I purchased a Van unfit for use from Brunel used commercials/The Van Hub. They are refusing a refund.

[johnonymous]

After I contacted the DVSA by phone and then email and leaving my contact details I received an answerphone message with a mobile number.

This number was for one of the DVSA quality control testers in Bristol rather than any kind of national line so I am not sure if it would be of any use to you, though I can forward it to the confidential email address if you do think you can find a use for it.

@Manxman 65k does seem low for the age but as it was definitely owned by BA before (still has the stickers) and all the previous tests on the government database match up the mileage is about the only thing I think was genuine.

The General contact for DVSA 

Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency | Ellipse, Padley Road, Swansea, SA1 8AN
Phone: 0300 123 9000

and I emailed..

[email protected]

I only had to chase them up once in order to get my assessment which is technically an MOT retest so I imagine anyone following this line would be able to get the service fairly easily.

[BankFodder]

If there was a mobile number then I'd be grateful if you would send it to me by email at our admin address please .

If you have a way of checking up the mileage from previous MOTs then that might be useful as well.

 

[johnonymous]

Sorry for the late reply, I will send the mobile number to the admin address.

I am attaching the MOT certificate that came with the car.

The Mileage from the previous MOTs are

63,120 (2019) October

57,361 (2018) November 

52,577 (2017) October

44,143 (2016) October

I have got these mileages from the government website and they do go all the way back to 2009.

MOT.pdf

[BankFodder]

Thank you.

Well I suppose the mileage looks broadly right. It certainly hasn't done much mileage per year and even though it seems to be nothing for 2020 or 2021, as the mileage is generally low they would seem no reason for playing around with the clock.

Are you happy that these are the correct mileages?

As I said, I think that although you can easily get a judgement against the dealer, enforcement might be a difficult business.

On the other hand, this is to be a clear discrepancy between what the assessment has found and the result of the MOT test only 18 miles earlier and only a few days or so earlier.

From time to time on this forum we get stories of people buying used cars with new MOTs and yet the vehicle turns out to be in very bad condition and often in dangerous condition very shortly after the issue of the MOT certificate.
Obviously one is very suspicious of that new MOT but it is generally speaking very difficult to prove that the MOT is dodgy – maybe because a few weeks or months have elapsed or maybe because a few hundred or even a couple of thousand miles have has been done before the situation is scrutinised.

Your case is different because only a few days elapsed, a negligible mileage was done and most importantly you got an extremely authoritative inspection of the vehicle which shows that not only should it has not passed its MOT but in fact that its condition was really extremely bad.

Of course I'm speculating as to the possibility of enforcing a judgement against the dealer but I've already pointed out that I think you can have a lot of difficulty. 

Of course the case here with BRISLINGTON MOT CENTRE might have a perfectly reasonable explanation – but it doesn't look good. In the absence of any explanation from them, and on the documentation that you provided with the fact that you have given us, I think there wouldn't be much difficulty persuading a judge that there is good reason to demand an explanation from Brislington as to how the vehicle passed its MOT.

If you wanted to sue Brislington then you could sue them in the tort of deceit – or even on a misrepresentation where you have been induced to enter into a contract as a result of their representation that the vehicle had gone to an MOT and had passed.
The reason that you could sue for a misrepresentation is because although you are not the contracting party – you didn't commission the MOT, under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, you enjoy the same rights as the dealer who commissioned the MOT.

Let me say that both of these actions could be brought in the Small Claims Court but they would be unconventional and I can imagine that Brislington would go crazy – if they decided to defend. On the other hand, the consequences of a judgement against them for this would be profound for them, and the dealership and could lead to some very serious attention from the police.

Think about this – and also please can you list out all your losses. I may have asked you to do this already but please do it again.

I'm talking about the cost of the vehicle, and expenses in collecting it, any other expenses incurred trying to address issues – everything.

In a list format please

[johnonymous]

My Losses would amount to the van at£2300

V62 comes to £29, 25 for the thing itself which ends up costing just over 28 as a postal order and then the cost of mailing it.

£15.70 for 2 special delivery letters to Brunel used commercials.

So far this is all as the DVSA assessment was free.

Would it be possible to pay to have the van fixed with an idea to keep it and still sue for the cost of repairs? Otherwise I may have problems at the end of April when my friend is moving out.

I would either have to have it towed a nonsensical distance

or start paying the tax and insurance on it and leave it out on the streets, neither of which are especially appealing.

