Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • maybne the courts are waking up to Simple Simon and his shenanigans, and dots are being joined?
    • In their draft application to the court they state that their Letter of Claim listed the proper three invoices.  Is this true, or are they lying?   As for replying to them, hang fire for the moment, see what people who have dealt with this sort of thing before have to say, there may be a way to oppose their application or at least make them pay a hefty sum to the court for granting it.
    • but the other debts are part of this big picture and its eventual solution a rough idea will help.   if if if they ever get another powerless repo/dca involved, they will tell you well in advance.   help us please
    • to do what they are powerless...   you like 10'00'000 of other s jump because a dca says this or that a DCA is not a bailiff and has zero legal powers on any debt no matter what its type.   another one of your issues is following stupid freeman of the land twaddle. very dangerous.don't   moorcroft dont by debts they only act for clients.   as long as you don't run from debt and insure the debt owners or 'the client' has from you a letter which states your correct and current address or you did so to the Original creditor before any sale or your haven't moved since taking 'the credit' out you are safe from backdoor CCJ's to an old address.   sit on your hands and see if the owner of the debt want to issue a letter of claim. if they do  you return here   A CCJ - which is the only tool they have - because just like us joe public, its the only thing we can legally do if we claim someone owes us money - they have no more powers that you or me
    • That is why I (specifically) said "the lender".
  • Our picks

    • 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
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 984 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

Looking for advice on getting a £500 refund for a deposit on a used car.

 

On July 2018 I visited a second hand car dealer to purchase a used BMW that was for sale on its forecourt.

 

I had a test drive we agreed to purchase the car for £11,000.

 

The salesman filled in a part exchange form.

 

I was trading in a CAT D car and at the time I didn't tell him that it was a CAT D. I understand that I was not under any obligation to do so. They inspected the car and they offered me £4500 for the trade in. There was a tick box on the form that asked if the car was in insurance write off. This wasn't ticked by the salesman amongst other things some of the boxes they should have filled in were not filled in. Additionally one of the terms was that deposits were not refundable. I signed the form.

 

I told him that I would not be able to pick the car up for three weeks when I would take delivery and pay the balance. During the 3 weeks they continued to advertise the car for sale.

 

One the day of picking the car up I called the garage and asked if it was ready to pick up. They told me yes. About 5 minutes later they called to say that they had done a check on my trade in and couldn't accept it as it was an insurance wrtite off and I would be better selling it privately. They had 3 weeks to do this and the unit price for them would have been at a lot lower price than I could get it for. I sold the car to a private buyer 2 days later.

 

I called the garage to inform them that I had sold the car and also told them I was offering £10,500 on the car as there was no trade in. They did not accept the offer.

 

I asked for my deposit back and was told they would not be giving it back.

 

The car was advertised on the Autotrader for a further 6 months before it sold and the last price advertised was £10,450.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I understand that they had possession of your old vehicle for the three weeks before they then rejected it?

 

Also, you say that they inspected your car and then made the offer. Did you see the inspection? What did they do?

 

What was wrong with the vehicle?

Link to post
Share on other sites

" On July 2018 I visited a second hand car dealer to purchase a used BMW "

 

2017

 

Caveat Emptor springs to mind

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do I understand that they had possession of your old vehicle for the three weeks before they then rejected it?

 

Also, you say that they inspected your car and then made the offer. Did you see the inspection? What did they do?

 

What was wrong with the vehicle?

 

Apologies I should have made it clearer. The car was rejected on the day I was going to pick up the BMW. They didn’t have possession of my car. The inspection wasn’t very thorough probably about 5 mins. I was with when he did it.

 

The car was written off originally due to water damage but was fully repaired when I bought it and was in excellent condition, fully serviced and apart from a small bump on the rear wheel arch it was perfect inside and out. He looked at the outside and interior but not in the engine bay or boot.

 

I forgot to add that when I made the counter offer after I had sold my car I asked them to offset the £500 original deposit against the car meaning that I would pay £10000 balance if the deal had gone ahead. This offer was rejected.

Edited by Twitch Younger
Link to post
Share on other sites

So you went to the garage, you negotiated a deal, they inspected your car and then made you an offer which you accepted. You then left a deposit.

