Evans Halshawe/Moneybarn - sold unsafe car, won court case, but finance stood, i'm appealing this - need help with N161 by 15th Nov

[Moneybarn victim]

I am writing in desperation to ask for help or advice in regards to a consumer rights issue, Breach of contract and misrepresentation of a vehicle I purchased in December 2018 for £5700 (screen price)

 

BMW 1 Series 2011 via conditional sales agreement using a company called Moneybarn No1 Limited (total price £10,500),

 

i was also lead to believe included + 2 year extended warranty as part of the negotiations with the dealer (Evans Halshawe in Altrincham Manchester) in addition to the 3 month warranty as standard, allowing me to feel comfortable in the knowledge if anything major happened i would be covered. 

 

I apologize in advance for the lengthy email.

 

I suffered from disabilities for a number of years which include depression, anxiety and a perforated disc causing back pain and mobility problems, I urgently required a vehicle to help me in commuting to and from work, I am a weekend Dad and require a vehicle to assist with that also.

 

Evans Halshawe (Altrincham)

 

Experienced numerous issues with the vehicle from the date of collection (18/12/2018), which the dealer attempted to fix on numerous occasions without success.

• 1st occasion was 24th December 2018 a few days after purchase in notice a number of problems (text messages to dealer as evidence) i collected my car on the 27th December. to be told they did not find anything wrong, they reset the dashboard warning lights and said if the problem persists to bring in back.
•  

A week or so later the lights came back and problems persisted, however, when i tried to book it in for a second repair, any day i was available they was not resulting in the next mutually available appointment being April 2019 (obviously questions were asked and i was reassured it would be ok )  

 

• 2nd occasion in April 2019 - they replaced the battery and again reset any warning lights, i again asked what the problem was and again got fobbed off, they said if the problem persists to bring it back for repair. After a week or so the lights and problems were still there.
•  
• 3rd occasion in May i booked in the vehicle over the phone and attended the dealership to be told,  i am now outside of my 3 month standard warranty period any work will be charged to me. The dealer then claimed after (6 months) During a complaint lasting a number of weeks that, I never purchase an extended warranty any work carried out on the vehicle previously was a good will gesture. which meant i would now be liable for any cost and this worried me.

 

Issues with vehicle at the point of sale

 

1. Blocked DPF
2. Worn break pads
3. Flat Tyre,
4. Vacuum sensor,
5. Pressure sensor,
6. Struggled to go in reverse - Fixed by Evans.
7. Momentary power loss,  
8. Flickering of instrument panel.

Resulting in warning lights on the dashboard.

 

BMW (Stockport) Safety Recall Notice

 

I then received a Safety Recall notice in June 2019 listing issues consistent with the faults I had been experiencing for the past 6/7 months, which included:

• Juddering, Jerking and momentary loss from the engine whilst driving,
• Electrical problems such as flickering of the instrument panel,
• it is no longer possible to start your car,
• The vehicle central locking system fails,
• Advise is to stop drive.

 

As instructed I took the car to BMW to carry out the recall work in July 2019 which highlighted more issues with the vehicle which BMW quoted me approximately £950 to repair, Blocked DPF, Vacuum sensor, Pressure sensor.

 

BMW would not provide a diagnostics to evidence these faults and stated I would have to pay for diagnostics report (a second option) as i did not pay for the recall work initially.

 

i booked my car in around 1st August for a diagnostics test. When I got the report they had simply charged me for the original dated 17/7/19 and not from the occasions I had taken the car in over night specifically for a diagnosis test 1/8/19 which raised even more questions.

 

My friend and i then did a little research in relation to Safety Recalls and came across Trading Standards - https://www.tradingstandards.uk/news-policy/news-room/2018/get-safety-recalls-fixed-or-risk-prosecution-dvsa-warns-car-dealers

 

we came to the conclusion, the vehicle was sold with an outstanding safety defect making the car a defective product not safe to drive therefor not worth a penny other than scrap value, also by driving it in that condition i could have been liable to a driving ban, points on my license and a fine, in addition, Moneybarn and Evans had broken the law by selling me an unsafe vehicle which Moneybarn are ultimately liable for in this type of agreement.

