Jump to content


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 323 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 Bank Fodder I made it

 

 

 

Purchased a Porsche Cayman 2008 - 21 02 2020

 

·      During the test drive I remarked about a lot of travel on the brakes, the salesman told me this was because the brakes were sports brakes and need a lot of heat to get them to work really effectively, I have heard this in the past with other manufacturers so didn’t challenge this statement.

 

·      Whilst viewing the car we were told that the car would have a service, and a Pre Delivery Inspection check prior to us picking the car up

 

·      With this knowledge and excellent reviews we elected to buy the  vehicle, we had also checked prior to purchase the MOTs online to gain a better understanding of the car, it was noted that there was issues with the chassis and were only an advisory at that stage, the next few MOTS those advisories so we thought had been dealt with along with a persistent airbag light on the dash

 

Once we had taken out HP for the vehicle, drove it home

 

21.02.2020:  Once on our driveway we wanted to know more about the car, so investigated the engine bay with a view to checking the oil and water, it was at this point we noticed a strange attachment to the engine ( photo dated and time stamped if needed )

 

 

·      Concerned about the brakes and the strange attachment to the engine we elected to take the vehicle to an independent Porsche specialist and to generate a small report about the vehicle which he did

 

·      A list of faults are as follows:

 

·      Boot release switch pack broken

·      Drivers side window faulty, wind noise and rattling when door closes

·      horn tone odd

·      air bag light on

·      wheel bolts rusty

·      AC has no gas

·      NSF tyre is new but not branded or N rated

·      Front bump stops rotten

·      Front damper shafts corroded

·      pin hole in OSF lower ARB link dust cover

·      front discs worn and corroded and cooling holes blocked

·      OSR outer CV joint leaking grease

·      Front bump stops rotten

·      Front dampers corroded at the top mount and need replacing

·      Engine is modified

 

This was furnished to CarQuay the dealer after some heated exchanges  the dealer and I came to a decision to look at the car with a view to repairing the car after the pandemic was over

 

·      04.03.2020 Contacted Autotrader for a copy of the advert for the Porsche, no where is it stated that the car is modified, it also states that the car will have had a service, and was mechanically prepared by them this isn’t correct if it had been they would have noticed the modification to the engine.

 

Here is the advert: 

 

Quote

 

 SOURCE - This very rare Porsche Cayman 987 Sport (number 59) has been sourced directly from a performance car specialist who received it in part exchange against a newer car. OWNERSHIP - It has been well looked after and maintained by its former keepers from new and genuinely resembles a much lower mileage example. SERVICE HISTORY - It is offered with service history and has just been serviced and fully mechanically prepared by ourselves prior to being advertised. It will be supplied to its next owner with a brand new 12 month MOT. PRESENTATION - This special edition looks fabulous presented in black and cosmetically is in great condition considering its age and mileage. This car rides on super looking 19" alloy wheels which are also in lovely condition. The full black leather interior, upholstery, carpets and roof lining are showing no real signs of wear and the boot is clean and tidy. Since being photographed the bodywork has been extensively detailed and looks absolutely magnificent, the pictures don't do the vehicle justice, it needs to be seen to be fully appreciated. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - The car is completely HPi clear having no outstanding finance and has not been stolen or subject to an insurance loss either. Its mileage is also verified as completely genuine. The buyer will be supplied with the V5 registration document, service records, MOT certificate and a HPi clear certificate too. All vehicles supplied valeted prior to sale and with a nationwide warranty. Part exchange very welcome and finance also available. Please call us today for a tailor made quote to your specific requirements, Upgrades - Guards Red Seatbelts, Black Full leather interior, Standard Features - Alarm, Alloy Wheels (19in), Electric Windows (Front), Seats Electric (Driver/Passenger), Tinted Glass. 2 seats, Metallic Black, Family owned and ran business, available 7 days a week.

 

 

 

During the pandemic periodically we would check Carquay website, and no mention was made of offering services for key workers, only the ability to contact the dealership via a sales email, this we did and got no response I had to contact him 3 times

 

 

·      19.05.2020 During the pandemic we had to from necessity because my wife is an NHS Specialist Nurse on a Covid 19 ward we replaced the brakes, this was a decision taken without seeking re imbursement from the dealer.