In any case I am very keen to try legal action against Brislington MOT centre

Incidentally what would your rationale be in thinking that the MOT centre would be easier to enforce a judgement against than the Car dealership?

Would this be solely because the Car Dealer has been in liquidation since 2019? 

[BankFodder]

First of all, yes it would probably be easier to sue simply for the cost of repairs – what are they? You would be entitled to get a good quality repair. You wouldn't have to cheapskate.

And yes, I think that it would probably be easier to enforce against the MOT station which is probably a much more established business. Furthermore, I can imagine that they know who the dealer is and if they found themselves on the end of this kind of legal action, they would be complaining to the dealer and trying to get the dealer to step up to the mark.

Once again, we can't come right out now and say the dealer has given you a dodgy MOT – but when you look at the MOT certificate which you have and the subsequent assessment that you have – it doesn't look good.

At the end of the day it is for a judge to decide.

If you did decide to sue the MOT garage I think that you should be ready for a very interesting reaction. Of course they may simply roll over in order to avoid trouble – and then you would have to draw your own conclusions but at least you would get your money.

On the other hand, they might rise up in a fury because there are serious issues at stake here.
If you do get a judgement against them then it would have various has consequences for them and in fact we would point this out in a letter of claim.

What is the cost of repairs – good quality repairs – although of course you will only be able to get the items included in the MOT assessment prepared. Other matters will be down to you and would be between you and the dealer if you could get hold of them.

 

[johnonymous]

I am getting a mechanic to come out on Wednesday the 9th to do some diagnostics. I am going to end up getting the repairs and then sue the MOT garage for theses costs. I will post an update then.

[BankFodder]

Firstly I think I've already pointed out that it's unhelpful if you don't engage with the thread more closely. You are dealing with a very serious matter and if you don't do it right, it would be like waking up sleeping tiger and you won't like it.

Good idea to get the diagnostics. Bad idea then simply to go ahead with the repairs. It's important to lay down a paper trail and to let the other side know what you're doing in advance so they can't later on complained that they had no opportunity to comment.

Last time you responded to the thread it was Wednesday evening. Now it's four days later.

You come here for help and then we find that you are going off on your own route and make your own arrangements – which aren't necessarily in your best interests

Is the diagnostics test going to cost you any money?

[johnonymous]

I had misunderstood that when you said it would be easier to sue for repairs that this was going to be different to getting the repairs done before taking legal action.

 

There would be a call out charge for diagnostics.

 

Would you advise taking any action before getting the diagnostics?

 

I would only have the broadest of ideas as t the cost of the repairs before this is done.

Edited January 30, 2022 by dx100uk
added A few blank lines only..dx

[BankFodder]

No, you have understood correctly.

 

But the important thing is not to start making arrangements which could incur costs before letting the other side know .

 

If the diagnostics don't cost very much, then certainly it is worth going ahead with those but it is not then worth going ahead with any repairs until you have given the other side notice and an opportunity to object or to carry out their own inspection.

 

If the diagnostics are going to cost a lot of money like a couple of hundred quid then it would be prudent to let the other side know what's coming so that they can make their comments before you incur costs .

 

Don't forget that eventually you will be going after them for all of the money

 

 

[ukshane4life]

look like the company as shut Permanently closed

[stu007]

Hi

 

If you actually look closely at the Companies House link they have failed to provide Accounts by the due date of 31st January 2020:

 

BRUNEL VEHICLE SOLUTIONS LIMITED overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

FIND-AND-UPDATE.COMPANY-INFORMATION.SERVICE.GOV.UK

---

BRUNEL VEHICLE SOLUTIONS LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history...

 

 

At present this Company is NOT Dissolved but only going through the process of being in Liquidation in which an Insolvency Practitioner will be Appointed to Dissolve the Company.

 

You then need to take a Take a close look at the Gazette on this Company as it give you a Timeline of where the Company is at during this process:

 

BRUNEL VEHICLE SOLUTIONS LIMITED | 08471137 | The G...

WWW.THEGAZETTE.CO.UK

 

This does not stop you contacting Companies House about this Companies actions and making an OBJECTION to this Liquidation due to your present issue with this Company

 

It may not stop the current action but at least you have made an Objection known to Companies House and have a record of this.

[BankFodder]

It's a shame that the OP seems to have disappeared on this case. Although the dealer appears to have closed down, it wouldn't surprise me if they are still around and trading and also known to the MOT company.

I'm quite sure that a claim could be brought against the MOT company with a reasonable chance of success. But of course the OP needs to engage with the thread