Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • doesn't matter you've admitted about the DN and anyway where have you done that and to whom?   by assignment arrows are the creditor regardless to your acking of that fact or not.      
    • Just ignore the letter.   Block/bounce their emails or let them come through so you know what they're up to, and keep us posted.............   😎
    • Thanks DX,   I've already admitted that a default notice was served in 2010 by MBNA, so it seems I might be left hoping that they're unable to produce the original CCA.   I've never acknowledged Arrrow as the creditor and continue to pay MBNA.  Is that in my favour?   Cheers,   Richard.
    • For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]       please answer the following questions.       1 Date of the infringement  10/07/2019       2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date]  12/07/19      3 Date received  13/07/19      4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?/    Yes      5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?  yes      6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal]  yes  Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up  yes      7 Who is the parking company?  Civil enforcement      8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]    10B QUEENS ROAD, CONSETT, DH8 0BH       For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Yes    …………………..     This is what I sent to CE appeal in my own words   Reason For Appeal: Firstly I had an appointment at that time with the dentist. My last visit 2 years ago the car park was free and was not aware of the new parking system.   The sign at the front is very obscure especially turning right into the car park. Where I did park, the sign opposite was turned 90 degrees making it hard to see.   The door at the surgery was wedged open when I entered not realizing there was a sign relating to the new system . I cannot remember if there was any signs inside the surgery but once in I always pick up a magazine to read until the dentist is ready to see me.      My statement and evidence to POPLA. in response to CE evidence highlighting main arguments.   Par 18 . The image submitted from the Appellant of a sign slightly turned is still readable and is not obscured...….. Me Not from where I was parked. A photo from the bay shows a pole with the sign facing away.  Par 18 . Furthermore, it highlights that the Appellant was aware of the signage on the site and failed to comply with the terms and conditions regardless.......  Me I treat this paragraph with contempt. There is nothing to "highlight" here as I maintain I did not see any signage; Regardless ? I could have legally parked right outside the Surgery as there were spaces at the time but having "regard" for disabled and elderly, parked further away having to cross a busy road to the Surgery. Par 20....,. Furthermore, the Appellant failed to utilise the operator’s helpline phone number,,, (displayed at the bottom of signage) to report the occurrence, or to request advice on what further action could be taken.... Me How could I have done this ? I only realized there were signs there when the PCN arrived. Summary. I stand by statements and maintain that I did not see any signage entering or leaving the car park. The main sign at the entrance is too small and easily missed when you have to turn right though busy traffic and once through carefully avoid pedestrians, some walking their dogs. The main sign is blank at the back. When you leave the car park I would have noticed the private parking rules if the writing was on both sides. Roadworks signs close to the parking sign at the time did not help either. [see photo] CE evidence is flawed, illegal and contemptuous. Photos submitted are from months ago, Today I have driven into the car park and noticed the same signs turned 90 degrees including the one opposite my bay. CE have done nothing to rectify this disregarding my evidence and the maintenance of the car park. Showing number plates is a total disregard to patients privacy and I object to these photos being allowed as evidence on the grounds that they may be illegal.    POPLAS assessment and decision....unsuccessful   Assessor summary of operator case   The operator states that the appellant’s vehicle was parked on site without a permit. It has issued a parking charge notice (PCN) for £100 as a result. Assessor summary of your case   The appellant states that he parked on site to attend a dental appointment. He states that the terms of the site had changed since the last time he parked two years ago. He states that signage at the entrance to and throughout the site did not make the terms clear. The appellant has provided various photographs taken on and around the site. Assessor supporting rational for decision   The appellant accepts that he was the driver of the vehicle on the date in question. I will therefore consider his liability for the charge as the driver.   The operator has provided photographs of the appellant’s vehicle taken by its automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras. These photographs show the vehicle entering the site at 14:17 and leaving the site at 15:13. It is clear that the vehicle remained on site for a period of 56 minutes.   Both the appellant and operator have provided photographs of the signs installed on the site. The operator has also provided a site map showing where on site each sign is located.   Having reviewed all of the evidence, I am satisfied that signage at the entrance to the site clearly states: “Permit Holders Only … See car park signs for terms and conditions”.   Signs within the site itself clearly state: “DENTAL PRACTICE PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY … ALL PATIENTS AND VISITORS MUST REGISTER FOR A PERMIT AT THE PRACTICE RECEPTION ... IF YOU BREACH ANY OF THESE TERMS YOU WILL BE CHARGED £100.”   The signs make the terms of parking on the site clear, are placed in such a way that a motorist would see the signs when parking and are in line with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice.   The operator has provided evidence to show that a search for the appellant’s vehicle has been carried out against the list of vehicles for which a valid permit was held on the date in question. The appellant’s vehicle does not appear on this list.   The appellant states that he parked on site to attend a dental appointment . I accept that this may have been the case, however I do not accept that this entitled the appellant to park on site outside of the terms.   The appellant states that the terms of the site had changed since the last time he parked two years ago. The operator’s photographs of the signage on site are dated 27 March 2019.   It is clear based on these photographs that the terms had been in place for at least three months by the time the appellant parked, which I am satisfied was a reasonable period for any regular user of the site to adapt to any change to the terms.   The appellant states that signage at the entrance to and throughout the site did not make the terms clear. He has provided various photographs taken on and around the site.   As detailed above, I am satisfied based on the evidence as a whole that signage made the terms sufficiently clear. I am satisfied from the evidence that the terms of the site were made clear and that the appellant breached the terms by parking without registering for a permit.   I am therefore satisfied that the PCN was issued correctly and I must refuse this appeal.   docs1.pdf
  • Our picks

