Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Really sorry this is a long story. I Ordered and paid for bathroom furniture on the 8th of December 2020. was told it would take a month which was why i needed to. Pay in full understandable. Month later come no bathroom stuff and no contact what so ever. Phoned them chased my order up myself. The sales manager said it would be here a week later but sink and vanity unit would be another month. February come no contact off them and no goods or delivery. Tried to phone them for yet another month with no luck what so ever. Finally got in contact with them after a number of emails. told me order was here and will be delivered next week. Delivery come on the 23rd of march with radiator and valves missing. Phoned up the manager again he said it should be there if not the driver must of not put it on the van so will get it delivered soon as. Yet again no contact until i went in the shop when it opened due to covid asking for it. When the manager had a look in the stock room he said that he can not find it so must not be here but then showed me another one that he said was bigger and more expensive but same colour obviously off someone else's order told me i could just take that. I replied that i just wanted the one that i ordered really. Went back in the showroom and checked the order on the system and said it should be here. I reminded him about a conversation where he said on the phone that it was here but the driver must not of put it on the van which he replied with that he couldnt remember that conversation or saying that then turned around to me and said that they have been issues with his boss or the owner who keeps buying property to do up and takes stock out of the warehouse for the property which at that stage i was very shocked. The manager then said he will order me a new one that would be delivered tomorrow and will phone me to let me know. Tomorrow come no phone call and no product. I was sent the wrong vanity unit that i ordered yet again manager made up a bull story that he told me when i ordered it that the supplier didnt have it in so ordered a 1 draw and not 2 draw even though the 2 draw one was on my receipt 🤔. I put a review on Facebook about the company They are blaming covid for the rubbish customer service and offered £50 and free toilet holder on the ground i take the review off the director phoned and saiid the review was unfair and and shocking then said that stock is stock its the companies until it gets delivered but yet i had paid in full for my order. What am i entitled to do here.
    • so all speculative invoices since that date should be refunded....ruddy fleecers!   dx  
    • Well if you have got crime reference number that's a good start. You should be recording your calls and you should not rely on calls which are apparently recorded by others – especially not the police who will always be very reluctant to disclose any information even under a statutory request. When you are on the phone to anybody you should make sure that if there is something you are not clear about you should ask them to repeat it so that you can make notes. Read our customer services guide. The police are correct – as I have already pointed out – the car belongs to you and so if it is sold to somebody else then it is stolen. If it is not given to you then it is stolen. You should always in all your dealings with anybody refer to the fact that your car has been stolen.
    • Incidentally, a brief word – for you, but also for anyone else who visits this thread. It's a word about insurance. By requiring you to take out insurance, they are effectively asking you to protect yourself against their own negligence, their own breach of contract or the criminality of their own employees if stuff get stolen. This is extraordinary and it is part of the culture of the removal business and I have no idea how this culture came about and it is now accepted so meekly as the natural way of things by people who use removal services. There is exactly the same culture in courier services so that companies such as DPD, DHL, UPS – and particularly Hermes require their customers to pay for additional protection in case the service that they have already contracted for and paid for is not carried out. Amazing! It doesn't stop there. Extended warranties. If you go into any Currys PC World, if you buy any computer or washing machine or fridge from them or anywhere else, some salesman will chase after you and ask you if you want to buy an extended warranty. So for extra money you can buy an insurance which will apparently cover you in case the item you have bought breaks down within a certain amount of time – normally three years or five years. Incredible! You already have perfectly good statutory rights which will cover you for most of those situations over the foreseeable reasonably expected life of the item you buy. What they are all doing – whether they are removals, couriers, sellers of white goods and electronic goods, is effectively getting you to pay for rights which you already have under statute or under ordinary contract law.  
    • Thanks. How much did you pay for the insurance? AnyVan is declining responsibility because they say that the items did not go missing "in transit". They are wrong. Clearly the removal company took charge of the items and disassembled them. This must be the case because you have received part of the item and it is only part of the item which is missing and that means that they were already under the control of the removal company. In my view that puts the items squarely "in transit". I am quite certain that no judge would simply say that "in transit" refers only to the time that your items are in a removal van. This is far too limited. And in fact I notice that in the summary of terms which you have linked us to:     Clearly insurance cover applies from the moment that the collection begins right until the delivery is finished. However, even if they accepted this point, there are still other ways that they can say that the insurance does not apply to you Looking at the policy which you have linked us to, I see that first of all there is in excess of £50 and that means you have to pay the first £50 of any claim. According to you, you have only lost about £35. Are you saying that the entire book case is worth £20? It seems very little to me. The second thing is that they say that lost items are not insured unless they are listed with their value. Presumably that hasn't happened in your case. On that basis, it seems to me that the insurance doesn't cover you anyway. I do agree that I think you've been treated disgracefully and I don't think that the lack of insurance is any bar to making a claim. If you would like a bit of fun, then we can help you make a small claim in the County Court to recover all of your losses directly from them for their breach of contract/negligence. Of course they won't be used to that kind of treatment – but do you really care? The chances of succeeding if you are prepared to go to the Small Claims Court are better than 90%, in my view. You would have to play a claim fee that you would recover that when you won your case. Of course in the event that you lost, then you would lose that claim fee and also a hearing fee if it got that far. Frankly, for this kind of money I would imagine that they would put their hands up once you issue the papers and they realise that you are serious and it was going to cost them much more money to defend it then simply to pay you out. In addition to getting your money back and delivering a slap, you would acquire transferable skills so that you could confidently in the future sue anyone who got in your way. What's not to like?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

