Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @Tom Price   Thank you for your note, which is very helpful.   Did VCS cite the following cases?   1. VCS v Ward 2. Semark Jullien   VCS threw the two cases to me in the last minute at my previous hearing. The judge accepted the extra WS and adjourned my case for me to read/defend it. My case is going to be held on 30th March.   Thanks!      
    • Hi,   So, I received a letter today from a debt collection law firm threatening CCJ action on behalf of Volvo/Santander for a voluntary termination of a vehicle. (I did request Volvo/Santander that a complaints procedure be started as I think the terms of the contract were miss sold but alas, they ignored me and went straight to CCJ action via a debt collection law firm!).   I digress, anyway, so the letter was addressed to me, it included my original signed contract, but, there was another document inside. This document was another hire contract with some other person details on it!   It includes:   Their full name Their address and postcode Their handwritten signature Their email address Their mobile telephone number Their debt amount Their vehicle registration    Is this a breach of the data protection act? On the flip side, my details could be in the hands of someone else, who knows?    What should I do now, is this a trump card that I could use if this matter does actually go to court? I did intend to argue against this debt in the first place.   Any advice on this would be most grateful!   TIA         
    • Hi guys   I received a county court claim form on Thursday dated 18/02/2021 saying that the claimant (CABOT FINANCIAL (UK) is claiming for the sum of £2140.14 on behalf of  NEW DAY LTD RE MARBLES. but it requests all documents to be sent to MORTIMER CLARKE SOLICITORS.   Now i think i did have a marbles card a while ago although my partner says that that was a capital one card.   But either way i don't like the idea of these parasites chasing me for money for a debt they probably bought for £10.    From looking around here it seems that i should be sending them a CCA request and a CPR 31.14.   I've bought a £1 postal order.   Is there anything else i need to do?   Thanks for any help given
    • Yes that is an absolute must. Generally the Council has no wish to see people committed to prison for Council Tax debt. They want to see the debt recovered where it is properly due and the debtor has the ability to pay. If he hasn't that ability they will take into account the debtor's financial situation and make any arrangements they can. But only a court can remit some or all of the debt. The more you engage with the Council the easier this will be.
    • I think you'd need to have formally noted you were working under protest at the time. 
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • 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
        • Thanks
      • 33 replies

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

Recommended Posts

I don't think it will be especially more difficult or less difficult than trying to get the car repaired – and afterwards it will be considerably easier because you won't have the constant anxiety of having to deal with the same dealer.

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

Just had a email from the Customer Service Advisor saying that 'When an independent report is completed Advantage Finance are not required to provide the full report to the customer and is provided at

The standard that is expected under the consumer rights act is that the car be of satisfactory quality in the opinion of a reasonable person – this is always taken to mean an ordinary person who doesn

My experience suggests that the gearbox becoming unserviceable is most likely unrelated to the cars service history. Many cars with this transmission have had at least one replacement gearbox fitted, or open heart surgery with the clutch packs being replaced.


The terminology is important regarding repairing engines and transmissions. People often say ‘it’s had a refurbished ‘box in it’, which often means it’s been simply swapped for a used example. Possibly with more miles on it or older.


if you are getting quotes then you need to clarify if the supplier/repairing agent is doing the above, or taking out the existing gearbox and repairing it, taking out the existing gearbox and refurbishing it (fixing the fault and replacing serviceable items such as clutches, filters, valve seals, mechatronic sleeve, seals, sump pan etc), replacing the gearbox with a refurbished/repaired exchange item or finally, and by far the most expensive option, is to fit a new ‘crated’ transmission from the manufacturer (FoMoCo). The latter could possibly write off the car in financial terms. 


is it widely known that main dealers often farm jobs like this to Independant specialists? When I go in a gearbox place the white board is filled with some very well known main dealer franchises and car supermarkets. They just add 40% GP to the Bill they pay. So maybe clarify if they are doing it ‘in house’.


I apologise for not noticing in the threat that it is Advantage you are dealing with. They are a reasonably large company/provider and they have a dedicated resolution team. I’m amazed they haven’t capitulated yet as they are far from the most hard nosed finance houses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a email from the Customer Service Advisor saying that 'When an independent report is completed Advantage Finance are not required to provide the full report to the customer and is provided at the case handlers discretion'

However so you have full transparency of how your complaint was dealt with I will forward a copy of report to you.