·      19.06.2020 Attended, Centre Gravity Porsche chassis specialists in Atherstone Warwickshire, this was to check the chassis and gain a true understanding of the faults with the car, report generated for myself as well as Carquay so they had a better understanding of the car once they came out of Lockdown

·      To date Dealer refusing to come to the party with help regarding current concerns with quite disgraceful statements which are untrue and to try and get the finance company to divulge information about one of their clients against GDPR regulations, also the dealer admits in a recent email they were working form May, when clearly the government has instructed them not to be operating whilst under lockdown, recent email sent from Carquay

 

Quote

 

As per my previous email we were able to look at the car, had arranged pre lockdown to look at the car and were able to receive communication throughout lockdown.

A simple call or email from yourself (or the vehicles owner Joshua) would have taken less than a minute.

Disappointingly it appears to me now that you have pressed on with work with the intention all along of using the appalling pandemic we have experienced to have work carried out on your car completely at our expense without any form of authorisation whatsoever.

I will be speaking to the finance company this morning once they are open as ultimately they own the Porsche until it is paid for and will outline the steps we took prior to lockdown to have the vehicle looked at and the steps you have taken to simply press on with spending money on the vehicle with no prior authorisation from ourselves.

I will also let them know I have been in communication with the owners father rather than Joshua himself and they will probably want to discuss what has happened with Josh directly as he is the owner of the vehicle.

I will update once I have spoken to them later on this morning.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to have the vehicle independently inspected to ascertain two things:

Firstly, was the vehicle in roadworthy condition when it was sold to you – and if not, what were its defects.

Secondly, since you have now had some work done on the vehicle, is it now in roadworthy condition – and if not what are its current defects?
In respect of any current defects to put it into roadworthy condition I think you need an independent quotation of the cost of the work.

How much did you spend on repairing the brakes? It's a great shame that you didn't make an attempt to inform the dealer in advance of what you are doing. Keeping everybody informed is absolutely key to these kinds of things. On the other hand, if the dealer was closed during the pandemic, then as you had bought the car and paid the price, I see no reason why you should be required not to drive it for a period of time – even though it is not necessarily the fault of the dealer that they couldn't attend to it.
Therefore if you paid out money to put the car into a roadworthy condition, I don't think that's unreasonable – although did you get more than one quote for this work?
If you didn't get more than one quote then I suggest that you will have to contact somebody to give a written quotation from another independent source to give you an idea of what the work would have cost if you had gone to them. At the end of the day were interested in discovering the cheaper of the two quotations – the speculative quotation – and the price actually paid.

I understand that there is more to the story than you have told us. I understand that there was some negotiation over the price and that this was intended to take into consideration certain faults which were discussed before you made the contract. Is this correct?
 

 

Also, I understand that the contract is with you and not with your son. Is this correct?
If it is correct then why is it in another thread we were told by your son that he made the contract but the defects were discussed with you and not directly with him?

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI BF

 

Looking at the MOT there is no mention of faults with the brakes current or historical, that said they were appalling and the first inspection mentions this fact, but doesn't state that they were un roadworthy and a dealer will use the MOT to back this up im assuming, which was why I had the first inspection, what is a failure though historically and currently is the Airbag warning light, this first was mentioned back in 2014s MOT and has been turned off electronically before and after each MOT to camouflage the fault.

 

The car brakes now, where as before it was scary long travel before coming to a halt, the car still needs chassis work doing to it with dampers and springs all around at the very least, we employed the services of Centre Gravity a chassis specialist who generated a report  and furnished us with an estimate for £3500 I sent this to Carquay, but I did explain to the dealer that if he used my receipts he could claim back the VAT possibly, if he decided that he would help with Centre Gravities Estimate that is, I was trying to be helpful, the brakes cost with fitting £915 along with other cosmetic work carried out on the car, a service, bodywork etc I was personally prepared to pay for,  I realise the car is 12 years old and you cant expect a dealer to pay, so I had no intention of asking for money.