 

You then left the garage with your own car and three weeks later you want to pick up the BMW and they told you that they were rejecting your car. Is this correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So you went to the garage, you negotiated a deal, they inspected your car and then made you an offer which you accepted. You then left a deposit.

 

You then left the garage with your own car and three weeks later you want to pick up the BMW and they told you that they were rejecting your car. Is this correct?

Yes. I think I know what’s coming

Link to post
Share on other sites

HPI checks are not extortionate and the cost is absolutely minimal to a car dealer and they had three weeks to check. After taking the deposit they continued to advertise the car on the autotrader and in their showroom. After three weeks they told me that they couldn't take the car as trade in effectually cancelling the contract and I made a counter offer to them. I understand that private sellers don't have to disclose Cat D but must to IF asked. I was there when he inspected the car for a value I did not misrepresent the car.

Edited by Twitch Younger
Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally I think you're on a hiding to nothing as from your posts you knowingly failed to disclose a material fact which has a proportionate effect on the deal agreed/contract. Theoretically they could come after you come after you on an attempt to defraud. The fact it was only at the last minute they uncovered this as it could be argued this was part of due diligence. Prior to this I would deem it to be an invitation to treat. I think you might be on a bit of a sticky wicket here so would suggest it might be best to let sleeping dogs lie??

 

sorry but this is mainly completely wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are a private individual and you are dealing with a trader. They exercise a certain amount of expertise and they could be taken to know what they're doing. Even though this is not subject to the usual consumer legislation, I think that the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 probably does apply – in particular S.4

 

Implied terms about quality or fitness.

(1)Except as provided by this section and section 5 below and subject to the provisions of any other enactment, there is no implied condition or warranty about the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied under a [F2relevant contract for the transfer of goods].

 

[F5(2)Where, under such a contract, the transferor transfers the property in goods in the course of a business, there is an implied condition that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality.

(2A)For the purposes of this section and section 5 below, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.

 

(3)The condition implied by subsection (2) above does not extend to any matter making the quality of goods unsatisfactory—

(a)which is specifically drawn to the transferee’s attention before the contract is made,

(b)where the transferee examines the goods before the contract is made, which that examination ought to reveal, or

 

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/29

 

 

What we have here is a private individual effectively making a sale of an item to a trader who is well experienced in what he does.

 

Section 4 of SGSA says that generally there is no implied term as to quality or fitness for purpose. It goes on to say that however, where there is such an implied term then that implied term does not apply where there has been inspection of the goods and that inspection should reasonably have revealed the defects in question – if sufficient care been taken.

 

Clearly, the trader inspected the vehicle and had an opportunity to discover the defects in the vehicle – including its cat D – if they had been more careful. Clearly they were capable of doing this because later on they realised the defect and they cancel the contract.

 

As a result of that my view is that they breach the contract. In theory you could go ahead and sue them for the lot – but I wouldn't bother. I would be suing them for the £500 and then let it go. I think that you are probably treading a fine line and if you can get out of it without any particular loss then I think that you are doing well.

 

Have a think about this argument and if it appeals to you then you need to decide what you want to do. It is extremely unlikely that you will be able to persuade the dealer to pay the money without a fight so you will have to think about bringing a County Court claim.

 

My feeling is that if you did bring a claim and it went to court, then you would stand better than 85% chance of success. There is a high likelihood that they would see sense once they receive the court papers and they would put their hands up.

 

A secondary argument is that they are trying to levy a penalty for breach of contract and it is not at all clear to me that £500 is really indicative of their actual losses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I confirm my view of the situation. I confirm also that I disagree completely with user Heliosuk and user oddjobbob.

 

By all means go to a solicitor, but you risk spending a lot of money on somebody who doesn't have the confidence and assertiveness to deal properly with a very small value claim like this. If you want your money back then the best thing you can do is to threaten them with the legal action and then to issue the papers. Don't make the threats if you don't intend to go through.

 

I can't remember what the cost of a claim for this value is – but probably only around 50 quid. If they want to take you to a hearing then they could be hearing fee of 150 quid – but once again you should check these values.

