Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sweatband.com I like many of these online retailers – and also retail shops – which sell their goods, make all sorts of claims for their customer service et cetera – but when things go wrong they refer you to the manufacturer. Of course this can be a very sensible arrangement because the manufacturer is better placed to deal with the problem – but we tend to find that very often the manufacturer is pretty reluctant and of course because they are not the retailer, there really not too bothered about their customer-facing reputation. So as has been suggested by my site team colleague above, you are being fobbed off. Secondly, any attempt now to start saying that the treadmill should not be used in the garage – when this has not been referred to at all when it was being sold to you, is in effect introducing a new term into an existing contract. This means that it has no effect whatsoever and is not binding. Sweatband.com are bound by the law of contract and also by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. You are entitled to purchase a treadmill which is of satisfactory quality and remain that way for a reasonable period of time – and you are quite right, it hasn't matched up to those standards and so sweatband.com are in breach of contract. It has nothing to do with the manufacturer. If the manufacturer really want to say that it should be kept in a garage then that's between them and sweatband. It's especially telling that according to you sweatband have actually said that this is a great thing to keep in your garage. I would suggest that you go around the Internet – trust pilot et cetera putting up reviews about sweatband – who as I have said after fobbing you off and letting you down – but also you should put up separate reviews about this particular brand of treadmill and make sure everybody sees that even the manufacturer is saying that it should be kept in a garage and that they won't stand by their product when it breaks down after three months. I can imagine that the person who said this to you from the manufacturer will get a bit of a talking to. Maybe you can tell us the make and model number of this treadmill so that references to it will come up in Google hits in the future. The situation as advised by my site team colleague is that as it has failed within the first six months, the retailer is entitled to one single opportunity to carry out a repair and failing that they are obliged either to replace the item or to give your refund at your option. These are rights which have been created by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. These rights should be asserted in writing You should write to the retailer immediately and put them on notice that you are asserting your rights under the 2015 act and you are giving them a single opportunity to repair the treadmill. Tell them that given its size and its weight, it will have to be repaired at your home unless sweatband.com want to take responsibility for picking it up and selling it to whoever they want to get it repaired by. I can imagine sweatband won't be happy about this and you are going to find everybody's going to start dragging their feet. I can imagine also that sweatband would try to up the ante by saying that it is your responsibility to return the treadmill to them. That would be wrong. The treadmill is defective. Sweatband are in breach – and it is up to them to deal with the problem. I think you will need to be quite assertive and I would suggest that your letter to them should give them a seven day window to let you know what the arrangements are and that the treadmill should be repaired or replaced in any event within 14 days. Please keep us informed as to what happens. Just so you know what we will advise if sweatband don't step up to the mark – if they don't let you have a satisfactory response within the first seven days then we will be suggesting that you begin the claims process by sending them a letter of claim – which then leads to a small claim in the County Court. This is not something you should worry about. Your chances of success are much better than 95% and I can imagine that at the end of the day sweatband.com don't want this kind of trouble and once they realise that you are happy to confront them, they will buckle down. Of course you never know – maybe they are going to act brilliantly and respond correctly immediately – in which case it will be kudos to them. Let's see  
    • Simple answer to that is gambling and having borrowed way too much previous to 2018 and simply not being in a position to meet all debts so always robbing Peter to pay Paul. From last year it just began to catch up. Then covid came and made it worse. Income reduced and job changed and dealing with mental health issues. That’s really the long and short of it. 
    • The UK's inflation rate surged to 0.6% in December from 0.3% in November despite Covid curbs. View the full article
    • Fears had grown over the Alibaba founder's whereabouts because of pressure from Chinese authorities. View the full article
    • I felt outmatched to be honest. Lowell probably did identify me on here and decided to send one of their more experienced. The guy they sent to last hearing didn't sound half as competent. The solicitor and judge were pretty much talking amongst themselves. That's how it felt. The Judge understood and accepted what the solicitor said at every point. She accepted fresh start as a brand name only. She accepted all the evidence were copies. She accepted I entered into a valid agreement. She accepted the error on the default notice was a typo. Felt like I lost before the hearing. If not, I wasn't able to express my points well enough. Not like the claimant who I'm sure was giving a law lesson. Completely out of my depth. I didn't ask to appeal. I'm upset understandably but grateful for all the help and support I received here. I've learnt a hell of lot but hope to never need it again.
  • Our picks

    • 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
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Problems with Car purchased from Fast Motor Finance Ltd - and Advantage Finance


Recommended Posts

Obviously, things that you read on the Internet about this are helpful – but they are anecdotal and they are not slamdunk.