Dealer refuses refund after failed repair attempts


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1067 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

You're not the OP, and writing in the first person is not helpful.

 

The whole reason that consumer legislation exists is because of stuff like you've written here. Thankfully we no longer live in that world.

 

You are spouting nonsense, I've no idea what you mean about writing in the first person.

 

Let's be clear. The OP bought exactly what the advert said it was - a car suitable for spares or repairs. As a dealer you cannot sell a car 'sold as seen', it is illegal to do so.

 

Consumer legislation exists, quite rightly, to protect the consumer: but you cannot protect a consumer against themselves, the OP bought the car thinking it would be ok, but it wasn't, and was expressly described as being for spares or repairs.

 

As for your comment that we no longer live in those times, the very fact that the op has come here demonstrates that we do.

 

Why on earth any dealer would get involved with stuff like this is beyond me....if it's not good enough to retail, send it to auction.

 

I am NOT defending the dealer or maligning the op, simply telling it how it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The seller could argue that the fact that he put on two tyres to sweeten the deal in order to sell as spares and repairs. I think the OP has a very weak case with this. When the car is advertised as spares or repair it means exactly this. They cannot control what subsequently happens to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are spouting nonsense, I've no idea what you mean about writing in the first person.

 

Let's be clear. The OP bought exactly what the advert said it was - a car suitable for spares or repairs. As a dealer you cannot sell a car 'sold as seen', it is illegal to do so.

 

Consumer legislation exists, quite rightly, to protect the consumer: but you cannot protect a consumer against themselves, the OP bought the car thinking it would be ok, but it wasn't, and was expressly described as being for spares or repairs.

 

As for your comment that we no longer live in those times, the very fact that the op has come here demonstrates that we do.

 

Why on earth any dealer would get involved with stuff like this is beyond me....if it's not good enough to retail, send it to auction.

 

I am NOT defending the dealer or maligning the op, simply telling it how it is.

 

 

 

 

 

Peugeot 207 1.4 petrol 5 Door hatchback

 

Full Service History

 

MOT UNTIL 16TH AUGUST 2018 no advisories

 

Cambelt and water pump have been changed in last 500 miles

 

Sold as seen on behalf of customer.

 

 

What do you mean As a dealer you cannot sell a car 'sold as seen', it is illegal to do so. The advert states this on the botton Sold as seen on behalf of customer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know....thy should never use that phrase! 'Sold as seen' carries no weight whatsoever from a car dealer. Illegal was perhaps too strong...just meaningless.

 

However, 'spares or repairs' is perfectly ok.

 

Presumably 'sold as seen 'implies that it might well be a good car, have a look, make your own mind up, whereas 'spares or repairs' implies it is definitely not a good car.

 

The ad said:

year

make mileage

mot

spares or repairs

 

The ad did NOT say

drives well

excellent condition

starts first time

excellent bodywork

reliable

etc.

