Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well done on your victory!  👏   You must have a magic touch, it's extremely rare that the PPCs accept an appeal.
    • Court hearing today. WON on all counts of claim. The win though is not the interesting bit, but the ‘why’ is really useful. We were allocated 90 minutes but it took two hours by telephone . The defense were represented but I failed to note whether by a solicitor, barrister or other advocate.   As soon as the judge finished the introductions and before he had time to pass the time over to me to explain my case, the defense interrupted and asked the claim be struck out. He then spent the next 40 minutes discussing with the judge that I had failed to properly serve my bundle upon which I intended to rely. The judge asked me to explain and I said I had served the bundle to them and the court 3 days before the deadline, by signed for post with a tracking number to the address named in the summons being the Royal Mail Head Office in London. I said it was a bit rich that they were making this request when they had failed to serve me and the court with their bundle within the deadline and that I had only just received it. They quoted a certain principle of law (which I failed to write down) which explained that service of documents must be made to the address which either party may request service to be made. They claimed that six months earlier when they lodged their defense to my summons, the covering letter had been sent from their Sheffield office and it constituted the address for future service of documents. I of course had no idea of such a requirement and said that a simple letter heading on a piece of correspondence was not the same as a formal sentence in a letter requesting such future service. It gave the judge some concern but he decided to park the issue and allow the hearing to continue.   I was able to explain my case for the £50 compensation for the lost parcel using the evidence from the defense bundle referencing the Overseas Post Scheme. It was all straight forward. I explained the facts and let them speak for themselves. I then moved on to the delayed Special Delivery items. This is where the fun began because I had to argue against their terms and conditions. I used the defense bundle referencing the UK Post Scheme. I quoted from various clauses which explained the rules relating to claims. That ALL delay claims must be made within 3 months, then that Special Delivery was actually 14 days so not 3 months after all, then another clause which confirmed the deadline was 3 months for all delay claims. I quoted further that these were “common terms” and that some services (Special Delivery was one) had additional terms which were called “specific terms”. Another clause stated that where a conflict arises between common and specific terms, then specific terms took priority. So I turned to the Special Delivery section to quote the specific terms as these would have priority. There was only one term that referenced claims. It simply said If we do not succeed in attempting to deliver by this time (being the next day) we will refund your postage. I used this single phrase to take priority over the 3 months  or 14 day deadline mentioned in the common terms. I discussed how the various clauses conflicted with themselves as if the clauses themselves did not know what the deadlines were and how ambiguous and confusing it was.   The time was then past to the defense and he started to argue there was no contract nor liability in tort (a substantial portion of their written defense document and bundle discussed this argument). It made me smile because I was ready for that. The judge though was ahead of the game and (especially because 40 minutes had been wasted at the beginning) he did not want to hear of it. After about one minute, he stopped the defense by saying exactly what I was preparing to say. Simply that I was not suing under contract or tort but under the conditions of the various postal schemes for which they were liable. He asked the defense to answer my claims. The defense then prevaricated trying to argue the clause that distinctly mentioned the 14 day time limit within which to make a claim for delay (which of course it did) ( as an aside, most people might accept that deadline and not bother to pursue a claim). He had nothing to add about the lost parcel.   Time had run out, we had no questioning and the judge said he was summing up. He was quite happy I had served my documents sufficiently well and took the view that the defense had fallen foul of the court order so he was cancelling out the question about valid service. He had no difficulty in accepting the claim that the lost parcel was valid and awarded me the £50 compensation. He then spoke at longer length about the delay claims and the conflict in the clauses. (at this point I had no idea which way this bit would go). Then, he spoke of how a business such as Royal Mail should not be accepting clauses in their contracts which were clearly inconsistant. (that’s when I started to relax), (and then the best takeaway of the hearing), He said that common law provides in the event of a standard contract if there is any ambiguity, the interpretation should be judged against the person drafting the contract. He called it Contra Proferendem. (I had no idea of that concept but had effectively explained it anyway). I was awarded the whole claim plus costs. The defense asked for permission to appeal which was refused.    Remember the phrase “Contra Proferendem” . I shall be looking more into it. I am sure it will come in handy against any institution that have drafted contracts that cannot be individually negotiated. And will certainly be useful for a long while yet against Royal Mail et al.
    • The White House highlights the upcoming offer of free trips in the US by the ride-hailing firms. View the full article
    • Original loan was £5000 unsecured over 5 years, 28 payments remaining, he wanted to extend it back up to 5 year.........the bank offered him £6700 to clear his credit card and the bank loan, £135 per month from the original figure of £121    One debt of two years old and one debt of 15 months        
  • 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
      • 33 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

