Jump to content


Used car purchased online from Gem Cars Ltd, Lincoln not in condition as described. Small Claims??...


Recommended Posts

This is a general comment on the entire situation.

First of all that it's been mentioned, by the dealer I believe, that there are no consumer rights in this case because the car is of satisfactory quality. However, the dealer is wrong. This complaint does not relate to the requirement of "satisfactory quality". It relates to the statutory provision that goods must match their description. One can say that this is a much easier factor to measure then "satisfactory quality" which is a kind of rule of thumb view based on the expectations of reasonable consumers.

It's very much easier to look at the description of the vehicle when it was being advertised and to compare it with what was actually received.

So in that respect, the question is still at large whether the vehicle was as described. In respect of that if the OP is interested in taking some kind of action then I would start off by getting an independent inspection of the bonnet and of the video to see whether an independent inspector formed the view that the damage to the bonnet had been underplayed – either deliberately or accidentally, it doesn't matter.

The second comment here relates to the quantum of damages which will be available if the OP brought an action against the dealer and succeeded.

I understand that the entire cost of re-spraying the bonnet and then blending the colour into the wings et cetera is something like about £550.

This means that an expenditure of £550 would produce a car bonnet which was essentially in new condition. However, the OP did not purchase a new car. The OP purchased a car which was second-hand and which had already suffered normal wear and tear and in respect of which at least some damage on the bonnet had been pointed out.
I'm going to say now that the pictures supplied by the OP clearly have emphasised the damage. I don't know whether they have exaggerated the damage but certainly if the dealer had posted those pictures, then he would not been able to sell the car – or at least not at that price. From that point of view is it seems that it is quite possible that there was an element of underplay.

If an independent inspection decided that the car had been mis-described and this report persuaded the court, then the court would award a judgement. However the court would then have to decide on the award of damages.

A court would balk at awarding a level of damages which essentially handed the claimant a bonnet in brand-new condition – in other words better than she expected to receive when she bought the car.

This means that the court have to calculate an apportionment of damages. This calculation would be based on the cost of repairing the bonnet and subtracting the value of the damage already in existence.

So for instance, cost of repairs equals £550. Value of existing damage, say, £300 – total award approximately £250.

Of course I have no idea whether these figures are correct. The only figure we can actually be certain of is the cost of repairing the bonnet. The rest of it is subject to argument and eventually a decision by the court.
A reasonable way of measuring the value of the existing damage to the bonnet might be by trying to assess its effect on the resale value of the car. 

What I'm saying here is that people have to tailor their expectations to take into consideration the diminution in value of the goods they have purchased by taking into account the age of that good and any defects that have already been pointed out.
Reciprocally the dealer has a certain duty of candour and that is to be brutally frank about what they are selling in order to avoid these unpleasant and damaging disputes.

I understand the dealer has already paid out £150. Then the OP may still be out of pocket but she will not be out of pocket to the tune of a completely renovated bonnet.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning Bank fodder thanks for the response but everyone appears to be missing the fact that under distance selling rules (which does apply to cars) 

The customer has 14 days to reject the vehicle without a reason and the supplying dealer is required to refund in full and collect the goods 

14 days is plenty of time to inspect the vehicle and decide if you feel the vehicle has a fault or isn't as described. 

 

You will see from my first email that i made three offers 

1 full refund

2 a contribution to the repair cost at the purchasers location 

3 repairs carried out by us in full at our location at no cost to the customer. 

 

Im sorry but having made these three offers renders all of the previous points in this thread mute. 

 

With regards to consumer law and the vehicle being as described im sorry but your response is incorrect 

I checked with the AA legal team and im pretty sure they know there onions! 

Firstly it applies to the description of goods supplied 

Ie, A Vw Golf tsi 1.4 se in white 

The customer recieved a vw golf 1.4 se in white 

The car was advertised with stone chips to bonnet 

The car had stone chips to the bonnet 

Was the damage concurrent with a vehicle of this age and mileage? 