 

We honestly and genuinely thought that Carquay were in Lockdown, it transpired they returned to work in May? and I wasn't asking them for money I didn't see I had to really, but again part of me felt rightly or wrongly they had a lot more to deal with at that time.

 

I sourced the brakes and the pads plus consumables myself using contacts within the Porsche Community to source quality cheap parts, I didn't get a quote or quotes but could do if needed....I will find out and enter it onto the thread

 

Yes your right there was an initial rejection of the 15k wanted for the car as I felt they could do better with the price and my son and I were keen on the car, we agreed things like switches and cosmetic things that could be replaced with a small amount of technical knowledge, but certainly not things like engine modifications.

 

No BF the contract is with my son its his name on the V5 and him who pays the finance company.

 

Both of us attended the test drive, and because of my sons autism he struggles with understanding technical concerns relating to vehicles, so I just try and be there for him

 

 

 

Kind Regards

 

Nick

Edited by hair on fire
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bank

 

I have just received this E Mail, talking about a client of a finance company, im not sure but isn't this against GDPR ......how odd the wrong finance company??......I smell a rat

 

Quote

 

I have spoken to Evolution Funding today regarding what has happened.

We have discussed our initial offer to have the vehicle back, to look at items of concern and rectify where necessary and then your insistence on taking the vehicle back prior to lockdown.

They are aware at no stage have we offered to pay for work to be done at a garage of your choice and having made no contact with us, or even attempting to make contact with us means that we have absolute no responsibility to make any contribution towards the work carried out by yourself.

In addition to this I have also called Lawgistics who specialise in motor trade law and they again have confirmed what Evolution Funding have too.

Despite all of this I will still stand on my offer to make you a gesture of £250.

Many thanks

Jamie

 

 

Edited by hair on fire
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to understand what it is you want.

It would be helpful if you could list out here the undeclared faults that had not been included in the negotiations.

And then separately, the defects which made the vehicle unroadworthy.

And then if you could tell me what all this means in terms of money – money that you have already spent out – and money that you think you are entitled to receive to correct all of the defects.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, you should be aware that if you have to bring a small claim on this, then somebody will have to present the case in court. If it is your son then is he able to do it?

Also, it seems to me that the dealers think that the contract is with you.

The ownership of the vehicle is irrelevant. In a way, so is the identity of the person actually paying the money. The important thing is who the deal was done with at the outset. Matters such as identity of the person paying and also ownership of the vehicle are, by and large, formalities

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

I'm trying to understand what it is you want.

It would be helpful if you could list out here the undeclared faults that had not been included in the negotiations.

And then separately, the defects which made the vehicle unroadworthy.

And then if you could tell me what all this means in terms of money – money that you have already spent out – and money that you think you are entitled to receive to correct all of the defects.

 

3 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

Hi Bank, sorry im just presenting the facts so that I can understand legally where I stand, if we have to go to court so be it.....but im sure that is the last resort

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

Also, you should be aware that if you have to bring a small claim on this, then somebody will have to present the case in court. If it is your son then is he able to do it?

Also, it seems to me that the dealers think that the contract is with you.

The ownership of the vehicle is irrelevant. In a way, so is the identity of the person actually paying the money. The important thing is who the deal was done with at the outset. Matters such as identity of the person paying and also ownership of the vehicle are, by and large, formalities

The contract is with my son, he has signed the paperwork for the deal from the outset was with my son, regarding whether he would be able to stand up in court Im sure he would put his case so long as he had me to give him confidence

Edited by hair on fire
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we are trying to understand what it is you want

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which limited edition version of the Cayman is this?  I thought it must have been the one that came in either orange or lime green, but I see this one is black.  I assume the number 59 means it's the 59th car out of a limited production.  Looking at Wikipedia, is it the Porsche Design Edition 1 (production run of 777) or is it the limited edition Cayman S Sport (700 made?)?  I'm interested to know what you've bought - and is it the model you thought you were buying.  (I'm not suggesting the model advertised is not what you bought - I'd just like to understand what you did buy.  And I'm not sure the Wiki page is correct)

 

(See about 60% of the way down the page, 2.2.1  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_987#cite_note-41  )

 

"... (A)lso the dealer admits in a recent email they were working form May, when clearly the government has instructed them not to be operating whilst under lockdown".   Are you sure they were in breach of lockdown?  I thought garages etc could stay open.  (I must admit, I don't know if the seller is just a car dealer or whether they fix cars too).