Hillside Leisure -Right to Reject New Campervan? - ***Resolved***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 796 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

I am new here but very glad to find my way here and would welcome any input.

 

i purchased a brand new campervan conversion from Hillside Leisure (175 miles from our home) on July 26th for £31,000 and, within 48 hours, during a storm, the alarm began to sound incessantly. We could not get it to stop, even after trying everything listed in the manual. We phoned Hillside on Saturday July 28th around 2.00pm. The young man who answered the phone said he would seek the advice of their technician and call us back, which he did. The technician told us that they, Hillside, couldn’t help, but that we should take the van to Nissan (the van is a Nissan) as the fault would lie with one of their components.

 

During the coming days, the alarm continued to sound randomly. Our neighbours were furious and we were beginning to feel quite stressed. We had a holiday booked (our first) but cancelled it because the sounding of the alarm being so unpredictable. We booked the van as we were instructed to into our local branch of Nissan who, because of the holiday time in August, were unable to fit us in for three weeks, but we accepted that’s what we had to do to get the campervan repaired.

 

We decided to ensure there would be no further problems, (the alarm had sounded at 5.00 am and seemed to be cycling through some pattern or other) to simply leave the van unlocked - which is what we did. No one from Hillside rang us or offered any input or help or asked to see the van during those 3 weeks.

 

Finally, on August 17th, we took the campervan into our local Nissan branch who seemed very helpful. However, later in the day we had a call from Nissan to say that they thought the internal sensors were causing the alarm to go off because the roof had been altered and so the issue lay with the conversion. I asked the Nissan man if they could simply disarm the alarm, but he asked who would pay for it. I said we had a van warranty with Nissan and a campervan warranty with Hillside, surely they must between them be able to do something. ‘Leave it with me’ he said.

 

An hour or so later, Nissan man phoned me and said he was not happy. Hillside would not speak to him saying they were ‘too busy’ and that there had been some words exchanged about their, Nissan’s, lack of expertise. He apologised but said they couldn’t do anything and we would have to collect the van, still with the fault.

 

At that time, I was furious and all the ideas I had of relatively trouble free motoring evaporated. Having had the campervan for just 3 weeks and driving home with the fault still on the van and this being the first experience of a problem was infuriating. I checked my rights and decided to invoke our short term right to reject the van as not fit for purpose after talking with CAB the next morning. We wanted our money back.

 

Since then, there have been 15 exchanges of letters between us and Hillside, each more unpleasant and accusatory. To be fair, after we rejected the van and asked for our money back Hillside did offer to inspect it and repair it, but why didn’t they do that in the first place and the problem was exacerbated by their complete lack of concern for us and our holiday cancellation. Perhaps, had Hillside apologised or shown sympathy or understanding of how difficult those three weeks of the unpredictable alarm were, we might have said please repair it. But they didn’t accept liability at the time, never contacted us and we simply followed their instructions to take it to Nissan. Hillside’s emails and later letters were belligerent and blaming, so we are still seeking a full refund. The van is still completely unused and sitting in our driveway still unlocked.

 

I contacted Nissan Customer Services who say they are unable to offer an independent inspection without the vehicle being stripped out by Hillside, so the advice Hillside gave to ‘take it to Nissan’ on that first afternoon was completely wrong,anyway. I have also tried finding arbitration but, so far, haven’t found anyone who can arbitrate because the van is under warranty and that includes the NCC whom Hillside are members of.