For the courts purposes it would be asked if the stone chips were considered concurrent with the age and mileage of the car. 

 

So unless someone had deliberately added stone chips  to the bonnet of course the chips are concurrent with the age and mileage its a mute argument.  

 

Were the stone chips underplayed by us or exaggerated by the customer? (Irrelevant under the circumstances as a refund or repair had already been offered) 

 

We spoke at length with the AA legal team on these matters and im pretty sure they know more than we do (unless you happen to be a qualified Solicitor practising in the automotive sector?) 

 

And all of it is completely irrelevant as having offered a full refund a free repair or a contribution all of our obligations under law have been met. 

 

The AA mediators exact words were you appear to have gone above and beyond and we are one of a handful of the AA approved dealers that previous to this have never had a single complaint lodged against them 

Regards 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for his contribution.

I'm afraid that you are wrong in almost every detail.

Also you should understand that the AA is a very decent and reputable organisation – but they are risk averse.

Let's hope we don't have to test our various opinions any further than this forum

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

Thank you for his contribution.

I'm afraid that you are wrong in almost every detail.

Also you should understand that the AA is a very decent and reputable organisation – but they are risk averse.

Let's hope we don't have to test our various opinions any further than this forum

Interesting!

All of what i posted above came from the AA mediation legal department 

Your basically saying the AA dont know what they are talking about? 

What are your qualifications in law to make such bold statements? 

Regards 

Mark 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 24/09/2021 at 08:51, BankFodder said:

This is a general comment on the entire situation.

First of all that it's been mentioned, by the dealer I believe, that there are no consumer rights in this case because the car is of satisfactory quality. However, the dealer is wrong. This complaint does not relate to the requirement of "satisfactory quality". It relates to the statutory provision that goods must match their description. One can say that this is a much easier factor to measure then "satisfactory quality" which is a kind of rule of thumb view based on the expectations of reasonable consumers.

It's very much easier to look at the description of the vehicle when it was being advertised and to compare it with what was actually received.

So in that respect, the question is still at large whether the vehicle was as described. In respect of that if the OP is interested in taking some kind of action then I would start off by getting an independent inspection of the bonnet and of the video to see whether an independent inspector formed the view that the damage to the bonnet had been underplayed – either deliberately or accidentally, it doesn't matter.

The second comment here relates to the quantum of damages which will be available if the OP brought an action against the dealer and succeeded.

I understand that the entire cost of re-spraying the bonnet and then blending the colour into the wings et cetera is something like about £550.

This means that an expenditure of £550 would produce a car bonnet which was essentially in new condition. However, the OP did not purchase a new car. The OP purchased a car which was second-hand and which had already suffered normal wear and tear and in respect of which at least some damage on the bonnet had been pointed out.
I'm going to say now that the pictures supplied by the OP clearly have emphasised the damage. I don't know whether they have exaggerated the damage but certainly if the dealer had posted those pictures, then he would not been able to sell the car – or at least not at that price. From that point of view is it seems that it is quite possible that there was an element of underplay.

If an independent inspection decided that the car had been mis-described and this report persuaded the court, then the court would award a judgement. However the court would then have to decide on the award of damages.

A court would balk at awarding a level of damages which essentially handed the claimant a bonnet in brand-new condition – in other words better than she expected to receive when she bought the car.

This means that the court have to calculate an apportionment of damages. This calculation would be based on the cost of repairing the bonnet and subtracting the value of the damage already in existence.

So for instance, cost of repairs equals £550. Value of existing damage, say, £300 – total award approximately £250.

Of course I have no idea whether these figures are correct. The only figure we can actually be certain of is the cost of repairing the bonnet. The rest of it is subject to argument and eventually a decision by the court.
A reasonable way of measuring the value of the existing damage to the bonnet might be by trying to assess its effect on the resale value of the car. 

