car lease demand after 3 years

[SeasideSteve]

I leased a car 4 years ago. 

 

There was a problem with the car within the first few months and I booked it into the main dealer.

 

When it went in they sent one of the videos showing the car. It showed that there were parts missing under the car.

 

Despite this they said that the problems were driver error and would not be covered under warranty. The cost of repairs would have run it into thousands and they collected their hire car, leaving me high and dry. I complained to the ombudman who advised me to carry on making monthly payments and register a formal complaint.

 

After 3 months, the complaint didnt go anywhere, they sent a letter telling me that by not making payments (incorrect) I was in breach of contract and they were ending the agreement.

 

I decided to cut my losses, as I had lost circa £500 in payments but the cost of repairs could have been a lot higher. I know from a friend who works at the dealership that the car was repaired and sold.

 

Fast forward, 3 years and I have received a letter asking for over £700. I am unsure how this has been calculated. They have transferred my details to a debt and revenue partner who will be in touch. Not ideal timing, assume that they are trying to get as much money in as possible.

 

I have all paper work and bank statements to show that I did make payments, it seems bizarre that a financial company would make such an error. 

 

At the time I did an SAR request, one of the internal emails complained that I had carried on making payments as this made it "difficult to maneuver".

 

Does anyone have any advice please?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BankFodder]

You could start off by telling us the name of the dealer – and some information about the car.

Frankly it sounds a bit of an extraordinary story – and also it's a bit of a shame that you seem to put your hands up right at the beginning instead of fighting back. I'm not sure I completely understand what is happening here so far but it seems to me that you had all the right on your site and you could have forced the issue.

Tell us the name of the company – and also maybe you can give us a more simpler bullet pointed chronology of events.

[dx100uk]

and ignore any stupid dca for sure...

have you moved since hiring the car?

 

dx

 

[SeasideSteve]

• Jan 17 signed lease on a Vauxhall Astra 
• April 17 car delivered as promised, paid deposit 
• June 17 reported problems, booked in
• July 17 took car to garage, provided with courtesy car
• July 17 received email showing missing parts under car engine bay
• July 17 received letter requesting that i pay for cylinder damage to engine due to driver error
• July 17 wrote to CEO asking for good will
• Aug 17 raised official complaint and send SAR
• Sept 17 received letter asking me to pay my regular payment (DD was not cancelled and all payments made on time) 
• Oct 17 SAR request returned 
• Oct 17 letter cancelling contract due to breach of contract
• Dec 17 carrepaired and sold (apparently) 
• June 20 received letter asking for money, threatening dca action

I have not moved house in that time. 

 

I leased the car through a small company who were great, it seems to be the manufacturer/underwriter that are playing silly beggars. 

[BankFodder]

I'm not sure why you won't name the actual companies involved – unless you are trying to protect them.

I wanted to look at it from the point of view that they have breach their contract and that you might have a basis for a counterclaim if they wanted to cause trouble.

I'm intrigued by the damage which they say was caused by you? Maybe you could give us some details

[SeasideSteve]

The leasing company were a broker, its the manufacturer/underwriter Vauxhall Finance Plc who have sent the letters.

 

In layman terms there was damage to the engine and gearbox. When the dealer did the video inspection video, they noted that there were bolts missing. I was told that I had caused this and they had different reasons for this but hand on heart, im not a racing or rally driver! I had never had a brand new car before and it was carefully ran in for the frist 1000 miles. 

[BankFodder]

We have quite a few people who are up on this kind of thing. You have a copy of the video?

Could you produce a diagram please of an engine and indicate the bolts in question which were discovered to be missing

[dx100uk]

why would someone leasing a car remove bolts..what muppets..

 

if they weren't there or fell out in use ..that's their problems not yours..

[BankFodder]

Yes, I tend to agree with the above comments. He really makes me think that we need to have a look at this. There may be a question of breach of contract by them which could have caused you losses.

For one bolt to shake free is a possibility but for several bolts to shake free suggests that either they were there in the first place or that they were not properly tightened up when the unit was assembled.

[dx100uk]

new car too..what other faults that could have been dangerous too did they miss..

[BankFodder]

Of course it's a shame that this happened four years ago and that the OP seems broadly to have accepted the situation – but still I think if they start to try something on, then it would be quite reasonable to think about going into "attack mode"

[SeasideSteve]

I really appreciate the messages above.

 

At the time, I threatened to reject the car as I felt that either the parts were missing, faulty or not properly fitted from new.

 

The best photo I have is below, screen shot from the video but I will have the video somewhere. It was also detailed in an engineers report (which Im sure they regretted sharing).

[BankFodder]

Thanks for this. Maybe you could tell us a bit about the picture so that it is in context. Maybe you could find an image less close-up so you could get a more overview of it.

The engineer 's report would be interesting. Why didn't you carry out your threat?

Maybe you could also tell us about your losses.

[dx100uk]

pop the vdo up on youtube and link here via tinyurl site.