If you actually have it in writing addressed to you on headed notepaper then that is slamdunk.

Is that what you have?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi.   Is it these people?   https://www.fastmotorfinance.co.uk/used-cars   HB

Okay well it's probably very thorough – it's not exactly an independent report because it's clearly a witness report prepared for the other side. I haven't been through the whole thread again so

Yes, it's better to be upfront – but if it means that you can't get any kind report then some kind of report is better than nothing. Nobody is telling you to be dishonest. Simply that there seems

9 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

 

you can't ....you have to allow one chance to repair ....you are outside of 30 days ..

IF then the car is not fit for purpose you can reject it .

 

pers i wouldn't be involving the garage /dealership or whomever you got the car from at all.

you go after advantage, it's their car, should it still be crap after the 'repair'. let them argue it out with the dealership.

 

i dont think it matters or not if the gearbox should be have been serviced every 35k and wasn't. 

 

dx

 

 

I can see both of your points and appreciate all of your effort.

 

Now the finance company are sending out a dead lock letter the only option I see with them is down the FOS but this can be very drawn out and they are paying for a undriveable car

Link to post
Share on other sites

The FOS is not the only route in respect of the finance company. You are under no obligation to go to the FOS. There is nothing to stop you going to the County Court – although I have already suggested that I think that there is a more interesting way to proceed. My site team colleague thinks you would be better off going against the finance company. Whichever you do, there is no need to go to the FOS and in fact I can tell you that Advantage Finance – like all finance companies – prefer that people go to the FOS. This immediately indicates that if it is what they prefer then it is probably not the best solution for you if you are prepared to go to court.

In terms of your letter, there are quite a few amendments and I'll deal with those tomorrow.

However, I'm still trying to get my brain around the documents and the fact that you may have been misled.

I'm afraid that I probably ought to go through the entire thread again more carefully – but I'm trying to cope with a few other issues on this forum so maybe you could run through this aspect very carefully in bullet pointed chronology without too much narrative please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bank Fodder & DX.

 

I will sit down and put everything in one post so it will be easier to work through.

 

Would you be able to clarify what I read on the money advise website that if the car is in the garage being either repaired or looked at, that the 6 month time you can take action stops until the car is back.

 

Thanks

 

JJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

what 6mts action?

 

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

On a website regarding rejecting a car your rights.

 

Paragraph 11 says:

 

  1. The Act covers you for up to six months after purchase. However, the clock stops while the dealer has the car to investigate the fault or make repairs. This is to stop a dealer taking an excessively long time to investigate a fault, to try and reduce the time available for you to reject the vehicle. So if the dealer has your car for a week, you can add a week onto your 30 days or six months as relevant.
Link to post
Share on other sites

that is poppy cockle!!

once you have complained and registered there is a fault within whatever timeline.. thats all you have to do.

 

 

  • Like 1

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

I think maybe this whole business of right to reject needs to be clarified.

The basic law is that if there is a defect which means that the car is not a satisfactory quality – then that is a breach of contract. However, there are two kinds of breach. There is what they call a "breach of warranty" and a "breach of condition".

The important difference is that a breach of warranty does not deprive the innocent party of substantially the entire benefit of the contract. On the other hand, a breach of condition certainly does. In other words the whole purpose of the contract to the innocent party has been completely lost.

Where there is a breach of condition – in other words the innocent party has been deprived of the entire benefit of the contract, then there is no other remedy other than to repudiate the contract and to ask for a refund plus any ancillary expenses.
Where there is a breach of warranty, this is a breach of contract which can be addressed by repairs or by some money compensation – but it would not terminate the contract.

So your rights when there is a breach condition are to terminate the contract immediately – to reject it. This right is available to you from the beginning of the contract and continuing for quite a substantial period of time – depending on what the contract is for and what the defect actually is.

With a breach of warranty – a breach of the minor term – a minor defect – there is no right to treat the contract is terminated. The defect can be addressed by repairs.

That's the basic law of contract.