What I'm saying here is that people have to tailor their expectations to take into consideration the diminution in value of the goods they have purchased by taking into account the age of that good and any defects that have already been pointed out.
Reciprocally the dealer has a certain duty of candour and that is to be brutally frank about what they are selling in order to avoid these unpleasant and damaging disputes.

I understand the dealer has already paid out £150. Then the OP may still be out of pocket but she will not be out of pocket to the tune of a completely renovated bonnet.

 

Thank you Bankfodder, your knowledge and advice are very valuable.

 

I have taken the car to a few independent body shops in my area who are all of the same opinion, although I told them what was stated by the dealer, they have not seen the video walk round. So, if necessary, an independent to assess both the car bonnet and the advertisement is very helpful piece of advice. As I stated to the dealer, I was happy to continue to search for a cheaper price. I have since found a couple of body shops who will do the works at a slightly cheaper price.

 

I have only received advice concerning my Consumer Rights on this, which I sought after correspondence with the dealer. I was informed that this falls under “Public statements such as those in advertising or on labelling, made by the trader, the producer or their representative about the vehicle, must be accurate.” Additionally, that irrespective of initially accepting £150 and rejecting a refund, the remedies must not be of inconvenience to me and must constitute full cost of rectifying the issue. However, I was not aware of how a Court would assess the issue or indeed the rewards process. This has helped me gain a greater perspective from an objective viewpoint.

 

I have never wanted anything but the car in the condition as described, if I could get the bonnet resprayed leaving it in the condition as advertised I would do so. I have also been told that a colour match can not be guaranteed and advised to blend into the wings. This is a further cost I was not aware of, and do not expect the dealer to pay for this as I thought that only fair. As it turned out my contribution would amount to over £180, when I was led to believe I was going to be contributing £50. I do of course have the option of getting the bonnet sprayed with no blending into the wings, but don’t want this to be glaringly obvious, so currently unsure.

 

I’m sure many would have just sent the car back. However, on this occasion I had a specific model I was searching for due to reading up on MK6 Golfs (VW Golf 1.4TSI Match) within a certain budget. I was seeking a minimum of two owners (ideally one), full service history, great condition for year and a dealer with great Google reviews. This one was the closest to me I had found, and the video walk round sold it to me straight away. I thought I was just lucky or it was meant to be considering it had been on the market since June.

 

I have now also arranged to have the car to be checked over next week for peace of mind upon your advice.

 

Update: I called the AA mediation team first thing Friday morning to accept the extra contribution of £112.50 from the dealer, should this still be on the table. I decided that the time spent and the stress this was causing was too much. I have not heard anything back yet but will keep you posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do feel now that I would like to comment on some points raised on some of the posts on this feed:

 

Although I found the appearance and comments from Zac to be rather strange, I have not left a scathing review; I was merely seeking some advice as I have never been in this situation before and did not know what to do.

 

The information I have provided is factual, transparent, and comprehensive. The pdf I posted of full correspondence, screenshots with text on (and to clarify direct quotations from the video walk round), and photographs of the bonnet show this.

 

The emails and comments posted by the dealer do not constitute the full facts of the situation as he stated, and it makes me feel sick that I have repeatedly been called a bully and a blackmailer (via correspondence and forum comments) throughout this. Additionally, the 4th email posted by the dealer which he named as the response to the email above it was not the response I received to it.

 

I have made it clear from the start that I wish to keep the car and only wanted it in the condition as advertised. Upon receipt of my first email concerning my complaint (not the best email, I know), it was very clear that the dealer wanted the car back. His response to this was a WhatsApp message which ended in “To be frank I don’t want to sell some one a car that insults and then blackmails me”. This was also the only option provided which would not cost me considerable time or expense. Although it would still have left me without a car (and having to resume my search), as my old Golf was due to be collected by a private buyer. Also, this was the only option offered without sarcastic and/or patronising comments attached. This is of course only my personal opinion and I am aware that I may not be fully objective on this point, but I felt bullied into doing what the dealer wanted.