 

Road traffic act 40A -https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/40A = A person is guilty of an offence if he uses, or causes or permits another to use, a motor vehicle on a road when— the condition of the motor vehicle, or of its accessories or equipment, or the purpose for which it is used is such that the use of the motor vehicle involves a danger of injury to any person.

 

What is a Safety Recall

In order to understand the codes it is vital to understand the definition of a safety defect as this is core to its aims. The definition of a safety defect is:

 

“A safety related defect is a failure due to design and/or construction, which is likely to affect the safe operation of the product/aftermarket part without prior warning to the user and may pose a significant risk to the driver, occupants and others. This defect will be common to a number of products/aftermarket parts that have been sold for use in the United Kingdom”

 

If such a defect occurred it could cause significant risk of serious injury or death and cannot normally be identified by routine maintenance or obvious changes to the normal handling or performance of the vehicle that the driver continues to ignore. It is a sudden and catastrophic failure of a component that occurs with little or no warning to the driver to enable preventative action to be taken.

 

Moneybarn Complaint

 

On the 2 August 2019 I raised a complaint to Moneybarn and wanted to reject the unsafe vehicle for the reasons stated above. Initially they considered it a satisfactory complaint they claimed they were going to collect the vehicle and provide a courtesy car, contact the dealer and the police to investigate, likely to involve compensation and will take approximately 6 weeks.(Recording of complaint available)

 

On or around the 12th August 2019 Moneybarn rejected my complaint stating Safety recalls are not within their remit, they closed my complaint after approximately 10 days referring me to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

Moneybarn claimed via letters and emails the faults with the vehicle were wear and tear issues and stated the onus was on me to evidence this now more than 6 months have passed (right to reject), i felt i had met any requirements with the vehicle recall letter on the 4th August 2019 (irrefutable evidence) but they refused to acknowledge it.

 

Having looked through the legislation in more detail by this point, it is clear the onus was always on Moneybarn never on me to identify and remove any unsafe products and without question not to possess or intend to supply or supply any vehicle which as professionals should know or should have known is an unsafe product. however....

 

Alternative dispute resolution (FOS)

 

In September 2019 I raised a complaint via the FOS, (the less said about the FOS the better other than disgusting) never the less in June 2022 they provided an Ombudsman's determination which ruled in my favour and stated:

 

the car was in fact inherently faulty based upon the existing faults present on the car at the point of sale and agreed Moneybarn failed in their obligations to their customer (FOS did not consider the recall issue fully or at all) recommended Moneybarn keep 80% of any money I had paid (£2450).

 

Moneybarn to collect the car, rescinded the contract and corrected my credit file, also awarded £250 in compensation...as I am sure you can imagine I rejected the Ombudsman offer.

 

• a Guide to Safety recalls in the use vehicle industry - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/302344/guide-to-safety-recalls-used-vehicle-industry.pdf
• Code of practice for vehicle Safety defects and recalls - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/code-of-practice-on-vehicle-safety-defects-and-recalls/vehicle-safety-defects-and-recalls-code-of-practice
• Code of practice on safety defects and recalls in the vehicle after market - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/code-of-practice-on-safety-defects-and-recalls-vehicle-aftermarket/code-of-practice-on-safety-defects-and-recalls-vehicle-aftermarket
• Trading standards - https://www.businesscompanion.info/en/quick-guides/goods/sale-and-supply-of-goods

 

On the 25th October 2021 Moneybarn sent me a letter stating I owe them £8,137,45p

 

They collected the vehicle on the 8th November 2021 and later claimed the car was returned damaged. (little did Moneybarn know, I had taken photographs as evidence...it was not damaged)

 

On the 14th December 2021 Moneybarn sold the car at auction for £1500, as the car was still in my name I continued to receive letters from BMW which stated, the car had further Safety issues which include:

 

• Safety recall - Check/reworking Heating and Air Conditioning blower regulator plug connection
• intermittent or complete failure of the heater blower,
• Smell of scorching/burning within the vehicle cabin
• Smoke within the vehicle cabin from the interior vents.