missvicky6657

Used car faulty - help

Recommended Posts

My husband brought a car and part exchanged his as part of the deal. The car was brought on the 15/5 and a fault became apparent the day after. While sat in traffic the engine overheating light came on as did the check oil light and upon inspection we found there to be no oil in the car aswell as no water.

 

My husband refilled the oil and coolant levels and it was very clear that the car was losing water rapidly. We took it to our trusted car mechanic who diagnosed that the water pump had gone on the engine. Knowing this we contacted the used car dealer where we brought the car and they wanted us to give them the car for inspection in their garage ( to which they said they probably wouldn't cover it as the warranty was for engine and gearbox only.)

 

We didn't want to take it back to them as it appears they falsely stamped the service book with their garage stamp as services should include change of oil filters and fresh engine oil which wasn't done and also they said we could not have a refund because they had to replace the gearbox and clutch on our p=x car and that if we wanted to go down that route we now owed them more for repairs to the p/x car. (We had told them about the clutch as that is what we were told was wrong with it). We got the water pump changed at our cost with the intention that we would try and get a partial refund or start court proceedings however yesterday 2/6 5th gear is jumping out of gear under any acceleration.

 

Does anyone know where I stand with what's happened prior to yesterday and also yesterday as to whether I must let them repair/look at the car or whether I can get it repaired and claim later? The garage owner was aggressive and am quite worried about returning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please will you tell us what is the name of the garage.

The Consumer Rights Act basically says that where a defect occurs within the first 30 days then you are in principle entitled to a refund or a replacement vehicle – at your choice. The notion of defect basically means that the car is not of satisfactory quality. On the basis of what you say, it is clear that it is not of satisfactory quality – meaning that it doesn't meet up to the expectations of a reasonable consumer.

However, we have seen problems where people have tried to return vehicles or even return them only to find that later on the garage has gone out of business. Frankly we are finding that very often this "short-term right to reject" which is provided in the Consumer Rights Act is not straightforward to enforce if you don't have a decent reputable garage. From the sounds of it, your garage doesn't seem to be very interested in respecting your rights/their contractual duties.

On that basis you might be better off getting the damage repaired and then selling them.

Start off by telling us the name of the garage. Have you had an estimate for repairs?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dealership is indeed a small 3 man band in the village I live in so I don't really want to say their name as it could be incredibly outing and they also own a garage in the city where the service was stamped before we viewed the car. 

 

 

We have already paid £511 for the water pump and timing kit to be changed as was adhered to change the timing belt die to potential contamination of coolant degrading the belt. We don't intend to claim for the belt so the cost of the pump was around £400.