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I see it, I think there are two issues - although I'm happy to be corrected.  First, was the car sold in an unroadworthy condition, or did it simply have faults expected for a car of its age?  Second, it's a pity you had the brakes fixed by a third party without informing CarQuay.  I understand why you felt it needed to be done that way (Covid etc), but it does sort of make things a bit more complicated keeping or getting the dealer onside.

 

Do any of the reports you've had done suggest the car was unroadworthy?  Reading between the lines, I suspect they don't.  Are they faults you'd expect in a car of that age?  The advert doesn't seem to mention anything, but then I believe there were discussions between you and the dealer about various issues with the car and it's not clear to me what was discussed or whether your recollection and that of the dealer would agree.  You also bought the car at a discount and again it's not clear to me if the price you paid for the car (a rare limited edition) reflects the faults you've had to have fixed.  Certainly that advert doesn't indicate any problems.

 

I agree with BF that you need reports detailing the condition of the car - especially the original one you got immediately after taking the car home.

 

I think the airbag light is a bit worrying.  I'm not really a car-tech person, but is it that easy to get a faulty airbag light through an MOT simply by switching it off?  Wouldn't that be spotted straight away?  (Maybe I'm being naive).  Or maybe it simply adds weight to your suspicion that there was no pre-sale service and that they didn't know what they were selling.  I simply don't know.

 

Just one other thing.  You mentioned what may have been an exhaust modification before, and now you mention something in the engine bay.  If your wife is using the car for work, does your insurer know about the modification as it could invalidate your insurance?  (Especially if it affects performance).

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Manxman in exile said:

Which limited edition version of the Cayman is this?  I thought it must have been the one that came in either orange or lime green, but I see this one is black.  I assume the number 59 means it's the 59th car out of a limited production.  Looking at Wikipedia, is it the Porsche Design Edition 1 (production run of 777) or is it the limited edition Cayman S Sport (700 made?)?  I'm interested to know what you've bought - and is it the model you thought you were buying.  (I'm not suggesting the model advertised is not what you bought - I'd just like to understand what you did buy.  And I'm not sure the Wiki page is correct)

 

(See about 60% of the way down the page, 2.2.1  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_987#cite_note-41  )

 

"... (A)lso the dealer admits in a recent email they were working form May, when clearly the government has instructed them not to be operating whilst under lockdown".   Are you sure they were in breach of lockdown?  I thought garages etc could stay open.  (I must admit, I don't know if the seller is just a car dealer or whether they fix cars too).

The car is a Cayman S Sport 59 of 700

 

Regarding the operating whilst under  lockdown, there was no indication that I could find that indicated they were operating garage repair services on their website, opening the website showed a panel about purchasing a car, and if a customer wanted or liked a particular the information would be passed on, we did eventually try and contact Carquay this way, it didn't work, so the only assumption one can draw given he information presented was that are really a sales dealership. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manxman in exile said:

As I see it, I think there are two issues - although I'm happy to be corrected.  First, was the car sold in an unroadworthy condition, or did it simply have faults expected for a car of its age?  Second, it's a pity you had the brakes fixed by a third party without informing CarQuay.  I understand why you felt it needed to be done that way (Covid etc), but it does sort of make things a bit more complicated keeping or getting the dealer onside.

 

Do any of the reports you've had done suggest the car was unroadworthy?  Reading between the lines, I suspect they don't.  Are they faults you'd expect in a car of that age?  The advert doesn't seem to mention anything, but then I believe there were discussions between you and the dealer about various issues with the car and it's not clear to me what was discussed or whether your recollection and that of the dealer would agree.  You also bought the car at a discount and again it's not clear to me if the price you paid for the car (a rare limited edition) reflects the faults you've had to have fixed.  Certainly that advert doesn't indicate any problems.

 

I agree with BF that you need reports detailing the condition of the car - especially the original one you got immediately after taking the car home.

