Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
    • here is a question for you, is yu house divided up into a retail/business area  and domestic area for business rates purposes? If not why on earth are you paying business water rates? ceertainly not for tax purposes as you can claim any legit expense without having to reclassify your home as a business premises. i would be stopping this nonsense and goping back to whatever water supplier is the domestic one for your area. there is stuff all they can do to get the £40 from you whan you do that.
  • 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

only if faulty you have stated yourself in para 3


:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:

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

Not sluggish - the it'd perform well.

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...