until the first week of the new year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment, I wouldn't settle for 70%. I would go for the lot. They cause you too much trouble and too much hassle. If they offer you 70% then they will go the whole hog.

 

Of course, keep a full tab of all your losses and extra expenses and also we better factor in something for the inconvenience. You may well decide that getting 100% of the claim will be sufficient for this.

 

Yes, that's the way that MoneyClaim online works. Get it ready, refine it, save it down and then click it off when your deadline expires.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may as well try. It won't hurt.

 

However, you need to justify in detail. Judges don't want to get involved with anything that amounts to a land grab.

 

Need to keep the claim very modest and fully justified by detail. Judges don't like simply "inconvenience". Judges are far more interested in the fact that your normal 10 minute school run has taken two hours every day. That's the kind of thing that a judge might look upon favourably. You don't ask, you don't get. Also, if you bulk up the claim a little bit then it gives you a bit of space to back down and negotiate without finding yourself out of pocket later on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been speaking with my work shop team regarding the engine issues you have had and I understand that you were speaking with Stef my aftersales leader prior to speak with myself.

 

For some reason there is no open session on ETIS for your vehicle which is the 1st step prior to speaking with Fords prior approval department, also they seem to have carried out a lot of work before carrying out these actions and then telling you Ford would not cover this under warranty.

 

What I suggest is that you go back to Marshalls and ask them to contact Ford as to why this is not covered, I would also contact Ford customer services and ask them to speak with Marshalls direct.

 

We will help out where we can but without the vehicle being on site and an session being opened on ETIS, there is not much more we can do from here.

 

If you need us to supply any evidence regarding service history and work that was done, please feel free to contact myself or Stef.

 

Regards

 

This is the response I just received by email - I have forwarded it on with comments about my conversation with Evans Halshaw, to my contact at Marshall Ford anyway, to find out their comments and to inform them.

Do you suggest responding to Evans Halshaw making it clear it is them I am holding responsible?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the first few lines at all – board I do see is that there still trying to pass the buck.

 

I would simply say a brief message that their response is not satisfactory to you. They are the supplier. They are bound by the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and that you are proposing to send them a 14 day letter before action on Friday – after that you will issue the claim.

 

You are not interested in buckpassing (I suggest you use those very words). You are not interested in any further delays. It has gone on too long and you too inconvenienced.

 

Please don't bother to make any further contact unless you have a proper and unconditional written proposal to make.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, I would say to them now that in view of their intransigence, they should consider this letter as your letter before action and that you will be issuing proceedings at the expiry of 14 days and without any further notice.

 

That gets the whole thing en route and avoids any further steps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is what it looks like to me - I don't know the actual process details behind the scenes with ETIS, all I know is that it's Ford's online technical info centre, I don't know if repair garages have to use it, even if Marshall have made a mistake there, that doesn't make Evans Halshaw innocent under my potential claim.

 

With regards to LBA, that's already what I've sent and they are responding to now, with 14 days notice, mentioning specifically 28th December as the date I will send out court action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I'd forgotten that you'd already sent the LBA.

 

In that case I would simply send them a short note:

 

Dear XXX,

 

Thank you for your message of XXX date.

 

Response is not satisfactory and the clock is still ticking.

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

"If you need us to supply any evidence regarding service history and work that was done, please feel free to contact myself or Stef."

 

I will make a response along those lines, but should I request those documents at this time - given that they are offering?

 

Also, I am going to get in contact with Barclays to update them on the situation, and find out if they've gotten anywhere for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest that you tell them that any service history should have been supplied with the vehicle at the time – and it wasn't. If they wish to send it to you now then fair enough but if not they will be required to disclose it as part of the pre-trial disclosure process.

 

By all means update Barclays – but don't hold your breath for any response. They just want it to go away and they don't care about you – or about anyone else except their own executives and their own shareholders

Link to post
Share on other sites

I responded

 

Dear Darren,

 

Irrespective of the warranty, you, Evans Halshaw are the supplier, and are bound by the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I am not interested in buckpassing, or any further delays.

 

This response is not satisfactory, and the clock is still ticking following my letter before court action.

 

I would appreciate the full detailed service history and any and all work done on the vehicle being sent over, preferably, it can be sent over via email, or posted to my address:

 

...

 

Yours sincerely,

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have quickly received the response

 

"Please confirm what it is you are expecting from us, you have had a vehicle for 6 months and done above average miles in that period, so the vehicles was sold to you in good conditional and very much fit for purpose, therefore this is not an issue of consumer rights.

 

We are actually trying to help you not pass the buck but your issue is with what is covered by warranty and not if the vehicle was fit for sale, as the belt that went was not due for replacement and there is no way we could have predicted this failure.

 

I will therefore pass your emails on to our legal team and inform them to expect your legal action, they can then correspond with yourself direct any legal representation you wish to use, you will therefore need to speak with Marshall’s and Ford UK about having your vehicle repaired with them.

 

I will send copies of the services carried out as a spate email but as I stated before, the belt was not due to be changed so therefore will not be on any invoices.

 

Regards

 

Darren"

 

I'm not sure what I feel in receiving that. Makes me feel a little more uneasy in being confident that I'd win in court - what do you suggest I respond to this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Well done, there is a very good result indeed.

 

Did you actually issue proceedings? Or what happened? Was there any further correspondence or to-ing and fro-ing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...