Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • SO if you refer to the bottom of the order you have the option to set it a side vary or stay it...but involves an application and fee...so I would suggest you get back onto Portsmouth and ask what exactly is the Order for ?   Inform them they have not served any documents on yourself or served a Certificate of service and given the errors of MCOL/ Portsmouth ask the court to clarify exactly what's happening in the claim.
    • I heard a noise downstairs. I had just got out of the shower. Threw on leggings ran downstairs getting dressed, just managing to put my top on. I walked into the kitchen a man all in black with a protective vest on. He had gold numbers on his shoulder’s socks tucked into his boots. I said "what are you doing in my house? Who are you?" He would not tell me. I said "Get out" he refused. Again, I told him to leave. I asked him who he wanted and what address. He told me the address and I said, "THAT IS NEXT DOOR" He called me a liar and said he would not leave he was 2 inches from my face at this point I was petrified. At this point my son came to visit me and opened the door. He asked this thug who he was. He refused to show any identification, I told my son it was for next door. He asked what name and the thug said a name of a person who lived next door but left approximately 8 years ago. My son took a photograph of the plaque next door and showed him. outside this thug stepped into my sons face and said got a problem? Do you want one.? I told my son to call the police and after taking a photograph of the property he walked back to his white van. I spoke with the police who asked me to give the phone to the thug. as I walked towards his van he sped of very fast and I had to dive out of the way, or he would have ran me over. I am not exaggerating I actually have the whole event on CCTV. The police rang me back and said they would not attend as the thug was a bailiff. Is said not for me he wasn’t he was an intruder. I was really mad at the police and said it was a disgrace and that I was not happy. An hour later 2 police officers came and said it was a bailiff and there was nothing they could do. I said to the police get out of my house now. They immediately started to leave. I said why are you leaving?? they said because you told us to. Hold on, so I can tell police officers to leave and you have to go but a bailiff that came into my home when he was in the wrong property and would not leave then tries to run me down, does not have to leave? So, he has more power than you??? I wrote 3 letters of complaint to the Bailiff company they ignored them. I called and they put the phone down. Does this mean anyone can come into my home and the police will not protect me? I am so scared now. I do not like being home alone and lock the door even if I go outside for a minute, then I am scared because I cannot open the door quick enough. I really do not want to live in a world that is not safe. Should the police have helped me. Are people allowed in my house by their mistake with no consequence? If anyone has any thoughts I would be grateful to read them.   TLF
    • Thank you so much. I hope this communication will help you advise me.   I have owned the garage since Nov 2016.    I instructed my solicitor to communicate with the management company. She raised issues regarding the costs, and requested an explanation as to costs. When they failed to respond and were threatening court action I sent a cheque in 2017. The lady (Emma from the pre-action dispute team at SLC) who I spoke to told me she had recieved the cheque and would provide an explanation. Between 2017-2020 I continued to get bills which I forwarded to my solicitors yet I did not get an expanation. Until 02/06/2020 this year when I recieved the following copied below. The issue I had with the explanation is that it talks about the need for maintenance of the garage and no maintenance has ever taken place.  Since that time the bills have escalated from £534 to £2400! (I have also copied the offer from my solicitors which highlights changes in reserve funds etc. Since this date they have acknowledge a small vat error yet still insist on these extra-ordinary charges and fees.)   Is there any possibility as this is in the small claims that they could escalate the bills still further?   Leter of explanation I recieved in June 2020 Our Client has a broker that gets multiple quotes from different sources and as long as they provide the correct legal liabilities and cover, they will of course go for the cheapest option as long as these requirements are met. They of course need liability insurance not just for their contractors but for the people that live on the scheme also. They also need to ensure that the level of cover is correct in case they need to reinstate the building like new in case of catastrophe.   Again the difference in cost could be due to certain liabilities they have to have for the garage if they were to ever having to use contractors to fix it, the superior Freeholder of the estate may also want certain covers in place which again would explain the difference. They of course will look into our policies on an annual basis to try and keep the costs down.   Our Client’s charges do vary from year to year due to the reactive nature of the maintenance done to the scheme, as the managing agent working on behalf of the superior freeholder, it is their responsibility to keep the scheme in a good state of repair, meaning that they have to proactively fix and maintain any issue found on site, which is paid through the service charge. The amount of work, as I’m sure you can understand varies annually, however more often or not as the building/buildings/estate gets older, more maintenance will need to be done to keep the estate in good quality so the costs of maintaining an estate and insuring it, also increases.   