Jump to content



Stockport Truck Centre - work done without permission & excessive charges


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1235 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Well if Ian is the owner and if Ian is the person you made the original agreement with then from now on, all communications should be directly with Ian. I wouldn't even bother to copy Dave in.

 

From the sounds of it, you have enough money to start the action and to see it through to the end. I don't see any other way out of this, I'm afraid.

 

If he ignores the letter from your ex which you say that you're going to send on Wednesday – I would only give him until Monday to reply then when you threaten the legal action, I would suggest to him in the same letter that it we better to pay the court fees to him as part of a reasonable settlement for the return of the truck than to spend them on a court action – but you are prepared to do that if he won't be reasonable.

 

Tell him that you fully expect that a court will impose a compromise but that he will also be responsible for your costs and that if he is in any doubt he should seek the advice of a solicitor urgently.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I've had a look at the website of Stockport Truck Centre http://www.stc-uk.com/contact.html and it seems to me that it is quite a large operation with several depots and with head office.

 

Which depot are you talking about?

 

Have you tried talking to their head office?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is a large company. It is the Hyde branch.

 

I've not tried talking to the head office.

Should I try and contact the head office as well or just concentrate on the garage I took the truck to for now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you based in Hyde?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it will be a very good idea to try and reach out to the head office. They probably have no idea what is going on and they may be much more businesslike about the whole thing.

 

I would write them a very nice and friendly email. I would get your ex to write it from her email address.

 

I would ask them very politely if they might feel that it is appropriate to have a look at what is happening and to intervene. Describe very gently – without trying to allocate any blame to anyone – exactly what has happened and emphasise that you thought you had very good relations the Hyde branch and you don't really understand why things have managed to deteriorate in this way stop

 

She should go on to say that in particular she is surprised that they would not allow her to have any sight of the vehicle or to inspect it in any way.

 

Tell them that you are turning to them because you have no idea what to do. You have been trying to write to Ian at the Hyde branch but you are now not getting any replies and they seem to be ignoring you.

 

I would address the email to Gareth Hardy who is the group managing director and copy it to Emma Porter and also to Rhys Dowling. Their email addresses are on this page here http://www.stc-uk.com/contact.html

 

As I say, keep it very polite. Don't suggest any other action or make any threats. Don't put them into any kind of position where if they help you that they end up losing face. It will be difficult enough for them to override what Ian has said because that will essentially make him lose face. Try to find solutions everywhere which allow them to keep their dignity and to save face.

 

If you draw a blank there, then you won't have lost anything except a couple of days delay and you will have to go back to the kinds of action which we have been discussing in this thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really appreciate all your help. I'll compose a letter based around what you've said, and come back to you to check it before I send it. I have to get her to familiarise herself with it so she knows how were progressing. I'll get back to you tomorrow once i've had a chance to see and explain the step to her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the message, she should emphasise that she is finding yourself in the middle of this dispute because the vehicle is hers and it has simply been lent to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hesitate to ask but are you able to give me a template. I tend to go off on tangents, missing and forgetting information or saying too much or concentrating on things that may not matter. I'm hopeless at this kind of thing. You've been a godsend and I just want to make sure I'm doing things exactly right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, there are no templates.

 

Just get it all down in the way that I've described – make sure it's from the heart and that you are simply trying to resolve a problem rather than score points over them.

 

Post it here and we'll see how it looks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BankFodder, so far i've not received any contact from anyone at STC. I've compiled the email to send to the head office as suggested. Please see if it's in context and correct before she send sends it. Just make any corrections where you feel necessary. Here it is:

 

Dear Gareth Hardy,

I would be grateful if you could consider an issue I'm having with the Hyde branch of your company Stockport Truck Centre.

I hope you feel that it is appropriate to have a look at what is happening and to intervene.

My truck (Reg.No. N*******) was submitted by the user driver XXXXl to the Hyde Depot for an MOT. It subsequently failed on a couple of minor issues and a major one being the rear service brake having little or no effort which in turn attracted an immediate PG9 being issued. XXXXX was then directed to Ian Shepard when he asked for a recovery agent to have the vehicle recovered back to the garage where all the preliminary jobs had been done. It was at this time Mr Shepard offered the option to have the problem investigated by his service manager Dave Butterworth who was not present at the time but would be briefed on the following Monday. Mr Shepard gave the guarantee no work will be carried out until the fault was correctly diagnosed and a cost to repair known, then he would notify XXXXX who would then have the option of having the job completed by Ian or recovering the vehicle back to his base where he would complete the repairs himself. This would be a no cost option.