 

Whilst I understand my initial email was quite conflict orientated, and that I have not dealt with this situation well, I don’t believe it excuses the responses I received. I am at a loss to see how this is above and beyond in terms of customer service.

 

As the dealer pointed out, I did state that the car was in fantastic condition for its year (the interior is fantastic for the year), apart from the bonnet of course. The car has most likely done predominately motorway miles which would account for the bonnet. There are minor issues which also don’t match up with the video walk round. Namely, a tiny dent in the rear wheel arch, which is barely even noticeable, several paint chips around one of the doors, the odd stone chip elsewhere, the alloy wheels are in good condition, but not absolutely pristine as most were described as (I had assumed maybe these has been reconditioned), the rear loading strip is heavily marked all the way across, but the paintwork not affected. However, all of these I feel are minor in a 10 year old car. Upon reflection ‘great’ may have been a better representation than ‘fantastic' on my comment.

 

During my initial phone complaint, I was told that I was the first customer to complain in over 50 cars (can’t recall the exact number but remember it being in the 50’s) to which I said that I felt bad about, later it was 300…

 

I never asked for £150. As mentioned before, I accepted this offer over the phone after the dealer had told me that I would not be able to get a stone chip repair company to rectify, as “there are hundreds,” and that it would need respraying. He told me that it would cost him £150 (did not mention plus V.A.T) and that it might cost me £200 here.

 

I was confused by the pricing structure mentioned (from the chap he has previously told me he has used for his body work repairs for years) as this appeared to be an invoice, which I assumed was for another car’s repairs. The total cost was over £1,000. It stated £180 for a bonnet repair and paint (vandal damage, small repair or paint correction) and on the second page V.A.T was added. If this is correct this would surely equate to a total cost of £216 for the bonnet, but of course I could be wrong. Not inclusive of the cost of collecting and delivering the car back to me, as I have been informed that this should not be of inconvenience or cost to me.

 

I asked for a larger contribution as initially I was led to believe it would cost me £50 and a little inconvenience. Only after I stated the specific consumer rights (which I had Googled over the weekend) and sent the dealer photos of the bonnet did he offer me a further £112.50 for this. In hindsight I could have specified a figure, and that I still did not expect the blended wings to be paid for. Before this, the dealer stated that he did not wish to negotiate any further and to take the car back to him to paint or they will refund and collect. Upon seeking more specific advice on Monday I was informed of my full rights in this circumstance.

 

It is certainly not a case of changing my mind because I wanted a brand new bonnet etc. and I disagree that the dealer kept his "kool" and replied respectfully throughout, as I do not consider sarcastic and derogatory comments throughout as respectful.

 

The warranty is a 6 month bronze package from Warranty Wise in this case, which I believe is the only option for a car over 100,000 miles.

 

I’m unsure as to the significance of the dealer counting 14 stone chips, but maybe this was on one of the photos close to the edge of the bonnet. I have not zoomed in, merely taken a photos of different areas of the bonnet. You can gauge the size on the photos which are closer to the front headlight area. Also, again this issue is not about the size of the stone chips, which do vary in size throughout, it is about the sheer amount across the bonnet not being as described. I did state that these were difficult to see in sunlight or at a distance. However, upon reflection I should have stated more clearly i.e. direct sunshine. I believe 2 or 3 were pointed out on the front edge of the bonnet in the video walk round. In which the dealer stated "Body work is absolutely stunning for the year, with only very minor age related marks, which we’ll point out as we walk round… Bonnet; no scratches, no dents, no damage. If we look closely, we might find the odd little stone chip here and there that have been touched in, little one there, very difficult to see. Little one there, look. So, it's got the odd little stone chip on the front of the bonnet edge, apart from that it's very very clean."

 

There are not over 30 emails about this, there are 12 and 11 WhatsApp messages (inclusive of the 2 photos of the body shop invoice).