Our Client wishes to assure your Client that it is in their best interests to have the interest of the leaseholders at heart, and they welcome a mutual understanding when it comes to the scheme. They will continue to work towards keeping the scheme at the highest level of repair.   Our Client’s current statement of account is attached. Both our Client’s Administration fees, and our fees have been waived, however the balance of £534.53 needs to be paid in full.   Please could you ensure this sum is settled by your Client, as a matter of urgency.     Reply from my solicitors: Whilst you have provided us with copies of your client’s accounts for this property, you have not provided us with a basis for your costs as requested on several occasions. You mention that the allocation of your client’s costs includes the maintenance of the estate and the garage, yet our client is invoiced separately for the service charge to the property and the estate. Can you please explain this? You have also failed to address our following points in your response and would appreciate your cooperation in providing these: 1. your client’s insurance premiums; 2. in respect of the Accounts preparation fee and Audit fee which has been allocated to our client, we consider that the level of work required to take into account the six itemised factors (as stated above) to be completely disproportionate to the costs allocation. Can you please explain why such costs have been allocated to our client’s garage and detail the level of work required by your accountants. With respect to the reserve fund, we note that this is referred to under the sixth Schedule of the Lease however the determination by your client must be reasonable. In accordance with your arrears schedule on 19th July 2017 we refer you to a letter of around the same date (please refer to separate attachment “First Port Letter Re Reserve Fund (July 2017)”) whereby your client stated “We have reduced the annual collection for schedule 2 from £250 to £90 as we feel with the current reserve fund levels this is a more appropriate level. We have therefore credited your account by £53.33.” As we have mentioned previously, there does not appear to have been any maintenance or management actually carried out in respect of our client’s garage which would warrant a departure from the £90 in reserve fund contribution from July 2017 to present. It seems clear that not only should the historic figures be adjusted to reflect this but also that the accounts for future years should be prepared on a similar ongoing basis. Your client’s costs should therefore be adjusted in respect of each of the years in question and for ease of reference we have set out the calculation below: · July 2017 to June 2018, the reserve fund has been charged at £250.00 when it should have been £90.00. Therefore the reduction in your costs for this year should have been £160.00. · July 2018 to December 2018, the reserve fund has been charged at £125.00 when it should have been £45.00. Therefore the reduction in your costs for this year should have been £80.00. · January 2019 to December 2019, the reserve fund has been charged at £265.00 (a 6% increase), when it should have been £90.00 (plus a 6% increase of £5.40). Therefore the reduction in your costs for this year should have been £169.60. This totals £409.60 however taking into account that your client credited our client £53.33 on 19th July 2017, our client has been overcharged by £356.27. We also note that there is a VAT discrepancy in the sum of £36.00 from the arrears schedule sent with your correspondence on 22nd January and 9th March and the arears schedule sent with your email dated 31st March, yet there hasn’t been any adjustment in costs. We are therefore working from your original arrears schedule, that being £1,179.71, minus the £356.27 that your client is attempting to overcharge our client, thus bringing the amount due to £823.44. In the circumstances, it is unreasonable to expect our client to cover the legal costs in this matter. Your client has not been forthcoming with the information or explanations requested on several occasions. We are of the opinion that had your client been forthcoming your legal costs would not have amounted to £336.50. As a gesture of goodwill, our client is prepared to offer a reasonable contribution towards your client’s costs in the sum of £150.00. In the absence of your client’s insurance premiums, an explanation as to the costs for the Accounts preparation fee and Audit fee, and an explanation as to how the management fee has been calculated without any management of the garage actually taking place, we are mindful that these allocated costs are likely to be inconsistent with what would be deemed reasonable in the circumstances.        
    • Yes exactly, nothing after mediation - previously it was with Northampton Bulk centre
    • Well this is where the confusion sets in.......did they get that order in 2018 ?    Did they file the documents with the court ? If they didn't there is no amended new date on the order that they should comply with the order.   So you have an old Order with a new date...which in respect tells you nothing.   Reading between the lines looks like Portsmouth County Court is in meltdown hence all the errors. You stated you submitted a DQ but it was never processed to the N57 Notice of Allocation...so mediation then nothing.  
  • 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 986 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 Topic 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...