 

I think the airbag light is a bit worrying.  I'm not really a car-tech person, but is it that easy to get a faulty airbag light through an MOT simply by switching it off?  Wouldn't that be spotted straight away?  (Maybe I'm being naive).  Or maybe it simply adds weight to your suspicion that there was no pre-sale service and that they didn't know what they were selling.  I simply don't know.

 

Just one other thing.  You mentioned what may have been an exhaust modification before, and now you mention something in the engine bay.  If your wife is using the car for work, does your insurer know about the modification as it could invalidate your insurance?  (Especially if it affects performance).

I think that a lot of this has already been mentioned previously and answered, we understood the age of the car we also knew we would repairs from time to time....which is why I have not asked car quay for any money for the work I have had carried out this was my decision.....you can switch off the airbag anytime with a tool called a scan tool, so yes you turn it off prior to having the car MOTd and it sales through the MOT.....the faulty airbag has been on this car since 2014 judging by previous MOTs and no one wanted to pay or deal with it....as a consumer I can only go on the information presented to me within the Autotrader advert......and checking the online MOT history which we did......we noticed at point of sale what appeared to be an aftermarket exhaust, these type of modifications are cheaper than an original exhaust so we thought no more of it, we picked the car up on the 21st of February at 12.12 - we investigated the engine bay on the 21st of February at 18.46, I have the report to hand of the first investigation and again the second investigation on the 19th of June, all photos are time stamped.....I want to be clear on this guys...... I am not looking for money for the repairs I undertook without authorisation from the dealer.

 

My wife is no longer using the car and neither are we its just sat on the drive  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but this thread is becoming a general narrative/discussion again and I think that it's about time that the matter was progressed.

I asked earlier on what is it the OP wants – and there's been no direct answer.

I'm afraid I think we need to understand what the bottom line is for the OP. The whole thing is so muddled and frankly the purchase and the approaches to the dealer has been so unhelpful that it's about time we cut to the chase and here. I'm sure the OP and the dealer would like to get this problem done and dusted.

So I asked a direct question – and I think a direct answer needs to be given

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BF

 

Yes your right,

 

I would like the car fixed with new shock absorbers and made roadworthy, the car was sold in an un roadworthy condition regardless of the brakes the fact the airbag has never been dealt with from 2014 proves this point along with a report and photographic evidence again dated and time stamped.

 

The car was mis sold to us without shadow of a doubt the Autotrader advert backs this up, and photographic evidence supports this, also dated and time stamped

 

Reports 1&2 show concerns regarding the chassis of the car with report 1 showing and indicating the unroadworthy condition ie: the airbag light 

 

Their is absolutely no requirement on my part for the dealer to re imburse  £2170 I have paid so far on the car this was my decision for safety reasons, and a realisation of the age of the car that some work has to be done

 

Your absolutely right BF and thank you........ lets all move on get this sorted whether that is going to court then so be it, personally Im sick and  tired of the dealer and his breach of GDPR and this silly dance we are doing, I just want to drive the car and enjoy what my son and I believed we were paying for.....a roadworthy car

 

Quite happy to go to court it is after all not my reputation is it.......one person on the reviews had to attend the dealer 17 times to get anything done......crazy

 

 

And a massive thank you to you all for the advice and any help seriously

 

 

Nick

 

 

 

Hi Guys

One final thing would it be helpful to send the Dealer a Subject Access Request to seize all and any communication regarding my son and I, on the grounds of being mis handled??

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with BankFodder that this shouldn't degenerate into a discussion, but I want to ask one question to understand better how your case stacks up and can be presented.

 

Assuming I know nothing about cars (which is pretty much true) can I ask how you know the faulty airbag light has been "fiddled" through successive MOTs since 2014?  I'm not saying it didn't happen but it seems odd to me that MOT inspectors since 2014 have been taken in by this simple to check duplicity.  Is it really that easy to pull the wool over their eyes?  (Presumably your negotiating position re misdescription is strengthened if you can argue that CarQuay either did know, or should have known, of this fault.  If it was easy for you to find out it would have been easier for a car dealer to find out

 

If it gets to court and part of your claim refers to this "history" of the airbag light, what happens if the judge asks "how do you know this?" and you can't answer?  Or what if you are asked "Didn't you notice on the test drive?".  If you haven't evidence as to how you "know" I'd be inclined to keep quiet about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I think the airbag light question is very important. I would like to know the answer to that as well. If you have definite proof that it has been deliberately fooled then this changes things a lot.