 

From what I understand about mediation, its purpose is to negotiate to resolve an issue as timely and smoothly as possible. The last emails from the dealer stated that they had no choice but to take legal advice and pass all their correspondence to Lawgistics. With a formal retraction of all previous offers except returning the car to them for a refund, which would be my responsibility. This also informed me of the AA ADR. Followed by one stating “My apologies I forgot to include the phone number for the legal team… Bonnie is the team leader should you wish to escalate to the highest level. Please note that on taking further advice we are under no obligation to offer a refund for the vehicle.”

 

The dealer also stated “our car” at the end of one of his posts which is odd. It is legally my car which was purchased online in good faith.

 

Bankfodder’s recent comment concerning the AA does not indicate he is saying the AA does not know what they are talking about.

 

Lastly, I am also unsure as to why anyone would want to deliberately add stone chips to their newly purchased car, or indeed how. Is this even possible?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of repeating myself over and over again 

During our very first phone call i was nothing but polite and apologetic

You said that you felt the bonnet had more stone chip's than you were expecting and i apologised sincerely and i politely asked what would make you happy 

I told you what our costs would be to paint a bonnet i told the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, i sent you a copy of our pricing structure from the paint company to prove my honesty and i sent you the £150 direct to your bank within minutes of our call ending. 

Having then received no other response until your email arrived the following day i tried to call as i always find it easier to talk in person as emails can be misconstrued so easily but you wouldn't take my calls 

I tried desperately not to be rude in any way with my email reply and read and reread my response several times 

I genuinely felt that i had been respectful and we had previously sent customers into lincoln whilst we have carried out repairs to cars and they have always been overjoyed and complimentary of what a lovely place lincoln is to visit so that offer was meant with sincere intentions. 

 

We offered in the very first email

1 A full refund 

2 3/4 of the cost of a full repair 

3 To completely repair at our cost 

Including fuel money and a free lunch 

You then emailed to say you had decided you wanted a larger contribution to the cost of painting the bonnet so in the interest of customer service i agreed to send you the extra £112.50

The very next day i received your next email and you had decided this wasnt good enough and you wanted the whole cost 

Now after all these emails and all this stress you have decided after taking further advice that you will be happy with the £112.50. 

 

So upon production of a vat invoice we will gladly send you the £112.50. 

 

I have nothing further to add 

Sincerely 

Mark 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, you were polite during your call about this after I had called and highlighted this issue to your wife immediately after the delivery man reversed it onto my drive, handed me the documentation and left. However, I fail to see how your other correspondence and comments on here are respectful.

 

You did tell me it would cost £150 for you and likely £200 for me here. I’m afraid the invoice you sent was contradictory.

 

I had explained that I was grocery shopping when you called. When I saw the missed call upon my return, I decided it was better not to call you back after I made the mistake of accepting £150 based upon your word of what it would cost. In hindsight, I should have checked out what it would cost first. I can initially be a little naïve when it comes to believing things I am told, as I tend to judge people based upon my own values. Rightly, or wrongly I decided it better to communicate via email from that point.

 

I did respond to the email instructing me the £150 had been transferred to which I stated thank you, but I have yet to get prices for it.

 

You did not offer me ¾ of the cost of the repair in the first email, you offered:

1; Refund us the £150 I sent you then bring the car back and have a day out in Lincoln, it’s a beautiful place to visit we have one of the biggest cathedrals in Europe (used in the hit film the da Vinci code) the castle is stunning and the cathedral quarter has some lovely places to shop and eat we also have a large Primark

We will drop you to get the train into Lincoln central and whilst you shop and eat we will get the bonnet painted for you we will give you an additional £20 towards food and fuel on us and then collect you in the afternoon and you can drive you car home with the newly painted bonnet.

