Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

We were referred to Auxilis by Admiral


Cornwall123
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2459 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I am so pleased but also worried sick to find this forum.

Briefly, my son was driving my husband's car last year and a third party ran into the side of it resulting in it being written off. It was a classic automatic Mercedes (this may be important). As my son required to travel 50 miles each way to his work location and my husband works in a rural location we required a car asap. We were referrred to Auxilis by Admiral and despite feeling uneasy about it all we agreed to the contract. The following day we were contacted and told that they would deliver a premium automatic car the following day to our home address. I said an auto was not necessary nor a premium and as my son was not in a position to work at this time we agreed for a car to be delivered to our home the following day as we could use the only other car available to us for a day or so.

 

I made a separate call to Admiral and asked very specific questions regarding the hire and cost of it and our liability. I even said that I realise it is very expensive and surely it would be better to get a cheaper hire ourselves. I was told that if we did that then we would be unlikely to get our money back and as it could go on for months before being settled we would be saddled with a big bill, probably thousands. That is exactly why Auxilis is recommended and people like us are referred to them I was told.

 

The following day I phoned Auxilis to see what time to expect the car (as they even suggested that I could choose what type) and was told that the car was already on its way. A brand new 4 x 4 auto thing because our car was a 'premium' car so they provide a premium car as a replacement. This was not agreed to or suggested by me.

 

Cutting this short - the car arrived, it took 6 weeks to get the pay out for the car and we waited to replace it until all was sorted, as we were told we could. The cost of the hire car for 6 weeks is around £7K to my horror. Obviously even though the accident was deemed completely no fault of my son's and the excess was covered in the claim and NCB is unaffected the other insurers are refusing to pay. The court date is set for end October and my husband has to attend (as the insurance is in his name). He is actually unable to attend as he has business travel at that time.

 

I have a few concerns. The paperwork mentions wage slips, credit card details etc. Theoretically we could have put the cost on a credit card or paid from savings - I was told not to. How will this all play out in court? What will happen because he cannot attend, does that look like he is not cooperating, as he agreed he would? We were asked months ago to provide dates he could not attend for the next 6 months. This we did. That brought us to the beginning of September. No questions were asked about any period of time after that so he was not able to tell them that October would not be possible. I am really stressed over this. Any advice please? If we tell the truth in court as above I suspect we would be seen not to try and recover Auxilis' losses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, you should have started your own thread but hopefully the Mods will sort it for you.

 

Tell your solicitor that your husband is away and unable to attend Court and that the trial date needs moving.

 

Sounds like there wasn't a need for the hire car as there was another one in the family, you had funds to buy your own replacement car and/or hire a car using your own money (so you were not impecunious).

 

Speak to your solicitor and tell them the above, Auxilis will probably be keen to settle the bill at a heavy discount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. There was not another in car in the family that was available for use and we were told by Admiral not to pay for a car ourselves as we would not get the money back. It would have sat on our credit card for sometime.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, you should have started your own thread but hopefully the Mods will sort it for you.

 

Tell your solicitor that your husband is away and unable to attend Court and that the trial date needs moving.

 

Sounds like there wasn't a need for the hire car as there was another one in the family, you had funds to buy your own replacement car and/or hire a car using your own money (so you were not impecunious).

 

Speak to your solicitor and tell them the above, Auxilis will probably be keen to settle the bill at a heavy discount.

 

Agreed, OP speak to the Solicitors (I assume they are Principia Law).

 

They will at some point prepare a witness statement for your husband to sign. This will have a Statement of Truth at the end - to verify to the Court that it's content is true. The statement they will prepare will be a fairly standard pro-forma statement which they copy/paste from claim to claim and add in new details. If your husband is concerned with the content of the statement he needs to raise this with the solicitors and only sign it if he truly believes what is said within is true.

 

When all is said and done, the Defendant's lawyers won't know half of the detail in your post (which suggests that credit hire should never have been obtained in the first place). They will receive a tick box form signed by your son or your husband saying that you needed a car, you didn't have another available and that you needed a premium vehicle.

 

 

As an aside:

 

"Theoretically we could have put the cost on a credit card or paid from savings - I was told not to."

 

"I said an auto was not necessary nor a premium and as my son was not in a position to work at this time we agreed for a car to be delivered to our home the following day as we could use the only other car available to us for a day or so. "

 

"I made a separate call to Admiral and asked very specific questions regarding the hire and cost of it and our liability. I even said that I realise it is very expensive and surely it would be better to get a cheaper hire ourselves. I was told that if we did that then we would be unlikely to get our money back and as it could go on for months before being settled we would be saddled with a big bill, probably thousands."

 

Frankly companies like Auxillis (and Accident Exchange/Easidrive/Kindertons etc etc) operate underhand tactics like this all the time, but as frustrating as it is, from the other side of the fence you can only realistically challenge what you can prove to be untrue - which isn't often a whole lot (credit hire litigation is something I do a lot day to day).

 

From your point of view, don't worry - your solicitors know what they're doing (they do this a lot) and as Ganymede said - a settlement before trial is the most likely outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. The fact is my son didn't work only for one day, so the car actually was needed by the day it arrived (2 days after the accident). We did not have another available. The only thing is that I suggested to Admiral that it was an expensive way of getting a hire car but was told quite categorically to use Auxillis. So are you saying we should just tell the solicitor all this now or should we submit our financial statements? I am worried sick over this. Since the accident we have had countless calls from people saying we could get compensation for my son etc. We have asked countless times for the calls to stop. He was not injured, merely shook up and so we do not believe in compensation for something not necessary. We are honest people just trying to get through this mess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just co-operate with the solicitors and submit the financials to them. They will see them before they disclose to the other side, and if they feel a need to make an offer, they will do so.

 

More importantly, tell your solicitor that your husband is unavailable for trial so they can start the process of getting the hearing date moved. You should do this asap as the nearer you get to trial, each party is incurring more costs, and the other side may kick up a fuss if you leave it late to tell them the trial needs moving.

 

And please don't worry. This is all run of the mill in these types of cases...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry just one more thing. My husband so does not want to have to provide all financial info. What happens if we don't?

 

If he doesn't, if the matter gets to Court, there will be no evidence in support of impecuniosity, leaving the Court open to awarding hire at what's called 'Basic Hire Rates' (BHR - i.e. the cost of hire if you went to a normal provider e.g. enterprise thrifty hertz etc - this is more often than not lower than the credit hire rate). So if the Court awards BHR rates for the hire, then they may award say £4-5k.

 

As such there will be a shortfall from the actual hire charges. The risk is that if you are non-cooperative in the litigation process, the credit hire company may pursue your husband for the shortfall as he prevented them the opportunity of recovering the full hire charges. Your credit hire agreement will state somewhere that the hirer remains personally liable for all the hire charges.

 

So the best thing to do is cooperate fully with your solicitors, in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...