 

Indeed, the condition of the car is not implied in any way.

 

The OP bought what was advertised I'm afraid

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now selling and buying at auction is very different to buying from a dealer.

 

What will be considered in this transaction is what was said at the time about the MOT, putting new tyres on etc but also where it was advertised and how much the vehicle was compared to one that isnt advertised as spares/repairs.

So, sold in trade mag or specialist site- then not aimed at selling to the public.

 

My opinion is that this car was priced and being marketed to consumers and as such their waffle about selling on behalf of customer spares/repairs is disingenuous so as you can see I disagree with oddjobbob on this one.

 

The dealer shouldnt have offered agency to it and refused to sell it to a random punter knowing that it wasnt his to bargain over so again that calls the other statements made by the dealer into question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if I remember correctly on watchdog or one of those programs there was a case identical to this

and it was adjudged that the dealer cannot state 'spares or repair' whenever selling to jo public

as and excuse for not refunding.

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

Who knows? You might be right, for the op's sake let's hope you are.

 

Why on earth any reputable dealer would want to be involved in acar like this I've no idea.

 

But I can foresee a battle....the ad could not be clearer that it's spares or repairs and there's nothing wrong with offering acar of this nature to the public. Also as stated the ad did not contain any 'puff' merely a statement of facts about the car.

 

we shall see!

Link to post
Share on other sites
if I remember correctly on watchdog or one of those programs there was a case identical to this

and it was adjudged that the dealer cannot state 'spares or repair' whenever selling to jo public

as and excuse for not refunding.

 

I vaguely recall it...but I think the ad did not state s/r, the dealer put it on the invoice at the point of sale.

 

que sera and all that....

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes I think that's it

and he;'d done it numerous times before and had been reprimanded for it already.

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

If you buy a banger for spares, don’t expect a faultless retail ready car. The retailer has every right to advertise a vehicle on behalf of a private seller and state it is not a retail vehicle and that machine is being sold for parts. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence understands the above. .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Got a phone call from the dealer after receiving letter, he saying willing to take car back for a full refund, but wants to deduct 25p a mile for miles used plus have it fully valeted before its return.

 

This works out at

103281 - 102835 = 446

Less 45 Miles = 401

 

 

401 X 0.25p = £100.25

 

 

Is 25p reasonable, as seems excessive if its for price depreciation of the car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing in the cRA states he can charge those .

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

Good work! The dealer knows you have a case, now it’s just a case of sorting out the details :)

 

The CRA specifically allows deductions for cars:

 

“No deduction may be made if the final right to reject is exercised in the first 6 months (see subsection (11)), unless—

(a) The goods consist of a motor vehicle“

 

That said, £100 plus valeting fee seems excessive. I’d offer them £50 in full and final, including valeting.

 

One thing to bear in mind: what price do you put on not having this stress in your life? If you can make it all go away for £100, depending on your circumstances, it might be worth considering.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the circumstances and my original view of your chances, I think this is a very good result. I would take it and I wouldn't hang around.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I asked dealer how he calculated the 25p per mile figure, suggesting 15p more of a reasonable figure. Response...

 

 

"Thanks for email, between us we seem to be worrying about a few pence, If you return it cleaned, perhaps we can have Final settlement and a closure to this at £950.00 or £900 if not cleaned.

How soon can I have the car? Any chance today? (Wednesday) as I am tied up the rest of the week."

 

Car returned on Friday, cleaned, £950 refunded into bank within 30mins, can't complain on a £50 loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done

 

 

 

 

The Consumer Action Group needs help to cover its expenses.

You could help by making a money contribution to http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/paypal.php?go=donate

 

or by downloading our toolbar and using it to search the web instead of your normal search engine:- http://consumeractiongroup.co.uk/cag_plugin.php

 

Please help.

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
With the revs dropping while stationary try resetting the ecu by putting ignition on without starting the car and then leave it for 2 minutes.

Then start the car.

It works on VW and Audi, so maybe it will work on French cars too.

 

Where on earth did you dig that little nugget of information from?

 

H

42 years at the pointy end of the motor trade. :eek:

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...