 

We are now at the stage of thinking we should take it back to Hillside to strip out and Nissan inspect, but we are so mistrustful of Hillside and have lost all faith in them and Nissan haven’t come out much better. We certainly don’t want the van back afterwards but wonder quite what exactly our rights are, here. Under the Consumer Act 2015 and the fact we rejected this van as not fit for purpose 23 days after buying it (and it’s never been used) we would welcome the experience, thoughts, advice and expertise of this Forum. Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read your story thoroughly yet, but I see that you are just within the first six months of ownership. You should assert your rights under the consumer rights act which entitles you to insist on a repair and then if the repair fails you are entitled to insist on a refund or a replacement – at your option.

 

Send a letter immediately. Send it by recorded delivery. Also send an email. Make it clear that you are asserting your rights under the 2015 Act and tell them that you want it repaired. You should also tell them that you will be holding them liable for any costs you incur associated with the defect – including delivering the van to them and collecting it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read a bit more carefully and I see in fact that you have already invoked your short-term right to reject in the first 30 days. Well done.

 

In that case you can ignore what I said about the six months right.

 

I'm afraid that the only thing now is to threaten a legal action. How did you pay for the van?

 

You can begin a legal action in the County Court. However you need to be aware that if you happen to lose the case, that you may be liable for the other sides costs. If you win then they will be liable for your costs.

 

On the basis of what you have told us above, your chances of success are better than 95%.

 

If you want to start a legal action then you will need to send them a letter before claim and given 14 days. Don't send the letter if you aren't serious. Don't bluff. It's not worth it. You will lose credibility.

 

It will help you if you can get something in writing from Nissan confirming the defect which you have identified – but even if the defect happens to be an Nissan defect, it will still be the suppliers of the van to you who will be liable.

 

At the same time I would suggest that you go round to all of the mobile home websites and start telling everybody about your experience. You may be very surprised to hear others reporting similar concerns about the same company.

 

If you want to start a legal action then we will be very pleased to help you and we will assist you in drafting the claim – which will be very easy and very short.

 

If you do start a legal action then you will be claiming for the refund to which you are entitled under the consumer legislation and also any associated costs caused by the breach of contract and also I would think about putting in a figure for the loss of enjoyment in respect of your ruin holiday plans

 

By the way, please read our customer services guide and implement the advice there. It is very important.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, thank you for the reply.

 

Perhaps I wasn’t very clear that we have sent many letters recorded delivery rejecting the campervan as not fit for purpose, the first one well within 30 days.

Hillside do not accept the campervan as unfit for purpose and have requested to inspect the van and want to repair it.

They did not accept liability for the van on the day of the fault but referred us to Nissan, who then said the problem was with the conversion, which Hillside refused to accept. We are caught in the middle and this is the essence of our discomfort.

 

In addition, because the correspondence (over 10 recorded delivery letters from them and us) has been so deeply unpleasant, because they gave us bad and wrong advice (take it to Nissan, it’s a Nissan problem) and because we lived with the stress of the alarm possibly sounding for three weeks we just want nothing to do with this company and want them to take their unused campervan back. They may well repair the fault but then we don’t want to have to deal with them at all in the future.

 

They haven’t inspected the van themselves (I think we suspected they were trying to blame us for the problem) but Nissan say they can’t check the alarm sensors without Hillside stripping out, so we are thinking we should get it back to them. But we don’t want it repaired. After these awful months and the loss of our holiday , we just want a refund.

 

Thank you!

Our replies crossed.

Will stay in touch.

Thank you!

 

Bankfodder, you asked how we paid for the campervan.

Well, with our life savings.

It’s all paid for, unmoved since the fateful trip to Nissan and still unlocked with 380 miles on the clock.

 

May I just ask one thing.

Do you think it advisable to return it to Hillside (God knows we have had enough of it) and get the inspection done?

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites
Bankfodder, you asked how we paid for the campervan. Well, with our life savings. It’s all paid for, unmoved since the fateful trip to Nissan and still unlocked with 380 miles on the clock. May I just ask one thing. Do you think it advisable to return it to Hillside (God knows we have had enough of it) and get the inspection done?

 

This doesn't answer the question. Did you pay by bank transfer, credit card, what means did you use to pay with your life savings?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The defect doesn't have to render the item unfit for purpose. According to the new 2015 legislation, it simply needs to be a defect. Who started using this kind of language? You or them?