2; Accept a full refund for the car and we will collect it next week

3; Accept the fact that it is a 10 year old car with 117000 miles it does have stone chips, we didn’t deliberately mislead you, we did send you £150 towards the repairs and pay half your delivery so buy yourself a Genuine colour pen for the car (£15) touch the chips in with the right colour and spend the rest on a spa day

 

I’m unsure why you feel #3 in particular is relevant or respectful.

 

For you to do the repair would have been a considerable inconvenience for me in terms of time and money. The £20 offered for lunch and petrol would not compensate for this. I could ill afford the time and petrol money to bring the car back to you. Whilst I understand you and your wife do not have the time to do this as you have businesses and children etc, I also have similar commitments and there is only one of me.

 

As mentioned in my earlier comment on this feed, you only offered me the further contribution later after I had emailed you with my Consumer Rights and sent you photos. Before this you did not wish to negotiate any further.

 

I had not received any further advice before I decided to accept the further £112.50 contribution if it were still an option or stated that I am happy about it. As mentioned, this is only due to the time and stress of this.

 

Please may I request that you formally respond via the mediation service with this offer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A brief note and that is to say that if you accept extra money, you should make sure that this is on condition that it satisfies the cosmetic problem with the bonnet and does not waive your rights in respect of any other defects which may present themselves at some point.

It would not be a good idea to surrender all your rights for a relatively small payment – certainly small in the event that for instance, the gearbox packs up or some other catastrophic event

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BankFodder said:

A brief note and that is to say that if you accept extra money, you should make sure that this is on condition that it satisfies the cosmetic problem with the bonnet and does not waive your rights in respect of any other defects which may present themselves at some point.

It would not be a good idea to surrender all your rights for a relatively small payment – certainly small in the event that for instance, the gearbox packs up or some other catastrophic event

Thank you again Bankfodder! I will ensure this is added to the final agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening,

 

I don’t normally comment on such matters but I enrolled onto this website because I think this entire thread is a joke and I’m surprised it’s gone on this far.

 

I am currently looking for a car myself and to see a dealership offer you a full refund for a 2nd hand car you claim is not to the quality you expect (but your happy to keep regardless) is completely acceptable in my eyes. The fact you do not wish to take a full refund but push for funding from a dealership after payment is borderline criminal. 
 

It is a second hand car with reasonable high mileage, good interior and has some unwanted damage to the bonnet. (What did you expect???)
You personally claim the car is not to the standard you expected but are UNWILLING to return it as your happy with its current condition but expect further funding for improvements/repair? Which is an inconvenience to you? If it’s an inconvenience take the refund???

im sorry I’m not sure what planet your on but reading through every detail on here you’ve labelled and scorned what appears to be on here a decent car dealership, better than many I’ve come across, they have acted completely fair and acceptable in my eyes, a dealership that has not only offered you a full refund but if you decide to keep the car which you have, the dealership have offered payments towards its repair with extras after the sale is completed. That’s a bloody good deal!!!

 
But your perception is the car is good enough to keep but not good enough for you to repair yourself?

you have an opportunity, a very fair opportunity to have the entire trade reversed and you don’t want to…. but you feel the dealership is responsible to improve its current state, one your currently happy to accept and try enforce improvements through some form of legal obligation.
 

Julia71, you either want the car or you don’t. Stop flip flopping around pretending your the victim when GEM CARS LTD clearly are still keeping your best interests at heart, very clearly.
 

I’m surprised this has been entertained for this long. 
 

Don’t be trying to bleed more money from a car dealership when you’ve had the opportunity to hand it back. 
Looks more like a scheme to get more money from a car dealership over you actually being unhappy with a trade.

 

keep it or take a refund.


You don’t buy a second hand bike and ask for money off the person you bought it from because the paint works chipped.
welcome to planet earth! 

 

 


 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Update:

The dealer has now offered the further £112.50 via the mediation service, as full and final settlement. However, the conditions attached are that I remove all libellous defamation comments from this site and leave no negative comments anywhere else.