 

dx

 

[Manxman in exile]

Who is demanding over £700 and why do you not know how it is made up?   Are you saying one of the companies involved has just written demanding £750 with no indication whatsoever as to how that amount is broken down?  (Presumably it's the difference between what they think you owe and what they sold it for - but it would be nice to know for sure).

 

If you've got proof that you continued paying, then they must have been in breach of contract and not you - unless there's something you haven't explained.  What did they originally say when you demonstrated that they were in error and you'd been paying all along?  "I have all paper work and bank statements to show that I did make payments, it seems bizarre that a financial company would make such an error."  Did you not point that out at the time?

[BankFodder]

Yes, all of this is correct – but I think it's gone to a new limit as they now schedule data with some debt collection agency. Have you checked your credit file?

I think we need to find out everything that happened and then you should take control.

We really like to know about the losses you suffered as a result of their breach of contract and we can advise you. This is not the sort of thing that you should simply take on the chin

[SeasideSteve]

On 17/06/2020 at 18:24, BankFodder said:

This is not the sort of thing that you should simply take on the chin

 

Dont get me wrong, im not loaded but I decided that for what I had lost it could have been a lot worse. I just didn't need the stress of a long drawn out court battle with a company who probably have infinite resources and top barristers on retainers. 

 

Ive read through all of the letters again and they were/are basically saying that I failed to make 4 payments, all 4 were made on time. I wrote to them in Oct 17 recorded delivery with bank statements and a full summary explaining their error.

 

If anything they owe me the money, not the other way around! The timing is strange, assume there is a time limit on complaints to the ombudsman and they have waited for that to expire.

 

In their view, the car had damage to engine/gearbox which presumably cost money to fix and they have made a loss. They dont seem to be pursuing this, only the payments that I made but for some reason they think I didnt make.

 

 

 

[Hammy1962]

All very odd, we have about 10% of this story...............................................

 

My first thought would be persons unknown stole the Catalytic Converter which would have resulted in missing parts and bolts. Not Warranty. Should have been covered by insurance.

 

Second thought would be damage caused by grounding the car, again not Warranty, but an insurance repair.

 

H 

[BankFodder]

Good point. Have you actually had an assessment of what the damage was? Or what the missing bolts were from?

[Manxman in exile]

14 hours ago, Hammy1962 said:

All very odd, we have about 10% of this story...............................................

 

My first thought would be persons unknown stole the Catalytic Converter which would have resulted in missing parts and bolts. Not Warranty. Should have been covered by insurance.

 

Second thought would be damage caused by grounding the car, again not Warranty, but an insurance repair.

 

H 

 

I hadn't thought about someone stealing the cat converter - but apparently it happens a lot.  Perhaps I'm being naïve, but wouldn't the garage have noticed if it had been nicked?  And if the OP had grounded the car, surely(?) they'd have made an insurance claim?

[Manxman in exile]

20 hours ago, SeasideSteve said:

 

Dont get me wrong, im not loaded but I decided that for what I had lost it could have been a lot worse. I just didn't need the stress of a long drawn out court battle with a company who probably have infinite resources and top barristers on retainers. 

 

Ive read through all of the letters again and they were/are basically saying that I failed to make 4 payments, all 4 were made on time. I wrote to them in Oct 17 recorded delivery with bank statements and a full summary explaining their error.

 

If anything they owe me the money, not the other way around! The timing is strange, assume there is a time limit on complaints to the ombudsman and they have waited for that to expire.

 

In their view, the car had damage to engine/gearbox which presumably cost money to fix and they have made a loss. They dont seem to be pursuing this, only the payments that I made but for some reason they think I didnt make.

 

 

 

 

If you have evidence that you paid everything you were liable to pay under the lease agreement, but they won't listen to you, then just ignore them - unless somebody brings an actual court claim against you.  If they do bring a claim though, you will win if you have evidence you made all the payments you should have done.  (That's assuming they are only chasing missed payments and not compensation for damage to the car).

 

And if they owe you money - chase them for it.

 

I think without you posting up* copies of the letters etc it's difficult to give clear advice.  See what BankFodder and dx100UK think.  We also need a breakdown of the amount they are claiming so we can understand it.  Is it just missed payments or is it loss of value to the car because of the damage?  You don't seem to be sure so how can we tell?

 

As per Hammy1962 (#18) they didn't tell you what was missing from under the car (eg the "cat" had been stolen) or detail what was missing?  And there was no insurance claim for any damage?

 

*If you do post documents up, follow the instructions in the guide (I'm not sure what the link is but somebody here will post it) and redact personal identifying information.

 

 

[Manxman in exile]

When I said earlier surely the garage would have noticed if the cat had been nicked - obviously they did notice.  What I meant was "surely they would have told the OP it had been stolen."

[Hammy1962]

Sadly, I think the OP has done a runner.....................................

[BankFodder]

I think it's a bit early to say that

[Hammy1962]

£1 to the charity box of your choice says he wont be back.

 

H