 

Even if it is not unfit for purpose, under the old legislation you would still have been entitled to a repair.

 

In terms of what you should do with the van now, I suppose that your worst nightmare could be that you would return it to Hillside Leisure and then they suddenly go out of business and you lose your van as well as your money.

 

Probably the best thing to do is to hang onto it but make it clear to Hillside Leisure that you will also be applying a reasonable storage charge to your claim.

 

The good thing about you as an individual bringing your claim against the company is that even though you are the claimant, the case will be heard in your local court. That will put them to load of trouble.

 

Just to avoid any doubt, I suggest that you make sure that you get some expert corroboration of the defect – even if the cause of the defect is not identified.

 

Also, write to Hillside Leisure and invite them to carry out their own inspection of the vehicle and tell them that you will be happy to accommodate them if they will make an appointment. Point out to them that if they will not make a visit and inspect the van then you will put that out to the judge in the County Court case and they will have difficulty disputing the existence of any defect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you BF.

In relation to corroborating the fault, I do have two pieces of written evidence from our local Nissan branch, one dated August 17th and the second, more formal, from the Service Manager October 8th reads,

 

“Just to confirm that the vehicle was inspected as Customer concern was alarm going off. We inspected the vehicle to find it had been completely modified and converted into a campervan.

 

We checked the alarm and suspect that due to the modification to the roof this may be causing the ultra sonics to set off the alarm.

 

Further testing of the alarm and wiring would involve removal of units inside the vehicle. We are not happy to work around the modifications made and recommend return to selling or adaption dealer.”

 

I do have that and a more informal email from another member of staff at our local Nissan branch.

 

I think your input to invite Hillside to inspect here is a really good plan.

We are very weary and just want it gone and sorted, but I think you have helped stiffen our resolve.

 

There have been some really unpleasant accusations thrown at us from Hillside

- not least that our contacting Nissan was “undertaken of your own accord.”

That made us particularly furious as we just did what they told us to do and just wanted it sorted.

 

In relation to the word ‘defect’ Hillside used it in one of their letters to us, so I think we may have used it without thought.

Thank you again, BF!

 

Sorry, just spotted your payment question.

We paid via two Debit cards,

lawntreader

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

In respect of the defects, you don't have to ascertain the cause. You only have to ascertain that the defect exists. Can they confirmed that the alarm problem exists?

 

In the case of the payments, it's a shame you didn't use credit cards because you would have more protection. I'm not sure what the chargeback rules for payments of this size by means of debit cards are.

 

Maybe someone can help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you king12345. Unfortunately, we paid by debit card so I assume this section 75 doesn’t apply? Hillside wouldn’t accept credit card.

 

In respect of the defects, you don't have to ascertain the cause. You only have to ascertain that the defect exists. Can they confirmed that the alarm problem exists?”

 

We did video it going off and it has been taken to Nissan whose report I included in my previous post.

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked d up this section 75 and debit cards and it doesn’t apply, but there is this Chargeback thing, but we are 4 days over the 120 days which is bit hard. But for future reference it says

 

 

Chargeback isn’t a legal protection like section 75. It’s an agreement Visa, Mastercard, Maestro and American Express have signed up to.

 

The scheme enables you to claim a refund from your card provider if a purchase doesn’t arrive or is faulty.

 

It works by the card company trying to claim your money back from the company you’ve paid, by reversing the transaction.

 

There’s usually no minimum spend in order to be covered by chargeback, but time limits apply for making a claim – usually up to either 45 or 120 days from making the purchase, depending on the type of card.

 

Chargeback claims can take some time to process because the card company has to get the money refunded before it can pass it onto you.“

 

But thank you everyone for this support

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it bewildering that Hillside haven’t insisted you get the van back to them for inspection, in the first place! It would probably take a good auto electrician a few hours to diagnose and either bypass some sensors or,

deactivate then incumbent alarm and fit a new one to the doors and engine bay only.

 

I suspect they think that you are suffering from “buyers remorse” and that’s why they are digging their heels in but they’re clearly wrong and this is abysmal behaviour from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with that..how silly of rhem

 

Dx

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

Ps chargeback is 120 days from when you realise not from paid date as long as you have not passed 540 days

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

Chuffnut, thank you.