 

We don't have a quote for current gearbox problem yet and don't want to sell the car as once it's done it should be a good motor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but you are completely wrong to withhold the name. This helpful to us. Also if the garage happens to discover that you are posting about it here then it will make them realise that there is more at risk then simply having to pay you out your money. It will also protect others – especially as you seem to be saying that they have at least two outlets.
The consumer problems which are post up on this website are intended to inform and to help everyone who comes here and not simply the particular individual which has posted the thread.

 

I'm afraid I don't really understand why you want to protect people who take your money and then try to rip you off by refusing to carry out their full consumer obligations.
 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in that case the dealership is called Vb car sales in kirkby  and their garage who put the service stamp in the book is called vb smart service based in Nottingham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

I suggest that you get a quotation for all the work that needs doing to put the vehicle into the condition that it should have been in when you bought it – meaning the condition that a reasonable consumer would expect it to be.

You must keep a paper trail – meaning that you must inform the seller of the vehicle at all times what you are doing and any expenses which are likely to be incurred. However to begin with you must assert your right to reject the vehicle. This means that you must write them a letter immediately, inform them of the various faults which you have discovered and tell them that you are asserting your right to reject the vehicle under the Consumer Rights Act and that you want them to discuss a refund of your money.

Even if you are going to reject the vehicle – you must assert this right so that your position is reserved.

In a separate letter inform of the fault is that you have discovered so far and of the work that you have carried out to date. Include receipts for the work. When you are getting further problems assessed, you should get hold of two quotes and provide them both to VB. Invite VB to inspect the vehicle themselves and to query any quotes but warned them that you will be carrying out the work within X number of days as you consider that it is your duty to mitigate your losses. Tell them that you will then be approaching them for full reimbursement plus any ancillary losses and tell them that if they will not cover all of your reasonable expenses then you will have to bring a legal action against them.

Come back here when you have the quotes so that we can understand exactly what is wrong and how much it is going to cost.

Finally, please can you tell us something about the vehicle. What kind of vehicle is it, age, mileage, and cost.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we please know the make, model, price and mileage of this car?

A £200 15 year old corsa with 250k miles on the clock would be seen by the reasonable person as a scrap.

Differently from a £20k 3 year old merc with 15k miles on the clock. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a 2004 toyota corolla verso 4d4 diesel should have been £1495 but paid £875 plus had £600 off p/x for my swift.

 

Mileage is 140k on the clock but had a second engine a year ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

Do you think that £1495 is the of it? Could it be worth more?

What can you tell us about the new engine? Was it a recon engine? Was it new? Have you been provided any paperwork/evidence for it?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Values of the car on honest john indicating cars value.  It was priced on forecourt at £1475. Presumably with fake service it would have been worth less?  Repairs total as far as £400+ 2 days after purchase. It's going to the garage as we speak to see what the fault is with 5th gear. 

Screenshot_20190603-135752_Samsung Internet.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay. I'm only asking you about its value because you should be careful about spending more than its value on repairs. On the other hand if you think the car is especially good for you then if you do spend more than the value then make sure that you are fastidious about letting the dealer know.

He also should understand that if you do try to sue for the full value of the repairs, if VB Cars decided to defend, they might raise the issue that you had bought a second-hand vehicle with 140,000 miles on the clock and you were entitled to expect a brand-new waterpump or a brand-new gearbox and that any money claim might be reduced to reflect that.

On the other hand, if they judge was persuaded that VB Cars hadn't been straight with you, the judge might be very much less sympathetic with them. In terms of any work that they had found it necessary to do on your part exchange vehicle, – that is tough on them and they would not be able to rely on it against you. They are effectively a professional firm which holds out a certain expertise and you are merely a consumer and so in terms of their purchase of your vehicle from yourselves, they have bought the vehicle "as seen".

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advise, I know we shouldn't expect a new water pump or gearbox however in relation to the water pump there would have been no water in the whinge or very little as as soon as it got into any traffic queue it overheated and would have blown the engine.

 

The pump was so bad that when we did put water in it it dipped then run out of the pump. If there was water in it at the forecourt we would have seen it after the short test drive.

Screenshot_20190603-141510_Messenger.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the chances of your claim being reduced for a water pump are negligible. Don't worry about it – but a gearbox might be a different issue. On the other hand if it is simply repair rather than replacement then once again it is far more likely that you will be able to reclaim your entire loss.