 

I again checked the GOV website, as evidence would suggest Moneybarn sold the car again with an outstanding Safety recall. The legislation specifically states that the car should not have be sold at an Auction either, clearly the fact this is a defective product and Money owe a duty of care and have failed in that duty by failing as professionals to implement due diligence to remove unsafe products seems to be lost on them.

 

The legislation also clearly states a defect product can only be sold as spares or repairs, Moneybarn again should have notified the Auction in writing and the Auction then should sell the vehicle appropriately.

I have since asked Moneybarn for confirmation which they have confirmed via email they do not have.

 

As I had rejected the Financial Ombudsman's offer and Moneybarn felt they was no longer obligated to do the right thing, adhere to the terms of our agreement and/or honour previous agreements,(Satisfactory Quality complaint) Moneybarn then considered me a default payer and issued a default notice in accordance with the terms of our agreement (apparently).

 

Consumer credit act 1974 - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/contents

 

However, my agreement clearly states: Nothing contained within these terms and conditions will affect or restrict the statutory rights of a consumer. however, It would seem Moneybarn have indeed restricted my rights, claiming they have rights over mine and have enforced them.

 

Statutory rights - Statutory rights are the minimum rights guaranteed to customers governed by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. The law stipulates a retailer is obliged to provide goods that are of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, and as described.

Consumer rights Act 2015 - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted

 

Enforcement/advice agencies

 

Unfortunately, due to the lack of help and/or support from Citizens Advice, who cant give legal advice.

FCA who require a number of people to raise a complaint regarding the same issue before they act.

FOS who act within the interests of their paid members, so there is a conflict of interests and reluctance to hold Moneybarn to task for their failings.

 

 DVSA, Trading Standards who may ask you to provide information giving the false impression they will at the very least ask a question or two, then to tell you after 3months...they may prosecute or fine them or they may not, in any event they will not tell me which the outcome which can include a £20,000 fine and imprisonment. (''apparently'') but no remedy what so ever for the innocent victims. 

 

Legal Proceedings  

 

Feeling helpless and in debt, suffering financial hardship, and exacerbated health conditions now having to resort to food banks, I had no option but to issue legal proceedings by myself having exhausted every other avenue. Which now meant i had to try and become familiar with the Civil procedure rules and practice directions. I issued a claim to court and Moneybarn defended it.

 

Moneybarn defended all of the claim with both a defence and witness statement stating: the vehicle was ''not'' inherently faulty at the point of sale, with no evidence other than their opinion, and did not provide a counter schedule of costs.

 

On the 25th October Moneybarn attended court with a solicitor which i was previously unaware of until the morning of court. The court awarded me (litigant in person) £70 for taxi fairs to and from the garages to get repairs done and a DPF cleaning fluid I had purchased to try to help the car run better,

 

Moneybarn finally later admitted in court on the basis of the recall letter it would seem the car was in fact inherently faulty at the point of sale. 

• The court did not rescind the contract, I still owe Moneybarn the remainder of my contract approximately £7400 which now also includes collection fees, car auction and repair fees -
• The court did not order them to refund my money. (£2450)
• The court did not order Moneybarn to correct my credit history.
• The Court did not award anything in way of damage or damages,
• or any form of punishment for selling unsafe vehicle (punitive damages),
• The did not identify any form of misrepresentation,
• They did not identify or pursue Moneybarn for the apparent contempt of court (False statements of facts)
• Or identify Moneybarns blatant attempts to obstruct the course of justice.

 

Issues that left me at a disadvantage.