The Consumer Rights Act added certain clarifications and certain remedies on top. So that in the first six months, even a breach of warranty – a relatively minor defect – can confer a right to terminate the contract – if the right is properly asserted – and if an opportunity to repair the defect has been given and the repair has failed.

However, if the purchaser is faced with a substantial breach which has effectively deprive them of the entire benefit of the contract, then they are entitled to treat the contract is terminated at any time and it has nothing to do with the consumer rights act.

In this particular case, from the sounds of it, this breach has been substantial and especially happening so early on in the contract, in my view, can be said to have deprived the purchaser of substantially the whole benefit of the contract. Therefore to my mind, this is a breach of condition and it is possible to say that the dealer, by their breach have terminated the contract and it is up to the purchaser to accept the termination and to demand a refund plus ancillary losses.

So, the 30 days and then six months right to reject are really only useful where the breach is a relatively minor defect which is not destroy the purpose of the contract and which can be addressed simply by repairs.
In the case of a breach of condition – a substantial defect, and frankly the consumer rights act adds nothing to the existing common law of contract. There is a right to terminate the contract at any time – although of course the longer the car runs well before the gearbox breaks down, the more it is possible to say that the breach is minor and that the purchaser did enjoy the benefit of the contract.

This I don't know if this is all too convoluted – but I'm trying to explain the basic legal principles involved.

Of course it will be helpful to have the benefit of the consumer rights act – but it's not too important if we are prepared to argue that this is a breach of condition which has robbed the purchaser of the benefit of the contract.

Of course it's up to the purchaser. The purchaser has the option of treating this as a breach of condition and therefore the contract is terminated, but the purchaser has the option of treating the breach as a breach of warranty and simply claim damages.
Treating a substantially broken down vehicle is a breach of warranty is more likely to happen, for instance, where the vehicle involved is a rare collector's vehicle and in which case it would probably not be possible for the innocent purchaser to find another one. In that case the purchaser would probably prefer to treat it as a breach of warranty and to claim for damages in order to put the defect right.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

of which the purchaser in this case is surely the finance company under an HP agreement that is covered by the consumer credit act.

 

this gives the person that took out and signed the HP agreement, with the finance company, the consumer, the right to raise a claim under  section 75 of the consumer credit act.

 

it's worthy to note, the FOS have in very recent times come down very hard on Moneybarn ...fining them (Provident) many £1m's over not treating customers fairly, including over the above issues. likewise Advantage Finance are too very much under their radar .

 

as from post 1 i am just musing here, but, i am wondering if a section 75 claim might be a far more powerful route.

however enforcing that i agree might not be a very quick. 

 

i have a feeling that the only thing that has actually been done here with regard too advantage is a simple complaint saying for want of differing words 'the car under the finance from you doesn't work'.

it was not a formal complaint under section 75 of the CCA, which carries far more weight and must be actioned properly by advantage, not just a fob-off letter resulting in deadlock.

 

i seriously doubt advatage would want to ignore the rights of a consumer raised under the consumer credit act. 

 

just musing.

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

Yes, section 75 would be less trouble – but the thing that concerned me was, as @dx100uk pointed out, that there seem to be some urgency because apparently we have frontline workers who don't have a vehicle and are being obliged to borrow one. ( – By the way, are they properly insured for that borrow vehicle?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is all the details (hopefully) in one post.

 

The Ford Kuga was purchased from Fast Motor Finance LTD Crawley on 8th September 20

Mileage at purchase was 109520 through HP fiancé via Advance Finance Grimsby

 

The car was covered by a 6 month warranty that includes engine & gearbox but excludes clutches, flywheels or any wear & tear (Taken from the garages website) 

 

Service History:

 

08-04-2013 Pre-delivery Inspection

26-11-2013 12809 Service (no paperwork just stamped book)

09-07-2014 25963 Service (no paperwork just stamped book)

09-02-2015 36814 Service (first Invoiced service but no paperwork just stamped book). Gearbox service would of probably been done here but can't verify.

16-02-2016 50385 Service  (Full service, paperwork and stamped book)

31-03-2017 64680 Service (Full Service, paperwork & stamped book)

13-02-2018 76988 Service ( Full service with gearbox service, paperwork & book stamp)

29-03-2019 92592 Service (Full service with paperwork & book stamp)

11-02-2020 106322 Service (Basic Service, no paperwork but book stamp)

 

As there was no paperwork for last service the garage which serviced the car were able to email over that the service was a basic oil & water change and that the gearbox oil and filters was not changed.