Of course you can simply sue them for the value of the vehicle plus your expenses reasonably incurred. To my mind it would be reasonable to sue for a refund of the purchase price plus the cost of the water pump.

However it probably means that you would have to take the vehicle off the road and not spend any more money on it. I think it will be quite reasonable to sue for the entire £1495 and not worry too much about the complication of the part exchange vehicle seeing as they have apparently carried out work on it. If you wanted to do this then we can help you. It's very straightforward and on the basis of what you say, you will win – but don't expect it to be very quick. I think you'd expect it to take up to 6 months.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To put it bluntly you exchanged a scrap for another scrap slightly better.

Unfortunately at 140k miles all cars start giving trouble and a water pump is just too common.

Gearbox? Who knows.

I had a fiat punto running on original gearbox for 200k miles, but i also had an s500 blowing a gearbox at 40k miles.

Luck of the draw.

To reply to bankfodder, I'm not too convinced that any judge would sympathise with the op.

Cars of this standard (end of life) are simply a big gamble and everyone knows it.

I would personally try to resolve with the dealer, possibly by getting px car back.

How much money would be exchange to cancel the whole deal would be a matter for negotiation, after all the dealer fixed the px car (so he says) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I partly disagree. You say that there has been a simple exchange – but this is not quite true. There has been a consumer purchase from a dealer. There has essentially been a private seller purchase to a dealer. These are very different and have different rules.

I agree that the easy thing to do would be to get your part exchange car back – but you are still out of pocket by about £500 for the water pump. You have no guarantee of the quality of the work which has been carried out to your part exchange vehicle – if indeed any work has been carried out at all. If you get your old vehicle back and it breaks down because of faulty work then you will have another litigation problem because you can be certain that the dealer will refuse to cooperate with you in anyway.

Getting your part exchange vehicle back might be the easiest in the short run – if you are prepared to write off your 500 quid for the pump. However as I have explained you are then taking a risk with their so-called repair of your old vehicle.

The cleanest way to get out of this is to sue them for your money back plus reasonable expenses of the water pump but it won't be a quick solution


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merely an observation, but £1495 seems like a lot of money(?)

 

Five years ago we had a Toyota Avensis written off ('53 plate, just over 100k on the clock, reasonable condition, "short engine" had been replaced by Toyota outside of warranty).  We researched all the guides prepared to negotiate any offer, and were happy to accept c. £1800.  I'm pretty certain it would have been less than a grand now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not 2004 I got that wrong it's a 55 plate. 

 

To update our garage believes the gearbox is shot and needs a replacement box, contacted the dealer who wants it in their garage tomorrow first thing. So that's where we are at the moment, otger half is going to sit in their garage tomorrow while they look at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our garage confirmed it's very likely the gear box is indeed shot. Taken back to the dealer yesterday who wanted it in his garage this morning. 

 

His mechanic agreed after looking that the gearbox is bad so having gone back to the dealer he is now saying that f1 autos have broke the gearbox ( they only test drive it) and he was going to speak to his mechanic. I got the feeling he isn't going to do anything and he is still not accepting the car back. Our part exchange car is sat in his garage minus a gearbox as we speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Please keep us updated


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dealer was meant to ring us back today to see what he was going to do after speaking to his mechanic and hasn't so tomorrow we are going to the garage to advise we are rejecting the car unless he repairs it. 

 

Is there a template letter I should be using for the rejection? It's also come to our notice that the car has been sold to us with an outstanding safety recall which they were not allowed to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No we don't have a template letter – but all you've got to do really is to point out the faults in the car – including the outstanding safety recall which you believe could be illegal under the Road traffic act section 75 and you are therefore asserting your rights under the Consumer Rights Act to reject the vehicle and require a full refund either of the total purchase price or of the price paid plus the return of your part exchange vehicle in the condition that it was in before the contract. Also tell them that you have incurred £X X X bosses which you recently incurred in reliance on the contract and you require those as well.

Frankly I would turn into a letter of claim and say to them that if all of this does not happen within 14 days then you will start an action in the County Court for the recovery of all your losses plus interest plus court costs and without any further notice.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...