The case was a floating case therefore was not allocated to a judge, any facts were not considered prior to proceedings which the judge apologized for, the judge dismissed the FOS findings stating he was not there to consider them (which had ruled in my favour),

 

he also said he is not there to consider Moneybarns complaint handling procedures and did not listen to my recording which in legal terms would be the date of notice 4/8/2019, key evidence was not even mentioned such as:

Terms of my agreement and/or warranty which are signed statements of facts which were used to entice me to purchase the vehicle which evidently have turn out not to be true therefor is a clear case of breach of contract by Negligent or fraudulent Misrepresentation ( I think we can rule out innocent Misrepresentation) and entitles me to rescind the contract, be put back in the position i would have been had i not been mislead, and more importantly should entitle me to damages due to the nature of the breach their is no limit to the remoteness of the damages and should entitle me to recover any losses that have stemmed form the breach which after three and a half years now includes lost earnings....however HHJ Bird felt differently,

 

County court order

HHJ Bird ordered;

1. There be judgement for the claimant for the sum of £74.99p
2. The claimant is denied permission to appeal the courts decision, the claimant , make further written application for permission to the High Court of Justice no later than 4pm 15th November.
3. No order for costs,

 

Nature of hearing - claim for damages in respect of breach of contract, damages in excess of £80,000, £200 was too remote. claim included lost earnings for work not travelled to and health issue including anxiety. (No mention of mobility problems or depression the more relevant issues) 

 

Result of hearing - he found ''breach of contract'' - car was sold subject to a Safety recall notice + awarded £250 damages, car was repaired at no cost . (but clearly it was not OMG, and what damages is he referring to the FOS Offer that was rejected?) Appeal lies in the High court, permission refused.

 

Brief reasons for decision - No reasonable prospects of success, damages claimed unsupported by appropriate evidence (this is not true i provided :6 years medical records, medical practitioners letter, Blue sci mental health practitioners support letter, 3 witness statements to support my claim, proof of employment, proof of estimated annual salary etc....lets just say the judge did not look prior to the hearing as previously explained, if he had he would not be making that statement) he also adds...and in any event too remote

 

The Application for permission to appeal may be renewed in the appeal court.(Thanks a lot judge, is this what consumer protection feels like)

 

Misrepresentation -  false statement of fact as i understand can lead to Breach of contact by Negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation in any event there is no remoteness limit, and the remedies are very similar therefor my claim can not be too remote as described by the judge there clearly has been some kind of error of fact or law (intentional or not) Had the court looked at my contract and/or warranty they would have identified the false and misleading statements, the remedy for such a breach would have been clear....however whilst preparing to appeal i came across this:

 

71, Duty of court to consider fairness of term - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/71/enacted

 

(1)Subsection (2) applies to proceedings before a court which relate to a term of a consumer contract.

(2)The court must consider whether the term is fair even if none of the parties to the proceedings has raised that issue or indicated that it intends to raise it.

(3)But subsection (2) does not apply unless the court considers that it has before it sufficient legal and factual material to enable it to consider the fairness of the term.

 

Clearly strong grounds for appeal.

 

Appeal 15th November

 

PLEASE HELP.

I have until the 15th November to appeal the decision by the court,

 

I made an application for the transcripts but I can not afford legal advice or representation.

I am on benefits and as a result of this issue

i now have limited capacity for work and work related activities having undergone a work capability assessment, this issue has exasperated pre-existing health conditions and my depression has worsened.

 

I feel helpless and let down greatly as this should not have been allowed to happen,

I feel like my Statutory rights have been breached and I have not be afforded any kind of consumer protection what so ever.

 

Moneybarn have committed a criminal offence and broken laws and have been allowed to get away with it at my expense (£10,500 plus costs).

 

This issue has caused financial hardship resulted in the need to visit food banks, when before this issue started I was managing my health conditions and trying to make a career for myself in the security industry.

 

I have done nothing wrong other than making the mistake of choosing Evans and Moneybarn to facilitate the sale of this vehicle have followed due process without unreasonable delay.

 

Please help.

 

I have requested transcripts to assist in the appeal process, i have also completed an application for contempt of court and exemption of fees forms. In addition, collected the relevant evidence which i intend to send to the courts on the 15th November.