XXXXX then called and managed to speak to Dave on the Tuesday to check on the progress of the fault finding. Dave informed XXXXXl he was cleaning parts and trying different things to locate the problem but to leave it with him. Eventually Dave called saying the truck was ready, all work had been completed and the truck retested much to XXXXX's surprise. He then gave a figure payable as £2395.05. XXXXX made it clear that not only was the job not authorised, but that the figure was wholly excessive.

On two occasions XXXXX went to the Depot to explain the situation and had offered to pay what he deemed fair and more than reasonable (an amount of £637.00) considering he had not even authorised the work in the first place and a final bill was not expected, rather an estimate or quote. This was refused and he has offered on more than a few occasions to negotiate a reduced settlement but unfortunately he has not been able to get a response from Ian Sheppard nor David Butterworth.

I thought they had good relations at the Hyde branch and I don't really understand why things have managed to deteriorate in this way.

XXXXXl had also been to the Depot and spoke with David & was surprised that they would not allow him to have any sight of the vehicle or to inspect it in any way when he requested.

 

I am turning to you because I have no idea what to do and I hope you can help to resolve the situation.

Yours sincerely.

Edited by bossogasa
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that it is a very nice letter. Very nicely put and very well judged. Nobody could possibly take any offence at it.

 

Dear Gareth Hardy,

I would be grateful if you could consider an issue I'm having with the Hyde branch of your company Stockport Truck Centre.

I hope you feel that it is appropriate to have a look at what is happening and to intervene.

My truck (Reg.No. N*******), owned by me but lent out to XXXX was submitted by the user driver XXXXl to the Hyde Depot for an MOT. It subsequently failed on a couple of minor issues and a major one being the rear service brake having little or no effort which in turn attracted an immediate PG9 being issued. XXXXX was then directed to Ian Shepard when he asked for a recovery agent to have the vehicle recovered back to the garage where all the preliminary jobs had been done. It was at this time Mr Shepard offered the option to have the problem investigated by his service manager Dave Butterworth who was not present at the time but would be briefed on the following Monday. Mr Shepard gave the guarantee no work will be carried out until the fault was correctly diagnosed and a cost to repair known, then he would notify XXXXX who would then have the option of having the job completed by Ian or recovering the vehicle back to his base where he would complete the repairs himself. This would be a no cost option. This agreement was the result of a conversation which XXXXX had with Ian and which was also held in the presence of ZZZZZZ (your colleque) who had come along with XXX to collect truck.

XXXXX then called and managed to speak to Dave on the Tuesday to check on the progress of the fault finding. Dave informed XXXXXl he was cleaning parts and trying different things to locate the problem but to leave it with him. Eventually Dave called saying the truck was ready, all work had been completed and the truck retested much to XXXXX's surprise. He then gave a figure payable as £2395.05. XXXXX made it clear that not only was the job not authorised, but that the figure was wholly excessive.

On two occasions XXXXX went to the Depot to explain the situation and had offered to pay what he deemed fair and more than reasonable (an amount of £637.00) considering he had not even authorised the work in the first place and a final bill was not expected, rather an estimate or quote. This was refused and he has offered on more than a few occasions to negotiate a reduced settlement but unfortunately he has not been able to get a response from Ian Sheppard nor David Butterworth.

I thought they had good relations at the Hyde branch and I don't really understand why things have managed to deteriorate in this way.

XXXXXl had also been to the Depot and spoke with David & was surprised that they would not allow him to have any sight of the vehicle or to inspect it in any way when he requested.

 

I am turning to you because I have no idea what to do and I hope you can help to resolve the situation.

Yours sincerely.

 

I've suggested a couple of small amendments – in red – just to be clear on a couple of points

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BankFodder, I've amended the email as advised and forwarded to her to send to the 3 persons you recommended. I will post any and all replies as soon as received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say give it until next Monday or Tuesday. If there is a reply which is unsatisfactory – or if there is no reply then you better revert to plan A. You better spend the time working out what that plan is

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will do just that. I'm willing to go to court over it if we can't come to a mutually acceptable compromise. I would think I could try the route of trying to reclaim the truck via my ex if that's a feasibly strong option while I still try negotiating with them? If that doesn't work then I believe the only option I would then have is to issue court proceedings via the small claims court? Is that current with your advise or am I mixing things up?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I think that is broadly right. I wouldn't spend too long negotiating if I were you. You have made a very decent approach to Ian and now you are following it up with a very decent approach to their head office. I think you now have to wait and see whether they are prepared to be businesslike and customer facing or whether they want to get silly about it.

