Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Honeybee Yes that's the one - many thanks. I did try and update it late last night but it said I had to contact site owners so I gave up and went to bed! In the end after no contact/updates from the solicitors the sale went through very quickly so I presume that didn't give the council sufficient time to swing into action.   Thanks
    • I tried to post an update on an earlier thread without success. Long story short. The house sale has taken place [title deeds had a charge against property] Restriction said 'No disposition of the registered estate is to be completed by registration without a certificate signed by the applicant or his conveyancer that written notice of the disposition was given to [name of council]. Exchange and completion within a couple of days. I've not heard anything from either solicitors involved on this point nor the council so not sure of the purpose / effectiveness of the charge as it doesn't seem to have held up the sale. Perhaps I'll get a bill next month?? Has anyone had a similar experience?  
    • Hi Hammy1962,    You make a fair point.  Yes, I made a mistake. I fully accept that.    As noted, this was an honest mistake - the DD was coming out of a joint account and I (mistakenly) assumed this was set up by my wife.    What concerns me - and I want to flag to others - is that when I was sold this policy it was not made clear that there is no obligation for D&G to get approval to continue this each year, no need for me to approve any increase to the premium they deduct (which has tripled over the period) or for them to change the policy. I was in effect (with one phone call) writing them a blank cheque when I agreed to this. If I had been clear on that I would have not taken on the policy.    From a business perspective, if one of my customers had presented me with these facts I would have handled it differently too.    Cheers!           
    • So the latest is I have agreed first thing  Monday morning with CCP to make payment by 22nd February. Just received a telephone call from Chartsbridge to make arrangements to collect my vehicle as they have just been instructed by CCP!!!
  • 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
      • 31 replies

Recommended Posts

Hi, 

 

Purchased a new van from Mercedes dealer, ad-blue started leaking, went back to dealer they said carry on fluid leak was from overspill pipe of ad-blue, two days later engine seized. Sent van back to dealer and was forced to pay 2k in repair as they alleged pothole damage, as a self employed courier could not afford to be without my vehicle. 

 

I argued that being such an important part should not be damaged by pothole but dealer would not budge, any suggestions as to the way forward. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please will you give us a complete timeline and chronology of what has happened. Bullet pointed please not too much narrative

Also who's the dealer

Link to post
Share on other sites


22'nd June 2019, paid a 315.00 GBP deposit to Roanza Truck and Van, Warrington, and placed an order for a Mercedes Sprinter 316 Sprinter van with electric handbrake and the Mercedes JB7 parking pack. 

 

The order was confirmed in writing. 

 

The arrival date given was 01st September 2019. 

 

Delivery date pushed back on three occasions with various excuses.  

 

The vehicle finally arrived on 24th September 2019. 

 

However, significantly different to order it as it was a 314, not a 316, and lacked front and rear parking sensors.  

 

I did not know this immediately. I was due to work at 0900 hrs in my vehicle but did not take delivery until 1030 hrs, so took keys and rushed to work. 

 

25th September 2019  drove to the dealership and spoke to their sales manager. Highlighted my concerns that if I have to return this vehicle, would be without a works vehicle as I had sold my previous van. 

 

Sales manager suggested rather than hire a van and bill Roanza (they could not insure me on a demonstrator for courier work) I keep the vehicle in my possession and on my insurance. 

 

02.10.19 - Van leak develops, that day went to the dealer, mechanic inspected leak and advised overspill pipe. 

 

04.10.19 - Went back to the dealer as loss of AdBlue was worse van booked in warranty repair for 10th October 2019. 

 

07.10.19 - Van got worse. Making me no longer willing to take the risk of driving it so handed it back. 

 

15.10.2019 - Roanza then stated they would not supply replacement van unless I paid repair cost of 2k as damage was done by road and warranty not covering it.  Argued that van not fit for purpose if Adblue so vulnerable but had no choice other than to pay. 

 

I had already paid 10k deposit and was losing between 700 - 1200 per week whilst off the road. 

 

My insurance was dealing with the matter under my legal policy, but they have gone bust. Hence, my post.  

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is Adblue?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ad-blue is an additive which you put into a tank much like the windscreen fluid, it mixes with the engine to clean the emissions, it makes new diesel vehicles road legal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that there was a previous thread about this same vehicle but on a slightly different issue which you began last year and then suddenly dropped out of the discussion.

 

What was the update on that?

 

also in respect of this issue, what are you trying to achieve? Are you trying to get rid of the van or get compensation or what?

i'm a bit surprised that as you know about this forum and we have helped you on several issues before that you have left it so late before doing anything

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My new van is fine. I just want my money back for the repair. I have waited so long because of two things, one, my insurers were dealing with it and then two as a courier, I have worked throughout lockdown, meaning never had a chance to deal with things properly, my insurance is due for renewal and it has brought matters to a head, so have taken two days off. 

 

I agree should have dealt with matters sooner but I trusted my insurers to deal with it, no one told me they had gone bust until today. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On my initial post, this was before ad-blue issues, got tied up in them, arguing with dealer and Mercedes. In hindsight should have issued proceedings but was worried about losing work, money in my hand to meet insurance and vehicle costs. Only I work supporting my wife and children, just a pay cheque away from losing everything. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So as far as this new thread is concerned, the issue seems to be that you took delivery of a new van on 24 September
 

02.10.19 - Van leak develops, that day went to the dealer, mechanic inspected leak and advised overspill pipe. 