In terms of an SAR – yes go ahead, why not. It's free and you have nothing to lose. Do it today

In terms of the items that you say you want repaired – it doesn't mean a lot to me. What are we talking here in terms of value?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As BF says it won't cost your son anything for him to do a SAR.  Are you expecting to find anything in particular?  I'm not sure what the mis-handling is?  CarQuay wrote to your finance company (technically the car's owner) to inform them that you'd had work done to the car without CarQuay's permission.  As CarQuay probably had reason to believe there was some dispute between them and you over the condition of the car when it was sold, I'm not sure they've done anything wrong.

 

(I think we're in danger of being diverted again.  As BF has said you and your son need to decide what you want to get out of this.  Then you need to organise your arguments and evidence and negotiate with CarQuay.  Is CarQuay aware that you don't necessarily want them to pay for some of the work you've already had done, or are they under the impression you want them to pay for everything?  I'm wondering if a simple misunderstanding is contributing to this).

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BankFodder said:

Yes I think the airbag light question is very important. I would like to know the answer to that as well. If you have definite proof that it has been deliberately fooled then this changes things a lot.

In terms of an SAR – yes go ahead, why not. It's free and you have nothing to lose. Do it today

In terms of the items that you say you want repaired – it doesn't mean a lot to me. What are we talking here in terms of value?

HI BF we are only talking £2033.36 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this. Now can you please tell me how much money you've spent on necessary repairs – and this means on repairs making it roadworthy and repairing any undisclosed faults.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Manxman in exile said:

I agree with BankFodder that this shouldn't degenerate into a discussion, but I want to ask one question to understand better how your case stacks up and can be presented.

 

Assuming I know nothing about cars (which is pretty much true) can I ask how you know the faulty airbag light has been "fiddled" through successive MOTs since 2014?  I'm not saying it didn't happen but it seems odd to me that MOT inspectors since 2014 have been taken in by this simple to check duplicity.  Is it really that easy to pull the wool over their eyes?  (Presumably your negotiating position re misdescription is strengthened if you can argue that CarQuay either did know, or should have known, of this fault.  If it was easy for you to find out it would have been easier for a car dealer to find out

 

If it gets to court and part of your claim refers to this "history" of the airbag light, what happens if the judge asks "how do you know this?" and you can't answer?  Or what if you are asked "Didn't you notice on the test drive?".  If you haven't evidence as to how you "know" I'd be inclined to keep quiet about it.

Hi Manxman, this is well known to those within the trade, a bit of background information here, my previous role has been for many years a Vehicle Diagnostic Engineer working for a variety of high prestige brands at a manufacturers level, the turning off of the Airbag light, is simple to do and could be done while sitting on the car park waiting your turn to have your vehicle MOTd, there are hand held devices that will do this for a few pounds., some vehicles have a time stamp marker to show in relation to the Airbag im not sure about how technical Porsches system is though, but I will find out,.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's easy to do – but you need evidence that it has been done. Otherwise it's pretty well a nonstarter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

Thanks for this. Now can you please tell me how much money you've spent on necessary repairs – and this means on repairs making it roadworthy and repairing any undisclosed faults.

For the brakes £915, the rest is cosmetic, reports and so on.

Just now, BankFodder said:

So it's easy to do – but you need evidence that it has been done. Otherwise it's pretty well a nonstarter.

Police need to understand things like this when doing investigations into accidents so most manufacturers build into their systems the ability to interrogate, the vehicles brain also has a time line 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hair on fire said:

Police need to understand things like this when doing investigations into accidents so most manufacturers build into their systems the ability to interrogate, the vehicles brain also has a time line 

 

Yes but if you can't prove that it has happened then this kind of information is totally irrelevant and it's not worth wasting time bringing it up. Come back to us with evidence that it has been done and we can take it forward.

