Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just looking at the date of the offence 12 December.  Possible was delayed in the post at that time as it was taking me up to 2 weeks to get a first class letter, then the New Year Shut down so to get it early January while the Xmas backlog was cleared seems about right to be honest.  Not that I am telling the police that. 
    • Please take note: I got 2 tickets for 32  miles in a 30 zone on different days.  The police said its their policy to ticket anything over 30!!   I had to pay £100 for one and do the course as well.  Even as a disabled driver there was no give on the tickets. Please stop saying that it has to be 35+ it really does not. West Midlands police in Nuneaton so definitely dont go 1 mile over in that area.  
    • New figures from the Insolvency Service show that early termination rates of IVAs have dropped 11% in the past year, while total IVAs have risen by almost 20,000 in the past two years. View the full article
    • Amigo Loans has posted an £87m loss for the nine months to December 31 2020, a 289% drop on the same period in 2019 View the full article
    • I've had a brief look over the thread and I see that there principle point is that he didn't take out insurance. Your answer to this is very simple – that it is absurd that you are required to pay to protect them against their own negligence or criminality of their employees or the people who are acting for them – in this case, Hermes.Your point here is that any requirement that a customer is required to pay extra to protect against the breach of contract is unfair within the meaning of the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act. Please have a read of the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act. In In particular, after you have read the sections within the act itself, get a schedule two and you will see examples of unfair terms. These are nonexhaustive which means that they are simply examples and lots of others can be added. An important point is that it forms a significant imbalance between your interests and their interests. They are using a standard form contract which is nonnegotiable. There is no competition because all the courier industry are doing this so there is no opportunity for you to go elsewhere and get a different type of deal. You will need to point out to the defendant – through the mediator – that included in the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act is a provision that gives the court the power – in fact a duty – on its own initiative to examine the fairness or otherwise of any term. Point out to the defendant that if they want to go to court then you are happy about it. That you will then raise the question of unfairness to the judge and also you will invite the judge to look at the entirety of the contract and to pronounce on the fairness or otherwise of the contractual terms. Tell the defendant that you expect that the judge will decide unequivocally that a term of the contract which requires the customer to pay extra to protect themselves against the service providers breach of contract is grossly unfair – and in fact it is ridiculous. Basically they are saying "pay us to deliver your goods – and pay us extra if you don't want us to lose them."   Explain to the defendant that you are fully aware that this is a culture within the courier industry which has developed over 30 or 40 years or more but it's not acceptable and that when you get a judgement in your favour which confirms that the term is unfair, (as will surely happen) that you will then make sure that copies of the judgement find their way all over the Internet including social media that is concerned specifically with complaints against the courier industry and then the game will be up for the loss of them. One the mediator to tell the defendant that once you get this judgement, not only will people be claiming for ongoing lost items, but they will also be claiming retrospectively for legitimate claims which have been rejected on the basis of this unfair term. Make it clear to the mediator – that they should tell the defendant that you're not dealing with very much money here – and you are prepared to risk it all in order to go to court and to demonstrate this principle. If the mediator says that you should compromise then you should tell the mediator that if the defendant pays up in full – including costs and interest – that they will then be spared the problem of going to court and getting a judgement against them which will result in the loss of millions of pounds in the future. Tell the mediator that this is the benefit to the defendant and you are not prepared to hand them any further benefit if it means sacrificing a single penny of your claim. Tell the defendant to take it or leave it – you are happy either way.   It is very important that the defendant understands that you don't care either way whether you settle now mediation or goes to court. The defendant as a huge amount to lose if it goes to court. You have very little to lose  
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Px'd motorhome. Dealer now asking for money for damp weeks later


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1070 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,

 

First post after hoovering up the info here, thought i'd as my query for clarity.

 

I bought a new motorhome. Part of the deal was to PX my old one. I accepted the dealers valuation of my motorhome, sight unseen on their part. On the day of the exchange, we handed over our docs, full service history and importantly the habitation inspection reports done yearly one of the checks is to check and report for damp. These came back without issue and we have always been happy in the knowlege that the van is in good shape.

 

we then exchanged paper work, and shown the van. overall there over 2hr 15 mins of which just 40 mins was the actual signing and showing. I asked if he had looked at out van and was happy. He said yes.

 

Happily we drove off. over 2 weeks later and the dealer now saying there is damp in the van, we should pay to put this right. First news to me and came as a shock.

 

1) Are they allowed to demand more money long after the deal

2) If 1. is yes, how long does a dealer have to ask for more money? What if they then decide I owe them more later for other issues, am i liable?

 

Thanks all

 

M

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not your problem. They inspected the vehicle, and had your inspection reports as well. It sounds liek they havent taken care of it, and given the recent bad weather, just left it out, possibly with a window or door open/cracked.

 

Can you name the dealer please.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The dealer has got no chance. They had the opportunity to inspect the vehicle including metering for any damp and accepted the vehicle at the agreed value after that inspection.

 

If the vehicle wasn't what they were expecting, that was their chance to refuse the deal. They can't now come back to you and attempt to change that deal.

 

The rule Caveat Emptor very much applies here.

 

 

The only problem that I can see is if you ever need to go back to that same dealer again in the future for something with your new motor home. Although it would be unwise on their part, they might try to do something silly.

 

I'd use a different dealer for servicing etc in the future. Just in case.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
:cheer2::cheer2:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not qualified to comment on the legalities , but as a caravanner of over 40 years experience I can comment on the damp situation .

First and foremost any caravanner and motorhome owner will be acutely aware of the problems of damp , more so dealers .

A simple damp testing meter can be purchased from Amazon for as little as £10 . it beggars belief that a dealer would buy in a caravan/motorhome without performing this simple test .

 

Each time I have traded bought or sold a caravan , the first thing done was , out with the test meter .

It is a great tool for getting the price reduced , and often the problem can be a simple fix ,

 

Good luck in rejecting these chancers , because they know the next buyer of your traded motorhome , will want a serious reduction in price .

 

Once cured , dampness can take up to a year to dry out , I have had problems with the mastic sealant on one of the windows in my present caravan , the window was resealed 18 months ago and it has taken until now for the damp reading to be normal .Ventilation when the vehicle is not in use is very important .

 

All these type of vehicles have a certain amount of dampness , due to cooking , living and sleeping ,hence there is an acceptable level of moisture , above which the vehicle can be considered damp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

all liability passed over to the dealer when you signed the vehicle over. They are proferssionals so expected to know their business so any attempt at a claim will always fail, even if you failed to point out anything you were aware of. They could have asked you specifically if they had any doubts but they didnt.

 

Dont feel sorry for them, they will still make money, just as not as much as they hoped for so no moral reason to help boost their profits either

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you for the advise and experience all. much settled now and awaiting the next call from the dealer. I really hope he sees the error and its fades into a horrible few days. it has been a stressful few days full of sleepless nights. after borrowing to our limit to buy the van finding over 4000£ is beyond impossible.

 

you lot are great will keep you updated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to find a single penny. Stop worrying.

 

There's nothing that the dealer can do if you say "Not my problem"!

 

If they tell you they can or will do something, they are either misinformed or lying.

 

 

As I said, it's Caveat Emptor. Which is the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made.

 

If they didn't or missed something. Unlucky!

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just to reiterate, this is their business so they are expected to know everything they need to know. They offered a certan price, you accepted their offer and that is that.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...