It wasn’t until we rejected the campervan that they contacted us and wanted to inspect it and, to be fair, they then wanted to look at it, but that was three and a half weeks after purchase and after we’d gone through all the debacle at Nissan when this awful row between the two companies had kicked off and we didn’t like being in the middle of it all.

 

Yes, if they had accepted liability for the campervan in the first place or expressed the slightest bit of concern perhaps things might have been different. Certainly if I was MD of a company and someone had spent £31000 with me and 2 days in they had a problem, I would have been straight on the phone asking what was going on and seeing if I could help.

 

On the day the alarm first sounded, we sent Hillside the video of what had happened and they didn’t acknowledge receipt until weeks later when we provided them with evidence that we sent it.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In the case of the payments, it's a shame you didn't use credit cards because you would have more protection. I'm not sure what the chargeback rules for payments of this size by means of debit cards are.

 

Hillside wouldn’t accept credit cards. Perhaps if we had been more consumer savvy in July when we bought the campervan our alarm bells might have rung back then. It’s such a worry to have this campervan unlocked outside.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hillside wouldn’t accept credit cards. Perhaps if we had been more consumer savvy in July when we bought the campervan our alarm bells might have rung back then. It’s such a worry to have this campervan unlocked outside.

Hillside wouldn’t accept credit cards. Perhaps if we had been more consumer savvy in July when we bought the campervan our alarm bells might have rung back then. It’s such a worry to have this campervan unlocked outside.

 

Contact your bank by phone and then my post beginning the chargeback process. It costs nothing to try.

 

 

 

Decide if you are going to begin a legal action. You don't need any prrofesional help at this point.

Be aware of the risks and if you decide then we will help you begin.

 

You need to decide quickly.

Ask us any questions

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hillside wouldn’t accept credit cards. Perhaps if we had been more consumer savvy in July when we bought the campervan our alarm bells might have rung back then. It’s such a worry to have this campervan unlocked outside.

 

Contact your bank by phone and then my post beginning the chargeback process. It costs nothing to try.

Don't expect your bank to be pleased or cooperative.

 

Before you phone - implement the advice in our customer services guide

 

 

 

Decide if you are going to begin a legal action. You don't need any profesional help at this point.

Be aware of the risks and if you decide then we will help you begin.

 

You need to decide quickly.

Ask us any questions

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Imo you have to let Hillside have the opportunity to repair, refusing them their right is unreasonable. You cannot make up your own rules. A judge would probably dismiss your case or it would be set a side prior to going to court for exactly the above reason. You are taking this far too personally and not looking at it practically, any good vehicle Electrican would be able to fix / disable within a couple of hours. Stop escalating the problem and resolve it, get it fixed and move on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is a ultrasonic sensor issue you should be able to disable this function. Not ideal but at least you will be able to lock it.

 

There's usually a button in the car on the drivers side. It's a worth a look.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for further sharing of information, I have contacted my bank to initiate the Chargeback process. I found them very helpful but they have informed me that the faulty goods/van needs to be in the hands of the merchant and they then have 15 days to act and if they don’t, the process of obtaining the refund can be initiated. So they can’t act until the van is returned.

 

I have been fortunate to have a friend who has a garage who feels any company should have the right to inspect a faulty vehicle. But, at the same time, Hillside tried to blame us for tampering and told us to take the van to Nissan in the first place. They never wanted to see it in the first 3 weeks. The element of mistrust here is so great, yet I don’t want to appear unreasonable.

 

I have also been looking at auto engineers and expert witnesses and all sorts to strengthen our position, but I can’t help noticing another week has gone by with a brand new, unlocked campervan sitting outside. The thought of court proceedings doesn’t fill me with joy, but I am wondering if this maybe what has to happen.

 

BankFodder your advice was to tell Hillside to make an appointment to come and inspect it here at our house, but then Chargeback cannot be initiated. Another week has passed, I have done more research but I am still unsure of my next best move. Any input welcome, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • BankFodder changed the title to Hillside Leisure -Right to Reject New Campervan? - ***Resolved***
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...