Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

Buel10

Bought new car:Sluggish so want refund?

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 836 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

Hi all.

A friend of mine bought a second hand car from a car dealer last Friday (4th) after taking it for a test drive. Unfortunately, the more he has driven it, the more he realises that the performance is not what he thought it would be.

 

Can he take the car back and get his money back?

 

Thank you, all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all.

A friend of mine bought a second hand car from a car dealer last Friday (4th) after taking it for a test drive. Unfortunately, the more he has driven it, the more he realises that the performance is not what he thought it would be.

 

Can he take the car back and get his money back?

 

Thank you, all.

 

Not at the moment. If there is a fault with the car, he needs to give the garage a chance to have a look at it and fix. There might be a number of reasons for performance issues.

 

In some cars, if the fuel level is below a certain level, the engine management system reduces performance to extend range left. So it might not be a fault. Or the car is just not living up to expectations and there is nothing wrong with it.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

Regarding giving the garage chance to have a look and fix it, I've just read this, is this correct:

 

The Consumer Rights Act 2015, which replaces the Sale of Goods Act next month, allows consumers to ask for a full refund in the first 30 days of buying any product that subsequently turns out to be faulty - including cars.

 

This legislation, known as the 'early right to reject', replaces the previous requirement for retailers to only repair or replace a faulty item or part, rather than the entire product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the definition of 'faulty' is the key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the performance of the car is especially poor when carrying 3 passengers but was told that it would be fine, does this count as mis-selling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

I think your friend has just decided they don't like the car.

 

If they want to prove a fault, take it to a garage where performance can be checked. Does not cost too much.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting stuff off the Which site:

If something you buy is not as described, or the seller is guilty of misrepresentation, you're entitled to:

 

give the second-hand car back and get your money back

ask for compensation if you want to keep the car (usually the cost of any repairs it needs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After a chat to my friend today, he tells me that the performance with four people in the car is awful when he was told that this would be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After a chat to my friend today, he tells me that the performance with four people in the car is awful when he was told that this would be fine.

 

Define "fine"?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

make and model, year and mileage of the car?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peugeot 2008 (that's the model, not the year) Allure, year: 2015.

I'll find out the mileage....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also find out the engine type. They run from a 1.2 l 3 cylinder petrol which could struggle with 4 reasonably sized passengers, to a grunty diesel that should perform well.


My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the 1.6 HDI and has done 20,000 miles. Unsure of which variant though - it seems that there's three different variations, each with a different hp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the same make and model from Dec 2015 with 14k miles on the clock. If it is from 2015, it is still under the manufacturers warranty of 3yrs-unlimited mileage. Qne thing to note; if it is the diesel version, make sure that there is sufficient AdBlue (fuel additive - google Adblue). This needs to be topped up from time to time and the refill tank is in the boot under the spare wheel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for this.

My friend has met resistance from the garage - does anyone know the contact details of Peugeot's Press office?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why Peugeot would be interested. Someone bought a car, they decided they did not like after driving it for awhile.

 

If the performance of the car is within the general range Peugeot state in their details for the car and there are no faults, then there is no reason for a Peugeot dealer to offer refund or exchange.

 

The advice is to get the car checked for any faults by another garage and if there are any faults, then there is more leaverage with the Peugeot dealer.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your friend is approaching this issue in the wrong way. He "feels" the car is sluggish. Why not just return it to where it was purchased and ask them nicely to investigate the problem. Talking about the Consumer Rights Act with a view to returning the vehicle or calling the manufacturers press office is a wee bit premature in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your friend was offered a test drive, accepted and then decided to buy the car. If a key factor in that decision was the car's performance with 4 people in it, why didn't he test drive it with 4 people in it?

 

As far as I can tell from your post you don't actually allege a technical fault with the car, only that it doesn't have the performance expected. I can't imagine how that's the garage/sales person's fault.

 

There is no way the salesman could know how heavy any potential passengers are anyway, so any comment on how well a car will perform laden with people is pointless. Then there's Ganymede's point; is 'fine' to you different in comparison to my definition of 'fine'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...