WWW.MOUNTBATTENCARSALES.CO.UK/Close Brothers - Faulty car

[Giraffegirl13]

I don't feel I should be paying anything! It's a faulty unsatisfactory product!

Is it worth opening another court case specifically to void the contract? At this rate I'll be paying back every Penny I won in the first case!

[theoldrouge]

Depends on whether or not you wish to preserve your credit file or whether you can manage to get Close Brothers to meet their obligations to you 

IMO you are inviting open ended risk by not VTing the agreement whilst you are still able to do so

Not saying you should pay anything at this stage but at least you would be in control of events 

[Giraffegirl13]

But what if they take the car and say "oh it's worth £500" and I know it's worth more?

Is it worth getting a few of my own quotes to get a idea of what it's worth?

I don't trust them AT ALL not to do me over...

[theoldrouge]

Certainly would be getting quotes to see what the vehicle is worth
You do realise talking VT here and NOT VS

[Giraffegirl13]

Oh what's the difference? I'll have to do some research 

[dx100uk]

VS means you owe the whole sum of agreement. VT means you only owe to the 50% mark.

 

Dx

[honeybee13]

Thread reopened.

HB

[Giraffegirl13]

Update on the last few months.

After I got mixed answers here I reached out to the financial ombudsman (who refused to help).

I then opened another MCOL case specifically asking for the contract to be voided, and all remaining payments refunded. (See first image).

This again went to default judgement about a month ago.

Since then CB have got solicitors to send me 'litigation' re the court case, which I don't 100% understand (and obviously they are trying not to pay, argue and use scare tactics). (See second image for most recent correspondence).

ALL I want is the contract cancelled, and car taken away! I don't know WHY they are STILL arguing  after nearly a year and *2* court cases (and subsequently losing double the amount of money had they just sorted and agreed my case in December 2022!).

What can I do now?

I am at the point of hiring a solicitor just to help to reply and get this FINISHED.

...................
My New Claim Particulars

As per claim number: xxxxx, vehicle xxxxxx has been found to be of unsatisfactory quality.

Considering the defendant has already refunded the deposit, repair costs (up to date of previous claim on 19/12/22) and finance for the first 6 months, the claimant is deeming this is conclusive evidence that the finance contract (Agreement Number: xxxxxx) should be judged as null and void.

Consequently, the claimant is claiming ALL finance payments and any interest since the previous judgement date should also be fully refunded.

Additionally, as stated in earlier correspondence, a daily storage fee is being charged from the aforementioned judgement date.

The claimant does not require the car to be removed, unless deemed necessary.

1480 

The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 28/03/2023 to 16/05/2023 on £2,381.25 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a dally rate of £10.00.

...................

From Close Bro Sols

Our correspondence of 29 June 2023 is clear. Our Client will pay to you the sum of £2 ,636.25 in full and final settlement of any and all claims by you. The Judgments that you have against our Client do not allow you to dispose of the Vehicle
- you have no legal right in which to do this. Should you attempt to dispose of the Vehicle our Client will claim the cost of the same from you .

If you elect to bring a further claim against our Client then , before you issue court proceedings, you must follow pre-action protocol and you must first write with a pre-action protocol compliant Letter of Claim setting out the factual and legal
grounds which support your action to Close at the address provided to you in the letter dated 29 June 2023.

We put you on notice that any proceedings you bring will be vigorously defended and our Client's costs and interest will be sought from you in full and to be assessed on an indemnity basis. Our Client also reserves the right in such an event to challenge the Judgments entered in default. If you are unclear as to the legal position you should seek independent legal advice.

In the event that court proceedings are issued our Client reserves the right to refer this correspondence to the Court when the question of costs and conduct falls to be considered.

Regards

sols for close

[dx100uk]

did you send in VT papers?

you have 2 default judgements now then?

the 1st is paid, but this new one on (date) is not?

[Giraffegirl13]

No VT. As then I have to pay the car off! The contract is to be VOIDED, not paid off.

Edited July 15, 2023 by Giraffegirl13

[dx100uk]

the AGREEMENT is not voided. 

this is what the 3 of us have told you repeatedly.

so you have a second default judgement ?

did they not defend again?

have they paid this one.?

[Giraffegirl13]

In the default judgement I wrote purposefully that the contract is to be voided due to vehicle of unsatisfactory quality. That is in the judgment! No they have refused to pay (as per the litigation). And if they pay the refuse to allow me to open any more cases against them.