 

I am not aware that I have made any such comments, as defamatory comments have to be false surely?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not aware of any false statements here. If there were full statements then we would remove them. The dealer has been actively engaged on this thread and and hasn't pointed out anything that was false and in fact seems to have confirmed things that have been said.

If the dealer considers that there are false statements here then the dealer should contact us using our contact form at the bottom of this forum and identify the particular words which are of concern.

I'm afraid that we sometimes get traders trying to protect or clean up their reputation by making these kinds of offers – or even sometimes threats to their customers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 27/09/2021 at 17:43, BankFodder said:

We are not aware of any false statements here. If there were full statements then we would remove them. The dealer has been actively engaged on this thread and and hasn't pointed out anything that was false and in fact seems to have confirmed things that have been said.

If the dealer considers that there are false statements here then the dealer should contact us using our contact form at the bottom of this forum and identify the particular words which are of concern.

I'm afraid that we sometimes get traders trying to protect or clean up their reputation by making these kinds of offers – or even sometimes threats to their customers.

Thank you BankFodder.

 

Wow! I guess that in a case of a  dealer is selling unroadworthy cars/death traps they would be prepared to go as far as threats.

 

Update:

I refused the above offer on Wednesday, stating that I would have accepted it had it not been without the attached conditions and with the added conditions as you advised above. 

 

I have now had the car looked over by an independent I trust, and as I expected it appears to be ok. The only issue was a couple of loose bolts on the drive shaft, which they said someone probably forgot to tighten when replaced. So, thank you so much again for advising me to have the car looked over. Although not the fault of the dealer, this could have potentially caused an accident if I had waited until the M.O.T. next June. 
 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So where are you now on this? Is there money outstanding? Have you made some other arrangement? Do you consider the matter closed now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meaning the AA?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The AA mediator returned my call and has stated that they can not help any further through mediation. The dealer is not willing to amend the conditions he attached to the offer, and has made it clear this was his final offer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I think you will have to decide what you want to do. It's a matter of £112, I think.

You will have to decide whether you think you can convince a court that the demonstration video were so dramatically different to what you actually received that it amounts to a breach of the statutory requirement that goods conform to their description.
You will also have to satisfy a court that the money you have already received plus the further £112 still takes account of the reduction in value caused by the damage as presented by the dealer.

There is a risk that a court might decide that you have had enough money given the fact that you expected to find some damage to the bonnet. In that case, you would lose your claim and of course you would also lose your court costs.
The court costs wouldn't be very much for a claim of this value – but it is something to bear in mind.

Luckily all court hearings are being conducted on the telephone so it is most unlikely that there would be an in-person trial. But if there was and if the dealer decided to travel to your local court to attend the trial then if the dealer succeeded, he will also be awarded his reasonable costs of travel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have accepted the above offer due to the added stress of having to the deal with this man long term. I’m fact, if it wasn’t for the appalling customer service throughout the correspondence (regardless of my poor handling of the situation) before this offer was made, I would likely have accepted it in the first instance. 

 

Considering the dealer has attempted to misrepresent our communications by way of posting select correspondence named as responses, posting comments that contradict himself, state he had instructed a solicitor for slander, and that the content of this feed constitutes libellous defamation, I do think he would have behaved in this manner regardless, had I not accepted the offers which suited him better.

 

Whilst I understand many would have let this go and just accepted the dealers offers, I have explained on this thread why I have always wished to keep the car. Besides which, all apart from the one he wanted from the start would have cost me considerable time and expense. For which the car not being as described was not of my doing.

 

As stated, I am happy with the car apart from this issue. I expected the odd little stone chip here and there on the front edge of the bonnet on the car. I had my old Golf almost 20 years which had high mileage, and the bonnet condition was similar to what had been marketed on this one. 

The defects clearly advertised by the dealer were very minimal, expected on a used car and would not have needed any intervention. Whereas the actual bonnet requires respraying to ensure it is not peppered with little rust spots in the longer term.