  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that we will take that as a begrudging  climbdown.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received the engineers report and as expected it is virtually word for word what has been relayed to us before, his conclusions are:


Our opinion, being based on a physical assessment, written and verbal information supplied,
observations made by the engineer and our previous experience:
There is no doubt that the vehicle is currently not fit for purpose due to the transmission judder and, as
a result, the transmission will need to be replaced to restore it to full operational condition.
The cause of the transmission judder, in our opinion, is the direct result of progressive, age-related,
wear & tear rather than a manufacturing or material defect.
In all other aspects the vehicle appears to be in a generally satisfactory condition for a used vehicle that
has covered approximately 111,000 miles.
Having inspected the vehicle we are able to confirm that it would have been considered to have been fit
for purpose at the time of its purchase and of a satisfactory standard. Although there is an underlying
issue with the vehicle now, this is the result of natural wear & tear through general usage and has only
developed into an issue that requires rectification after purchase. "


They have also included a statement of truth which seems that they are expecting to go to court about this as they state they are aware of the requirements of the CPR Part 35.


But also says


"This report is based on the instruction, information, statements, invoices, documents, correspondence,
images, or recordings made available and comments made to this engineer in the course of this
inspection and subsequent report preparation. Any of the above items listed, which have been withheld
from this engineer, may affect the comments, conclusions and opinions made. Therefore we reserve
the right to alter our conclusion"

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 you will have to remind me whether you have commissioned your own independent report? At some point you will have to.

Obviously their report is extremely useful for them – but on the other hand I think that there are a number of very good answers.

Firstly, the car has to be of satisfactory quality. This is not necessarily the same as – reasonable condition for its age mileage et cetera – although that is a closely related matter. The "satisfactory quality" test is whether it is of "satisfactory quality" in the eyes of a reasonable consumer – and will it remain that way for a reasonable period of time.

In other words, the purchaser – a reasonable consumer – is not expected to have any particular specialist knowledge about vehicles or what their condition might be at that age mileage and price.

So if you wanted you could say that you would approach 100 consumers and ask them whether they would expect that if they found themselves in a position where they were required to have the gearbox of a card that they had very recently bought for over £7000, whether they would consider that to be reasonable.
I think it's beyond doubt that any reasonable consumer would say "if I had paid £7000 for a car, I would expect it not to need any substantial work for at least a year or two – and maybe more".

Secondly, if the garage had advertised the car by saying "buy this car, £7000, it may need a new gearbox within the first three months" – with they have managed to sell the vehicle?
I think it's beyond doubt that they would not have managed to sell the vehicle.

Thirdly, was the worn out condition of the car so obvious that the garage realised that it would need a new gearbox within three months? If the answer is Yes – the garage would have realised this – then I think they have ripped you off. If the answer is, No – even the garage would not have realised it, then I think clearly this is an unexpected defect and further evidence that the car is not satisfactory quality.

Fourthly, the report is prepared by an engineer who has had to investigate the car. Therefore we are getting a report which which represents the opinion of a professional person "skilled in the art" (as they say in legal circles).


Then finally, we have the service history.

I'm still not completely clear on what is being said here about the service history – but as I understand it, there is a book which contains confirmation that various services were carried out but doesn't say what was done during the service. I'm not sure that you've been able to find out what the checklist is for each service stage. This would be very useful to know.
Also you have written confirmation from Ford that if the service is not completed correctly at particular intervals that the kind of damage which you have experienced would be very likely to happen.




  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you BankFodder,


I totally agree with you regarding the Satisfactory quality.


Next step is to get our independent report done.


The garage have the rejection letter delivered yesterday but no heard anything yet, not that I am expecting them to reply.


Ford have confirmed that the 100k service was just a basic service without the gearbox being touched.


I am still trying to find the service schedule breakdown for a 100k service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I think that our arguments are good enough for you to win anyway – but an independent report as well as the service schedule will be very helpful. The service schedule in particular.

If you ask for an independent report then as well as an investigation of the problem and whether it could be prevented by proper servicing, the expert should also answer these questions:
would a reasonable consumer expect a defect of this magnitude to occur within the first three months of ownership of a car of this value
would a reasonable dealer expect a vehicle which they sold for £7000 to be returned within three months with a defect of this magnitude
would a reasonable dealer put the car up for sale if they realised that a defect of this magnitude was a likely risk

These may be difficult questions for an expert to answer because really they're only qualified to talk about the mechanics and not get into the mind of a reasonable consumer. However, they may be able to give an opinion on a reasonable dealer.