 

For anyone to say that by bringing an action you risk more than the value, is completely untrue in this case. The worst you could lose would be your claim fee, the hearing fee, and the reasonable cost of travel of the defendant. Given the high chance of success of your claim and also given the chance that they will simply bottle it and put their hands up, I think it is a runner.

 

By the way, don't just accept my advice because it is the advice which favours your position. You should stand back and look at it.

 

Your point about making counteroffer is completely irrelevant to the situation and I wouldn't bring it up in a claim that you might make because it will just confuse the issue.

 

If you do decide to make a claim then let us know and we will help you draft your claim form. It will be very straightforward – just a few lines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely the contract has not been cancelled? The car you wanted to buy is still available at the price you wanted to pay for it- £11500? They are only saying come and pick your car up. All that's changed is the part exchange....which is NOT as you made it out to be, ie Cat D write off. Quite right they don't want to take it in px. The fact that you sold the Cat D car for £500 less than the px price shows they were correct to not give you the agreed amount for it.

 

Did the Cat D occur during your ownership? If so you should have told them. I agree they are in the trade and should have checked on the day, but they took your word for it that it was ok...and it is likely their policy to only hpi pxs at a later stage

 

As for still advertising the car you bought, this is common practice. It's done to attract sales calls, and anyone that phoned up for it would have been told 'we've just taken a deposit on it, sorry...however we've got this one which is 6 months older, blah blah'

Link to post
Share on other sites

They cancelled the contract. I bought the Car as a Cat D. I don’t really get the relevanc of your post. . As Bankfodder has pointed out the offer I made after the cancellation is not really relevant. When did I say I sold the Cat D for £500 less. I sold it for considerably more than the £4500 I was offered in p ex and told the private buyer it was a Car D. The dealer eventually sold the BMW for £10450 as mentioned in an earlier post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh...i have misunderstood.

 

If the car is no longer available after you left a deposit on it then that's not right and they should give the deposit back without question. go for it I'm certain you'll win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The BMW was still available after I left the deposit. When they did the check 10 minutes before I was due to pick it up they said they couldn’t accept a Cat D in part exchange and cancelled the deal and refused to refund the deposit. A few days later I made another offer on the BMW asking to use the £500 they had which they refused They continued to advertise it over 6 months eventually selling it for much less that the original asking price. The events after they cancelled the contract aren’t relevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't afford to lose £500 so I will bring a claim against the dealer. There was a tick box on the form to clarify if the car was an insurance write off which he never ticked off - a material fact that he couldn't be bothered checking at the time. We are going around in circles here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One last thing, – can you tell me a bit more about the form. Was this their own company form? Who was obliged to complete it – you? or them? Did it have to be signed by anybody?

Link to post
Share on other sites
One last thing, – can you tell me a bit more about the form. Was this their own company form? Who was obliged to complete it – you? or them? Did it have to be signed by anybody?

 

It was their own company form and they filled the form when they inspected the car (I wasn't asked to fill in any part of the form).

 

 

It was signed by both parties

Link to post
Share on other sites

Better and better.

 

Please let us know what action you take. If you decide to issue a claim then we can help you draft it. It doesn't need very much

 

In fact, this will probably do. You don't need to go into any further detail at this stage:

 

the claimant contracted with the defendant car dealer for the purchase of a vehicle for £XXX plus his own vehicle in part exchange valued by the dealer at £yyy for the purposes of the contract.

The claimant left a deposit/part payment of £500

the defendant subsequently refused to honour the contract and refused to return the claimant's deposit.

The claimant seeks the return of his deposit – £500 plus interest

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Supposition. I’ll wait and see what is submitted in defence. To reiterate my points. I did not intend to defraud him or misrepresent the car. The dealership has immediate access to hpi checks. He was happy with the state of the car and filled in the form. He then, three weeks later, did not want to go ahead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to stop worrying a bit. On the basis of what you have said, there is no suggestion of any fraud or fraudulent intent.

 

I'm afraid that the discussions that are happening on here between other people about fraud are fanciful and theatrical. Please disregard them.

 

Also, here's a warning to the others who are destabilising this OP with this kind of talk, I may move all of your posts into the Bear Garden – so please can it stop. I think you've each had your say now let it go

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...