[theoldrouge]

So the judgement specifically states that the agreement is void?
Personally I think you should have asked for advice on the wording of the POC

[Giraffegirl13]

That's what I did last year and it ended up in continuing issues and nothing being finished. The wording is above in the PDF I've attached.

All I care about is the contract being voided AS the judgement states, but CB solicitors are now arguing the toss and won't agree, and attempting to "litigate". Far as I'm concerned, I won the case, they have no leg to stand on. 

[dx100uk]

keep using the word CONTRACT when you have NO CONTRACT with close brothers. you have a credit hire AGREEMENT under the CCA.

your only contract was with the dealership.

you don't answer questionswhen they are asked..

you just dont wanna listen........and  vanish for moths and get/do things wrong again.

dx

 

[Giraffegirl13]

I asked for help several times months ago and got no solid help or answers, which is why I had to branch out and help myself. I've come back as suggested on fb re the litigation. 

[dx100uk]

1 hour ago, Giraffegirl13 said:

And if they pay the refuse to allow me to open any more cases against them.

then tell them to go away off, they can't dictate the rules on  YOUR court judgement.

send in the bailiffs again.

 

dx

 

[Giraffegirl13]

I answered everything you asked, and put the PDF files.

I appreciate you (everyone) helping in your own time for free etc but do not appreciate being spoken to how I have been throughout this whole case, 

even the "help" was wrong for the first MCOL meaning this has been strung out.

If I get various questions and responses from different people not knowing what I should do, that's not helpful.

Thanks for your attempt to help, I don't think you can help me anymore.

[BankFodder]

Have we seen the judgement?

[dx100uk]

On 09/01/2023 at 00:19, dx100uk said:

 copy and paste text to a msg box here, the text of the POC you eventually filed.

PLEASE

the exact wording of the first claim that resulted in your 1st default judgement 

and exactly what the judgement letter from the court said.

dx

[Giraffegirl13]

First Claim:

 

Claim Particulars

 

By an HP agreement on 30/4/22 with the defendant I bought a car – Kia Sorento,  for £7700.

 

Within In the first 5 months the car demonstrated defects and is not of satisfactory quality.

 

Claimant was informed by the supplier that it was her own responsibility. Being unaware of her rights, she had certain repairs carried out at her own cost.

The vehicle is presently undrivable and is her premises.

 

The supplier of the car and defendant have both been fully informed and have declined to act refused to take any action.

 

Claimant seeks full reimbursement of purchase price, repair costs & incurred expenses - £5470.53.

 

Defendant has been notified of storage cost.

The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 31/10/2022 to 16/12/2022 on £5,470.53 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £10.00.

[Giraffegirl13]

Second most recent claim (currently being 'litigated' and argued about by CB)

Claim Particulars

 

As per claim number: xxxxx, vehicle (reg) has been found to be of unsatisfactory quality.

Considering the defendant has already refunded the deposit, repair costs (up to date of previous claim on 19/12/22) and finance for the first 6 months, 

the claimant is deeming this is conclusive evidence that the finance contract (Agreement Number: 47-803308) should be judged as null and void.

 

Consequently, the claimant is claiming ALL finance payments and any interest since the previous judgement date should also be fully refunded.

 

Additionally, as stated in earlier correspondence, a daily storage fee is being charged from the aforementioned judgement date. The claimant does not require the car to be removed, unless deemed necessary.

 

1480

The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 28/03/2023 to 16/05/2023 on £2,381.25 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £10.00.

[dx100uk]

and the exact wording of the first default judgement ruling from the court please

 

dx

 

[FTMDave]

Let's do some mathematics.

Say by some horror you had to pay the remaining instalments.  You won't of course.  It's just to work out how far you would be down on the deal.  Add to that figure the £450 court costs with the first claim, whatever the costs were on the second claim, the bailiff fees, any other costs.  How much in total for all possible monies you might pay out?

On the plus side they have paid £5,470 and will pay £2 ,635 so about £8,105.  Is that right?

 

[FTMDave]

And to add to dx's request - can you please upload both default judgements please?

The reason we're asking for all these things is because Close Brothers are not defending, so there is never an actual hearing where a judge makes a decision, everything is by default, and it is therefore perfectly possible that you have won when it comes to the money but no-one has looked at your demand that the finance contract should be voided.