It would also be reasonable to expect an expert to talk about the service schedule and what should be expected every 35,000 miles.

There must be a copy of the service schedule somewhere. It's inconceivable that a mechanic is simply given a car and told casually to have a look around it and not given a checklist for points to consider at various mileage stages.

Even if you can't find one – it would be a good idea to ask your expert whether they expect that they would be one and whether this would be standard practice for any manufacturer to provide a service schedule to all of their outlets in order to maintain standards and quality and consistency throughout.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The company that did the engineer report was  Scotia Vehicle Inspection, after looking at their reviews on Google and others it seems that a lot of people have had the same problem with them putting every problem down to wear and tear.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent. Make sure you get a link – in fact you can even post the link here and get some screenshots. Are they regularly acting for this finance company?


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good.
"All our reports are tailored to your requirements"' ...nuff said.


Keep that. That will be extremely useful in court. It's an extremely foolish for them for them to say in public.

If you visit any websites where other people have had their vehicles inspected by this crowd, tell them to come over here for some help.  😄


  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we have just added our own review.



Maybe you would like to add your review and you could also refer to us and suggest that people might like to come to us for a second opinion

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have managed to get print out of the recommended 100k service through Hayes Pro workshop data. 


On it it states Dual clutch transmission - renew the oil and the oil filter ever 36 months or 37,500 miles max. 


Just waiting for confirmation of the work that was taken out during the 100k service along with the email we have saying that the basic service was done. 



Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay that's very good.

I thought you had already ascertained that there hadn't been these oil changes et cetera at these intervals? Am I wrong?

Also you definitely have the information from Ford that if this doesn't happen then you are likely to suffer gearbox damage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I have the email, but trying to get print out all the details of the missing paperwork of the 100k service, but Ford were reluctant as it would have the former owners details on the receipt. 


So been pushing them to print it out without these details 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are Ford  in contact with the dealers? I suppose they probably are in which case the dealers may know the information you are trying to get

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing that has been pointed out is that the I would of thought that the engineer would put what qualifications he has to back up his claims as anyone could say they are qualified to make a report 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not important.  


What is important is to get some clue that the service schedule was not carried out correctly

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Still not had anything back from the Garage.


Just been speaking to the RAC about and Post Purchase Inspection and they have given some details of the The Institute of Automotive Engineer Assessors, I am just waiting on when they will be able to view the car and do an independent report for us.


I've been looking into Scotia a bit more and their trust piolet reviews are worth reading, epically a couple that are in the same boat as us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I right in read of the consumer rights act 2015 that it is on the garage/finance company to prove the fault would not of been present at the time of sale.


With the reading of the independent report saying it would be down to normal wear and tear, would they have to prove what checks were done before purchase like servicing or gearbox check to prove it would of satisfactory quality at the time of sale?


In the report agents terms and conditions it says that car over 100,000 miles may have latent defects , serious or mechanical defects which are not detectable from external visual assessment.


So as I read that unless the agent removed and checked the gearbox he couldn't say when the damage occurred. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The standard that is expected under the consumer rights act is that the car be of satisfactory quality in the opinion of a reasonable person – this is always taken to mean an ordinary person who doesn't have particular expertise in the area. That person is relying on the expertise of the dealer. That reasonable person is an ordinary reasonable consumer.

The reasonable person forms their expectations based on the price paid, any description or claims made for the vehicle by the dealer and any other circumstances that they know about – (and I would say, that they can easily understand given their lack of expertise).

In my view, a good question to ask is whether any reasonable person, understanding the true condition of the vehicle and having understood that they would be met with this repair bill after this period of ownership, with that reasonable person purchased the vehicle.
I think also good question to ask is whether a reasonable dealer, would want to sell a vehicle in this condition to one of their customers. Would a reasonable dealer advertise the fact that a car costing £7300 would require a gearbox replacement within three months.

I don't really think we need to answer these questions do we?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Bankfodder,


The main problem I am finding is as soon as I say to an inspection company that we might have to take the garage to court, they don't want to get involved and say their report isn't for court purposes or that they want the gearbox removed to inspect it fully.

I have been put onto one local inspector that I am told will take the case and am just awaiting his response.

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...