 

At the beginning of November the gearbox started making some noise and was having trouble selecting gear.

 

The finance company  asked for the car to be taken to a VAT registered garage to find out what the problem was and not to drive it further.

 

After the garage looked at the car the estimate was for a full service of the gearbox which would be £370 but because it had gone over Ford recommended mileage for the gearbox there would be no guarantee this would clear the problem and that would mean a replacement gearbox would be needed.

 

Since picking the car up in September the car has driven 1500 miles.

 

Spoke to the garage as was informed that the car was over 30 days old and there was nothing they could do and the gearbox would not be covered by the warranty as this would be normal wear and tear!

 

The warranty company said exactly the same and would not entertain us.

 

After countless calls and emails to Advantage finance a formal complaint was raised and they finally agreed to send one of their mechanics to inspect the car last week 19th November.

The mechanics ahs reported back to Advantage that the noise is down to wear and tear and Advantage have closed the complaint and are sending out a deadlock letter that includes a copy of the mechanics report.

 

Would their mechanic have to be DEKRA registered to complete the report or Advance Finance own mechanic?

 

This now means that the car cannot be driven is still at the garage and will need a minimum of £370 to make it driveable on a car that has been driven 1500 miles since collection without a guarantee that this will cure the problem.

 

We are both key workers that need the car to travel to and from work as well as take our son to nursery, and at the moment having to rely of friends and family to help out with lifts.

 

I have spoken to Ford and they have told me these car need to have the gearbox serviced at around 35k and at a very maximum of 37.5k and have put this on letterheaded paper, I have also emailed a couple of other Ford and independent dealers to get details of this as well.

 

Would it be worth getting an AA or RAC inspection done to check the gearbox and to see if there is any other problems with the car.

 

Thanks again to everyone epically dx & Bank fodder who have helped me with advice.

 

JJ

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you need any further inspections for the moment. Of course what would be interesting to see would be the mechanics report which was prepared for the finance company. Although the inspector has apparently said that the problem was as a result of "fair wear and tear", they don't actually say what the problem was. How long ago did they promise you the copy of the report? I wonder if they will really provide it to you.

Just in case it suddenly doesn't arrive – I would send them an SAR. Do it straightaway doesn't cost you anything and there's nothing to lose.

As I hope you understand now, fair wear and tear has nothing to do with it. If the car hasn't be properly serviced and that is a defect. And in any event, you are entitled to have a car which is of satisfactory quality and remains that way for a reasonable period of time. Clearly a car which is behaving in this way is not of satisfactory quality.

I think we've already discussed that you are pretty well ready to go ahead and make a complaint/bring a claim – the question is to decide exactly who to bring the claim against for the best and quickest outcome.

However, I'm all for being cautious and gathering together as much evidence as possible. You say that the book is been stamped in respect of the various services. Are you not able to find out more information about this service as well?

It certainly seems to me that if you have a written confirmation addressed to yourself that these cars require a gearbox service at certain mileage – then that will be more than adequate for a judge – if you can prove that that service did not occur. In addition, the problems which appear now to be manifesting themselves in respect of the gearbox seem to be consistent with what you say about inevitable gearbox trouble if this 105000 mile service is missed.
 

How long ago did they promise you this deadlock letter – but particularly, the inspection report?

I'm also going to say that looking at your chronology of what has happened, I have a sense that we are inferring that you were misled as to the service. Have I missed something?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine there must be some book somewhere which describes exactly what each particular service interval should comprise. Are you able to get hold of that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bank Fodder;

 

The report was meant to be sent out on Tuesday, but as of today no report has arrived. Strange that they haven't sent it via email as well as they have emailed other information.

 

I have had a replied from a different Ford Garage saying the gearbox filters must be changed and serviced ever 37.5k or 3 years what ever is sooner. I am awaiting response to a couple of independent automatic gearbox garages to see what they suggest on the timing as well.

 

There doesn't seem to be a service check list I can find either will the car or an example online that is annoying.

 

Another thing has come to my attention today whilst speaking to my son in law, when he went to look at the car he was told it had a full check etc but no paperwork was ever included of any checks being doing. It doesn't say anything on their website so I don't expect this could help.

 

 

I think by looking through the paperwork we are just on the boarder of the gearbox mileage limit and wonder if this will go against us.

