Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, do the section 75 chargeback to your credit card provider.
    • See what dx thinks but it seems to me that sending a photo of your own pass isn't relevant to what happened. Let's wait and see what he says. HB
    • 1st letter image.pdf1st letter 2nd page.pdf
    • Many thanks for the replies and advice!   I what to send this email to the Starbucks CEO and the area manager. Your thoughts would be appreciated.   [email protected] [email protected]   Re: MET Parking PNC at your Starbucks Southgate site   Dear Ms Rayner, / Dear Heather Christie,   I have received a Notice to Keeper regarding a Parking Charge Notice of £100 for the driver parking in the Southgate Park Car Park, otherwise infamously known as the Stanstead Starbucks/McDonalds car park(s).   Issued by: MET Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Notice Number: XXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration Number: XXXX XXX Date of Contravention: XX.XX.XXXX Time: XX:XX - XX:XX   After a little research it apears that the driver is not alone in being caught in what is commonly described as a scam, and has featured in the national press and on the mainstream television.   It is a shame that the reputation of Starbucks is being tarnished by this, with your customers leaving the lowest possible reviews on Trustpilot and Trip Advisor at this location, and to be associated with what on the face of it appears to be a doubious and predatory car park management company.   In this instance, during the early hours of the morning the driver required a coffee and parked up outside Starbucks with the intention of purchasing one from yourselves. Unfortunately, you were closed so the driver walked to McDonalds next door and ordered a coffee, and for this I have received the Notice to Keeper.   It is claimed that the car park is two separate car parks (Starbucks/McDonalds). However, there is no barrier or road markings to identity a boundary, and the signage in the car park(s) and outside your property is ambiguous, as such the terms would most likely be deemed unfair and unenforcable under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   I understand that Starbucks-Euro Garages neither operate or benefit from the charges imposed by MET Parking. However, MET Parking is your client.   Additionally, I understand that the charge amount of £100 had previously been upheld in court due to a ‘legitimate interest in making sure that a car park was run as efficiently as possible to benefit other drivers as well as the local stores, keeping cars from overstaying’.   However, this is not applicable when the shop or store is closed (as was the case here), as there is no legitimate interest. Therefore, the amount demanded is a penalty and is punitive, again contravening the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   As the driver’s intention of the visit was genuine, I would be grateful if you could please instruct your client to cancel this Notice to Keeper/Parking Charge Notice.   Kind regards
    • I received the promised call back from the Saga man today who informed me that the undertakers have decreed it IS a modification and they will need to recalculate a quote individually for me. However it all sounds very arbitrary. The more I think about it, and with help from forum replies, the more I am sure that it is not a modification. If for example the original seatback had become damaged by a spillage or a tear, I would be entitled to replace it with the nearest available part. The problem is when it comes to a payout after an accident, there is no telling what an individual insurer will decide when he notices the change. I am still undecided which of the two best routes to go with, either don't mention the replacement at all, or fill in the quote form without mentioning, and when it comes to buying the insurance over the phone, mention it at the time.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Copart - £40,000 vehicle Sold as Unrecorded but Cat B in Australia


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1980 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

Hi, i'm looking for some advice on where I stand with regards to a vehicle purchased at a online Copart Auction please.

 

 

The vehicle was advertised as Unrecorded and in the additional information stated that it was an import, it has never been UK registered, additional charges may apply to register in the UK and it's history cannot be guaranteed.

 

There was no mention of where the vehicle was imported from, so was extremely difficult to trace back any history. I purchased the vehicle believing it to be a UK car, it was right hand drive and sold through a UK company. It was only when I had paid and sent a driver to collect the car that I realised it wasn't a UK car. Not only this, but the damage was much worse than photographed on the website, someone had basically polished a turd.

 

I accepted this and cracked on and repaired the vehicle. The retail of the car here in England was £42,000 and after its repair I have around £40,000 in it. Because the speedometer was in Kilometres, I then had to order brand new clocks before the vehicle would pass an IVA Test, these were on backorder and took 4 months to arrive.

 

Speedo arrived, the vehicle was completed and passed through its IVA Test with no issues. From here is where I tried to register the vehicle with DVLA. I was told by them this would take 10 days and after 6 weeks of waiting I finally received a response from them to the tune of... We have been liaising with Australian Authorities and the vehicle was a statutory write off, because of this we cannot issue a logbook under it's original VIN number. It must have a replacement VIN number and be on Q Plates because of a it's questionable history.

 

I looked into this more now I knew where the vehicle was from and a Statutory Write Off in Australia means "A statutory write-off is too badly damaged to be repaired to a standard that is safe for road use. The vehicle identification number (VIN) is recorded as a statutory write-off, and the vehicle is not allowed to be registered. These vehicles are only suitable for use as parts or scrap metal." - What's known in the UK at a Category B vehicle. These are worth around 10% of a cars retail value as they should never be allowed on the road again - only dismantled for parts and crushed.

 

I have since spoken to Copart who have told me that because the vehicle has never been registered in the UK, that the car is "Unrecorded" and they have not misrepresented it on the advert. They have said they will look into the documentation and come back to me.

 

I was looking to get opinions on this. As I have £40,000 in a vehicle which is worth around £8,000 as a breaker and probably £15,000 - £18,000 as a vehicle with "Q Plates". Not only this, but I am now concerned for my safety as it's been deemed unsafe by an assessor previously. Copart are saying the vehicle is unrecorded, yet I have a certificate confirming it is, although not in the UK.