 

04.10.19 - Went back to the dealer as loss of AdBlue

 

10th October 2019 van booked in warranty repair but by the

 

07. 10. 19 - Van got worse and so you handed it back

 

This means that the warranty repair did not happen and on the

 

15.10.2019 - Roanza then stated they would not supply replacement van unless I paid repair cost of 2k as damage was done by road and warranty not covering it.

 

Argued that van not fit for purpose if Adblue so vulnerable but had no choice other than to pay. 

 

I had already paid 10k deposit and was losing between 700 - 1200 per week whilst off the road. 

 

You made an insurance claim which I believe was in respect of damage caused by road conditions – although you don't say.

So I gather that you seem to be accepting that the leakage problem was caused by some Impact with uneven roads and you made insurance claim about this. Is this correct?

What was the name of the insurer?

When did you start the claim? I have a sense that this claim has been going on for over a year and nothing has happened.

What was the insurer? Was this simply a legal assistance insurance – or was it an insurance against this kind of damage?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ad blue (or lack of) would not make an engine seize, it is an additive to the fuel that improves post combustion in the DPF/Cat. 
These days vehicles give a warning if the AdBlue is low and go into limp mode if empty, this is not because of potential damage, rather a requirement to ensure you actually refill it to maintain documented emission levels. 
If the engine seized it is nothing to do with that, but would potentially seize from a coolant leak?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Engine did not seize but went into limp mode issue was as a self employed

 courier working in my van all day the risk that things would slowly get worse became to much did not want to be out delivering and van pack in. That would have meant me losing money through not getting paid for whatever I had done and having to pay to cover what ever work I had left to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So let's nail a few things down.

I understand that you accept that this was caused by road impact damage. Your argument really is that there is a design vulnerability that should not have allowed this to happen. Is that correct?

You still haven't told us anything about the insurer even though I asked you three hours ago

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bank fodder 

 

To answer your questions - 

 

So I gather that you seem to be accepting that the leakage problem was caused by some Impact with uneven roads and you made insurance claim about this. Is this correct?

 

I am not accepting it was damage but can not prove it was not, that is what I was told by the dealer, this is why I involved my insurers, they would have access to an engineer who could tell me wether it was even possible. It must be remembered when I was told this I had already handed van and keys back so only had the dealers word. The issue is went to dealer twice and both times mechanic inspected vehicle and told me it was simply an overflow pipe drip but then magically when I requested warranty repair refused based on damage from road to ad-blue pump. This meant I had no vehicle, so no work, so only option was to pay repair cost, argue after, and get back to work. 

What was the name of the insurer?

 

Anjuna, broker was Coversure. 

When did you start the claim? I have a sense that this claim has been going on for over a year and nothing has happened.

 

Spoke to Coversure for advice, they told me speak to claims line with insurers, contacted them 09th October 2019, then sent emails for about four months, explaining situation, and asking wether I had cover on my legal protection in order to pursue this. I then chased it again every couple of weeks via email, Covid meant working six days a week until October 2020, raised a complaint with the FOS. I then found out when I was renewing my insurance this year that Anjuna had gone broke, which explained why I had heard nothing but left me the 2k out of pocket with no idea of  a way forward. 

What was the insurer? Was this simply a legal assistance insurance – or was it an insurance against this kind of damage?

 

I had fully comp insurance including accidental damage but do not know if Anjuna covered it, saying that really felt dealer and Mercedes were trying to wriggle out of liability, they knew vehicle was for a multi drop courier, so would expect it to have a hard life, therefore, would expect the ad-blue pump to at least be protected from damage. A stone chip to the windscreen fair enough but damage from the road to the engine block or a significant part like this less easy to swallow. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still struggling to understand it completely, but one thing is clear is that this is to be a shortage of evidence – partly through the passage of time but also because you don't have the van any more so you are unable to get independent inspections carried out.

I think if you are going to make any headway on this then you need to get some documentation which means sending subject access requests to the various companies involved – and also the dealer – but whether this produces anything is a matter for serious doubt.

 

There seems still to be an Ajuna in existence - https://www.anjunaunderwriting.co.uk/

 

https://www.coversure.co.uk/

 

so the van developed a leak. The dealer told you that this was caused by impact damage and although you won't convinced about it, you went along with the story and instead of getting the damage properly inspected by an independent source, you accepted the dealers word and decided to go against the insurer.

You say that you requested a warranty repair. Does this mean that you had purchased an additional warranty? Or are you simply talking about the sales guarantee/statutory rights?

Have you done any research to see whether these vehicles are prone to the kind of leakage or damage that you experienced?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok will do the subject access requests, hopefully something will come off them.

 

The dealer had me over a barrel, when I bought the van was told that if it was off the road would be provided with a courtesy vehicle, then, this was removed due to the fact I am a courier, with the excuse, dealer could not insure me. No van means no work, hire van would have cost five to six hundred pounds per month, which added to the cost of paying for my van, extra insurance simply not viable, using my clients vehicle meant me working for less than minimum wage so no option other then to draw a line, get back to work, if nothing else but to limit my. losses. Having taken legal assistance, thought at least could sue but due to Anjuna issues even that may have been taken from me due to the delay. 

 

The warranty was Mercedes warranty as van brand new. 

 

Going to research ad-blue issue now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well somehow or other you to get some report or evidence that this was a defect in the vehicle are not caused by road damage. If you can do that, then you would have an action against the dealer.

Other than that, I'm not quite sure what to do. It's all about getting evidence. If you can get direct evidence about the van then that will be enormously helpful. If you can get anecdotal evidence about similar problems with similar vans then that would be helpful.

Overall though, I don't think there's a lot of help – unless you strike gold with a report

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...