 

I am going to get the SAR request sent over via email this afternoon, do I need to follow this up with a letter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It scarcely believe all that with a modern car there isn't a definite checklist of service items – otherwise each garage will be doing their own thing. It must exist.

And so your son in law went to buy the car and he listened to the salesman's patter making all sorts of promises and then not asking for any evidence of it – bless!

Has the finance company sent the final response? You said earlier that they were going to send the mechanic report with it.

When you say it's on the edge of the gearbox mileage limit – what do you mean? Of course it has manifested a fairly serious defect so I don't think it's a particular problem – but on the other hand I prefer to get as much evidence stacked up against them as possible. What you mean that you on the border of the gearbox limit? You said that a service should have been carried out at 105,000 miles and that it was sold to you at 106,000 miles ostensibly with the service. Presumably that service should have included the gearbox service and you have now discovered that it didn't

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the last gearbox service was done at 76k (which was 40k after the last gearbox service) and it is now playing around at 111k.

If Ford are saying 37.5k for the change this would be around the 113k mark on the mileage.

 

The finance company said that the final response and mechanic report was going to all be sent out together.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but have you received the final response?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so can we actually see everything in writing that you have in/out to advantage please. pdf only

 

 

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

Okay, they are unequivocal that the gearbox is shot so that is very helpful. Of course it is not helpful that they say would have been considered to have been fit for the purpose when you bought it.

On the other hand, the law requires that it be fit for the purpose and remain that way for a reasonable period of time.

Obviously they have commissioned this report – and if the wording of the report shows that it has been prepared in anticipation of a possible legal action, and the terms in which it has been couched are intended to serve as a defence to a possible claim.

Of course, saying that it was fit for the purpose at the time it was bought really only means that the car was driveable and was not displaying any signs of defects. On the other hand, it would be extraordinary if they could argue that the defect was not simmering away: one moment it was perfect and then suddenly it became defective. Clearly we are talking about deterioration over time.

What's also interesting now is that although you have had a quotation for service which might fix the gearbox problem – but you would only know after the service, their report exit clear that it needs a new gearbox and that a service wouldn't sort the problem out.

So how much would it cost for a gearbox? Cost of the item plus installation. Do you happen to know this?

The second thing is, are we sure that had it been properly serviced with regular oil changes, that the gearbox would most likely not be in this condition? In other words, if the gearbox is properly serviced at the 35,000 mile intervals, then it would not have broken down and in which case this could not be said to be "reasonable wear and tear". It can only be said to be "reasonable wear and tear" given that it was never serviced properly. But of course the lack of proper servicing is itself a defect. However, it would still be helpful to find a checklist of service items for each scheduled service.

I have no doubt that you shouldn't go to the FOS now. I think that this report is addressed specifically to the FOS and it is very clearly an attempt to pull the rug from under your feet before the FOS investigation even gets going.
You can be certain that the FOS will be swayed by this report. The FOS does not routinely apply legal principals – as you might expect them to. I think you would have a difficult time he went to the FOS on this.

However, if you went to court, I have no doubt that a judge will find in your favour – but I would like it to be a little less the subject of argument and that would be held by getting a proper service schedule – and also (although I said it wouldn't be necessary), getting your own independent inspection.

You would need your own independent inspection to report that a car of this mileage his gearbox had been properly serviced would not demonstrate this problem and also that if one spends this kind of money on a car then one would expect it to keep on going for at least a year to your having to spend the cost of a new gearbox – you better tell us what the figure is.

And once again, I still think that the garage is the weakest link. Maybe even more so.

Have you sent an SAR to the finance company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thoughts. 

 

The dsar has been sent. 

Just working on an email as there is no copy of the independent mechanical engineer report which I think we are entitled to see. 

 

Going back to the gearbox service I think the missing paperwork for the 100k service is important as we now have proof that the required service wasn't done. 

 

I think the finance company will be the harder ones to get any joy with. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree – that the finance company will be more difficult. This is one of the reasons why you want to knock them back and knock  them back. Send them an SAR. Tell them that you had been promised the mechanics report and it isn't there and you want it.

I can also imagine that the garage has been given a copy. Send them an SAR as well

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will find out some prices tomorrow. 

 

It is strange why they haven't included the report to back up their findings. 

 

Is it time to get our own report to see if there is any other problems as well. 

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...