 

If anyone does read this thread in the future, other than the very helpful advice given by the site team, I would recommend the following:

 

1. Gather all information concerning your issue, including costs and your specific Consumer Rights before further contact with a dealer, and try to take a step back before responding to anything. Seems like common sense, but when you are upset its not that simple.

 

2. Do not place too much weight on reviews wherever they are posted. Most people don’t leave reviews, and many don’t feel comfortable leaving bad ones. Additionally, bad ones are open to being misrepresented by a company’s response. A company may well be predominately reputable and have some great reviews. However, think about what could happen should you respond emotionally, and not wish to accept offers which could be either what the dealer wants to ensure no negative reviews are left, or weighted to be the most convenient options for the dealer. 

 

3. Do not assume that the AA (or any other reputable organisation) approved dealerships are necessarily any better than other dealerships. Trustpilot appears to have many horror stories in relation to 'approved dealers', and not just small ones such as this.

 

4. If you should ever want to stand up for your rights and seek advice online, try not to reply to or be swayed by Trolls; it is always possible that they could even be the dealer signing up with another email address and posing as someone else in the first place.

 

5. Whilst reputable mediators have training and experience, they are not legal experts and can only tell you what they think in any given situation. As BankFodder pointed out concerning the AA; they are a decent and reputable organisation, but they are risk averse.

 

One of the best pieces of advice I was given was to arrange for a used car to be checked over by an expert you trust.

 

Lastly, in this case I believe that overall, this dealer provides good cars and appears to be reputable. However, should you ever have to put in a complaint and not accept the offers provided, be very careful as you could end up in a very unpleasant and stressful fight.

 

Apologies for another long winded post, I just want to be of help to others through my experience.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Your list of precautions makes a lot of sense.

One thing that leaves a bad taste in my mouth here – and I've seen it with several other dealers as well – is the application of monetary inducements to remove references to them on the Internet.

This kind of paid censorship is very unpleasant and unworthy.

Kudos to you for standing your ground on this point

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

So I think you will have to decide what you want to do. It's a matter of £112, I think.

You will have to decide whether you think you can convince a court that the demonstration video were so dramatically different to what you actually received that it amounts to a breach of the statutory requirement that goods conform to their description.
You will also have to satisfy a court that the money you have already received plus the further £112 still takes account of the reduction in value caused by the damage as presented by the dealer.

There is a risk that a court might decide that you have had enough money given the fact that you expected to find some damage to the bonnet. In that case, you would lose your claim and of course you would also lose your court costs.
The court costs wouldn't be very much for a claim of this value – but it is something to bear in mind.

Luckily all court hearings are being conducted on the telephone so it is most unlikely that there would be an in-person trial. But if there was and if the dealer decided to travel to your local court to attend the trial then if the dealer succeeded, he will also be awarded his reasonable costs of travel.

Thank you Bankfodder. I have taken all of your advice onboard, and although I believe I would be awarded the funds offered by the dealer it isn't a substantial amount of money. Therefore, I have decided its not worth the prolonged stress of continuing this complaint any further for a small amount of money and out of principle.

 

I have just booked it in to have the bonnet resprayed next month, as I feel I need to get it done before the winter sets in. 

 

I am so thankful for all of your time and advice, which you have given even though this is a minor case. So, I have just made a donation.

 

Many thanks again.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

Thank you. Your list of precautions makes a lot of sense.

One thing that leaves a bad taste in my mouth here – and I've seen it with several other dealers as well – is the application of monetary inducements to remove references to them on the Internet.

This kind of paid censorship is very unpleasant and unworthy.

Kudos to you for standing your ground on this point

I totally agree, its disgraceful!

 

Thank you, but I'd rather pay the remainder on my credit card and keep my values intact!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your posts today, I'm sure they will help caggers in future. I hope that what you've learned with us will stand you in good stead when eventually you buy another car. :)

 

HB

  • Like 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...