 

Having a pickup truck hanging around their premises which is not actually earning any money is not very useful. I'm still pretty amazed that they won't grant you access to inspect it and I have to say that sets off alarm bells in my mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alarm bells are ringing all over my head as they won't even respond when i'm offering to negotiate through all this for something I didn't even give the go ahead for. I hope head office at least reply and maybe even open the door to resolving it. I'll be back hastily should I get a reply.

You have been a great help and I don't know what i'd be doing without your guidance. Much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received a reply from Gareth Hardy saying:

 

Thank you for contacting me, I was actually already made aware of this issue by Mr Shepherd.

I will look into the matter and revert once I have done this. I am currently on a training course until Friday, so will endeavour to look at this on Friday, so it maybe early next week before I can respond.

 

Regard

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay. It's a nice enough reply – and at least it's not negative.

 

At least it sounds as if somebody might take a second view of it.

 

He says that it will be early next week – so I should leave it until next Friday. Let us know what happens after then.

 

Keep on planning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just send him a brief reply:-

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BankFodder, an email was received by my ex today from Ian Shepard and it reads:

Dear XXX, can you tell me when you are available next week for a meeting so we can try to resolve the problem.

Ian

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay – well that might be positive. I suggest that you and your ex: together – although she should do most of the talking. You need to keep it very polite and very friendly – even if it doesn't go your way. If anybody gets inflamed, it will just go to worms and you will end up in litigation.

 

I suggest that you take along any paperwork you have including the statement from your colleague who witnessed the conversation. Make sure that it's a copy and give it to Ian and say that it is for him to see because it really does represent what was said and what was agreed at your initial meeting.

 

I should also take a list of the works that have been done and what your view of a reasonable cost for them is – and I think that you should emphasise that even though they have gone ahead and done work without authority, you're not looking to get it for free – that you only want to pay a reasonable price bearing in mind that you are a mechanic and you could have done it all yourself and that this was your intention.

 

I think you also need to emphasise that you don't understand why you haven't been allowed to see the vehicle and that you are worried about its condition and if they would assure you that it is still in good condition then you would appreciate seeing it immediately and take photographs of it. If they say something to you like – why would you need to take photographs what you think might have happened? Then I think you need to answer simply that you are completely mystified at their unwillingness to let you see the vehicle and so like any ordinary reasonable person, you find yourself drawing the worst conclusions. Emphasise to them that it can't possibly hurt them if you see the vehicle if there is nothing wrong with it and that this would help to build trust between you.

 

Once again, it should be your ex-wife saying all this and she should dominate the conversation because it is her vehicle and she wants it back. You are really there simply as a witness to the original transaction and also to give her a moral support by being there – but by and large you should keep your mouth shut.

 

We don't want any testosterone wars. If you are in the meeting and you are sitting around the desk then I would suggest that you let your ex take the more dominant seat and that you should sit slightly rearwards of her so that it is clear that she is occupying the main ground and that you are simply there in support.

 

If he starts looking at you while he's talking instead of your wife then if I were you I would start looking away and looking down at your lap so that he is obliged to make eye contact with your wife and so that eventually the conversation is definitely held between them. It may be that because you are the male and also because he knows you, he will start talking to you and addressing you and having eye contact with you. This is not what you want. You should really only get involved in the conversation if your wife turns to you and say is that right or isn't that right? You should reply using as few words and astute syllables as possible.

 

Remember all the time that your role is simply to be supportive – even if you don't agree with what is being said. Your wife should be confident enough that if Ian says oh but your husband said blah blah blah, instead of turning round to you and saying – is this true?, She should be able to say "no that is not at all what happened" – this is what happened. This is what was agreed and "I was very surprised to hear that work had been carried out without my authority – because I would have had to have been asked first before I approved any work and any price".

 

You need to stick to your guns but keep it very friendly – and as I have said, you should sit in a subservient rearwards position and keep your eyes on your lap – but don't make eye contact with Ian. It's not your vehicle and it's not your conversation.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...