It seems to me that you received the car an unroadworthy condition. Although there was travel on the brakes, they assured you that this was normal and you accepted that a face value. Later on you discovered that this was not normal and in fact the brakes needed work because they were unroadworthy.

I think on this basis that you are entitled to proceed with the work. It was an error not to let the sellers know about it and of course they will try to leverage this. On the other hand, I understand that they want available because of lockdown and so you proceeded to get the work done yourself. I can't remember whether you had a couple of quotes for the work – but if you didn't then you should certainly get a second quote to confirm that the money you paid – the £915 was a reasonable price to pay.

They have offered you £250. Obviously it's not enough. As far as you're concerned, to put the car into roadworthy condition it's going to take another £2000.

You have reports which say that the car is not in roadworthy condition and so therefore the sellers have committed an offence contrary to the Road traffic Act by selling your car in that condition.

I would suggest that you go back to them with a letter and tell them that you are rejecting their offer of £250.

Tell them that you have independent inspections carried out which confirm that the car in so far as its brakes and suspension were in unroadworthy condition and that by selling you a like this, they were committing an offence.

Tell them that you are prepared to forego the £915 which you spent on repairing the brakes – as a gesture of goodwill to them – if they will undertake to cover the rest of the bill for putting the rest of the car into a roadworthy condition. Tell them that if they carry the work out, then no doubt they will save money – but you will have the quality of the work inspected afterwards to confirm that it is all satisfactory. Tell them that if this inspection is satisfactory then you will cover the cost of that. However if the inspection shows that the work is not being carried out to a satisfactory standard then you will sue them in the County Court for the total cost of repairs required to put the car in roadworthy condition including the brakes and including the inspection. One them that if you do take the matter to court and you obtain a judgement in your favour, which confirms that the judge also believes that the car was sold to you in an unroadworthy condition, that you will be obliged to forward it on to the appropriate authorities.

Given seven days to respond. If they try to prevaricate then as long as you're happy to do it send them a letter of claim.

I would suggest that you post up your draft letter here for us to see before you start sending it off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

 

Yes but if you can't proved that it has happened then this kind of information is totally relevant and it's not worth wasting time bringing it up. Come back to us with evidence that it has been done and we can take it forward.

It seems to me that you receive the car an unroadworthy condition. Although there was travel on the brakes, they assured you that this was normal and you accepted that a face value. Later on you discovered that this was not normal and in fact the brakes needed work because they were unroadworthy.

I think on this basis that you are entitled to proceed with the work. It was an error not to let the sellers know about it and of course they will try to leverage this. On the other hand, I understand that they want available because of lockdown and so you proceeded to get the work done yourself. I can't remember whether you had a couple of quotes for the work – but if you didn't then you should certainly get a second quote to confirm that the money you paid – the £915 was a reasonable price to pay.

They have offered you £250. Obviously it's not enough. As far as you're concerned, to put the car into roadworthy condition it's going to take another £2000.

You have reports which say that the car is not in roadworthy condition and so therefore the sellers have committed an offence contrary to the Road traffic Act by selling your car in that condition.

I would suggest that you go back to them with a letter and tell them that you are rejecting their offer of £250.

Tell them that you have independent inspections carried out which confirm that the car in so far as its brakes and suspension were in unroadworthy condition and that by selling you a like this, they were committing an offence.

Tell them that you are prepared to forego the £915 which you spent on repairing the brakes – as a gesture of goodwill to them – if they will undertake to cover the rest of the bill for putting the rest of the car into a roadworthy condition. Tell them that if they carry the work out, then no doubt they will save money – but you will have the quality of the work inspected afterwards to confirm that it is all satisfactory. Tell them that if this inspection is satisfactory then you will cover the cost of that. However if the inspection shows that the work is not being carried out to a satisfactory standard then you will sue them in the County Court for the total cost of repairs required to put the car in roadworthy condition including the brakes and including the inspection.

Given seven days to respond. If they try to prevaricate then as long as you're happy to do it send them a letter of claim.

I would suggest that you post up your draft letter here for us to see before you start sending it off.

Hi BF, thank you for this, what do we say about the engine modifications should this be raised I have timed stamped photographic evidence, and speaking with the chassis engineers they also confirmed they know the car to be modified

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...