 

What has happened here is a [problem]mer has purchased the vehicle in Australia as a parts only vehicle, exported it to the UK then sold it as an unrecorded right hand drive vehicle for maximum profit. Surely Copart should have done the due diligence before advertising this car as unrecorded? I have been told international titles will confirm if the vehicle is for destruction or not - something Copart will have asked for before making the vehicle available for auction.

 

Any advice and thoughts would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks very much.

 

Just so people know, I purchased the vehicle at the end of October.

The whole situation would've come to light much sooner had I been able to get ahold of the speedometer.

 

The vehicle was paid for by debit card and the repair work carried out was done with new genuine parts from the dealers.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of things firstly.

 

Your username.

I will assume That your a car trader by profession. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

 

. I purchased the vehicle believing it to be a UK car

 

 

And the moral of the story is " you believed"

Never never assume anything.

Just by the description of the vehicle red flags were waving at me.

If indeed you are a car trader you should know this already.

 

Unfortunately I cant see as the car was mis sold. They told you its unregistered and unrecorded and you took a gamble.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believed this as I’ve never known the company sell imported vehicles and I buy 100’s per year and have done for over a decade.

 

I didn’t read the additional information on the lot, I accept that and it’s a mistake that’s probably going to cost me 20 grand or more.

 

My argument is the vehicle was sold as unrecorded, meaning it has no bad history.

Yet it was recorded in Australia as a vehicle which is not fit for the road.

Which either Copart or the seller using them to move his vehicles did know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Unrecorded means unrecorded.

No data, nothing, no history known.

They cant tell you one way or another.

 

Now I do have some sympathy with your situation and yes, it does smell of a bit of a s cam but your a car trader, you should know not to buy a car without knowing its history. If you do you take the responsibility and unfortunately you've been bitten on the bum with this one

Link to post
Share on other sites

But my point is that it is recorded, I have the Australian Certificate proving this.

does that not count because it's not within the UK?

 

I presume it's only fair then that Copart resell the vehicle on for me, again as unrecorded?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of jurisdiction unfortunately

 

But you cant do the same without possible consciences.

 

You now know that its basically a cat b write off and if you sell it without declaring it you might open up a whole can of worms for yourself.

 

I must say for someone who claims to e a trader buying and selling 100's of vehicles, your knowledge on the law in regarding car purchases and sales of cars is, to say the least,lacking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't saying that was the route I was going to choose,

I was just curious to see if unrecorded would still be accurate in your opinion.

Which, although morally you don't agree - theoretically it is right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theoretically, no.

Whether selling privately, which you cant do, or as a trader these laws apply

 

Whichever option(s) you choose,

your advertisement must by law describe the car accurately and include the following details:

 

•Colour

•Mileage

•Condition

•Your contact details

•List of equipment/taxes

•Full service history (or not)

•The exact make and model

•The year of manufacture and registration identifier (eg ‘09’ or ‘59’ plate for 2009)

 

You're stuck on condition

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Hi im new to this forum and ive been stung by copart too ive just finished all paperwork and thought i was waiting for my new Reg and Logbook instead they send me my new VIN and trying to Register My audi Q7 on a Q Plate, has anyone got any more info on this and is it worth taking it up further with copart?:-x:-x:-x:-x:-x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi im new to this forum and ive been stung by copart too ive just finished all paperwork and thought i was waiting for my new Reg and Logbook instead they send me my new VIN and trying to Register My audi Q7 on a Q Plate, has anyone got any more info on this and is it worth taking it up further with copart?:-x:-x:-x:-x:-x

 

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

You need to start a new thread of your own please, to avoid advice for you being mixed up with advice for Cheung.

 

Best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

You need to start a new thread of your own please, to avoid advice for you being mixed up with advice for Cheung.

 

Best, HB

 

Hi im after the same advice as Cheung i just thought id let everyone know where i am with my vehicle

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is what already has been advised:

 

Copart only has to perform 1 check, its legal right to sell the vehicle in the UK which means so long as there is no finance outstanding (in which the agent in Australia also has to clear) and not stolen co part.

 

Any check prior to UK registration will return as unknown as its not a uk registered car there will be nothing held on file how could there DVLA don't know of its existence in the UK at this stage. Copart has no vested interest in registering the vehicle for themselves in the UK so no in depth checks from the DVLA will be performed.

 

If you take them to court your going to be asked several difficult questions. Such as Why you didn't perform your own investigations into the vehicle you were buying, why did you accept the vehicle from copart did you inspect before you signed on the dotted line and what you describe as "history unknown/not known" means to you why this is different to any other auction house purchase.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems this way.

Copart are a international chain just like a ASDA.

When you import a car yourself you can do all the checks you need to do by communicating with importer, IF buy one through copart that's listed as having no history, and perform no checks in order to confirm or deny its status then you have issues,

 

Law states that Co part have no obligations to perform any checks on a car other than to check they have legal right to sell it.

Copart are a salvage and AUCTION company, they are not a dealership in which you have full consumer protection.

 

With auction houses you have very little protection infact, just about as much protection as if you bought a car from a private seller.

I think the two here think they should have full protection of that of a dealership for buying through a auction house a salvaged vehicle to repair that was also imported from OZ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...