 

I am now in the process of completing the N161 Appellant notice form to send on the 15th also (if i can) but i am physically and mentally worn out with this issue,

 

any advice or assistance on moving forward would be greatly appreciated.

 

also if anyone knows someone who may assist via a Conditional fee agreement would be a life saver. 

 

I appreciate i have not left much time to respond, i have tried to seek legal advice and assistance but have been unsuccessful (unsurprisingly).

 

Any pointers on filling and filing these document, more important any Civil procedure rules or information that must being included

 

Many thanks for taking the time to read this very long winded and complex issue.

 

[dx100uk]

who led you up the path of you'd get consequential damages of +£10k? you won't ever.

i would simply go for getting the agreement voided.

 

dx

[Moneybarn victim]

 

hi , thanks for your response.

I'm aware this should have been a small claims issues initially 4/8/19 less than £10,000, the advice at the time were to take this matter to the FOS, if i knew then what i know now i would never of allowed Moneybarn to mislead me down the wrong path like they have.

 

The court date was the 25/10/22, surely one can assume there is some kind of cost consequence at the least a deterrent for exasperating this issue for over 3 years and denying facts proportionate to the individual circumstance of the case to include any time wasted and damage caused as a result?

 

• Is the consequence for selling a ''faulty'' car the same if they sell an ''unsafe faulty'' car? For example, a faulty boot latch is a fault but its not a safety defect, but a car that can cut out without warning and can cause death surely has to be considered more seriously.
•  
• Trading standards fine them £20,000 simply for breaking the legislation, is it normal for the victim to get less than £10,000 given the circumstances?
•  
• As a litigant in person i did not have access to any case president to assist in valuing the claim and could not find any similar issues online.
•  
• On the claim form i clearly stated: i do not know how much i expect to recover and asked for the court to consider the facts, but the process insists you give an estimate.
•  

Blackbeltbarrister - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LdStMsLk4o

 

I started a course for security in January 2020 and passed with flying colors in February, i applied for a job with a security firm and got the job my employment was confirmed in March. This was 7 months after a satisfactory quality complaint which should have been resolved within 6 weeks.

 

Then Covid hit in April...whilst everybody was being laid off and suffering finical difficulties as a result i didn't...well shouldn't have. Security was consider a key role during Covid and the industry required security for street patrols and testing sites etc.

 

i was still receiving emails for shifts throughout, however i could not commute to these shifts because Moneybarn hadn't refunded my money or replaced the car i had bought for the specific propose of commuting to work, i could not apply for another job because simply put there wasn't any.

 

I then begun to incurred costs and losses (The same way Moneybarn incurred costs and losses and have billed me for them) i could not get another car on finance because Moneybarn had tarnished my credit history, public transport and buying another car with cash was not an option for obvious reasons.

 

My employer was really understanding and patient to allow me time to get a resolution but ultimately had to terminate my contract.

 

I pleaded with the FOS to conclude their investigation but Moneybarn did not admit the fact the car was faulty or offer a satisfactory resolution, any remedy offered left me out of pocket resulted in a long drawn out process, by then i had lost the job and the situation worsened, by this point the damage had been done.

[dx100uk]

which is ALL nothing to do with your agreement/relationship with moneybarn, they did not sell you the car.

that would be for you to take the dealer to small claims under separate claim.

if you want to follow that guy later and do that ....well that's your call.

 

your losses are NOT MB's problem hence the judge whom was correct in what he did..(via you misdirected claims), did not concentrate and also void the agreement. the fact MB latterly sold it at action etc etc is none of your business.

 

your only course of action against MB might be to void the agreement - i'm not even sure you could launch a limited appeal to do that.

[Moneybarn victim]

My agreement is with Moneybarn not with Evans, Moneybarn purchased the vehicle from Evans intending to sell the car to me and did not do the necessary checks required by law to ensure the car was safe.

 

Signed statements of facts including terms and conditions of our agreement and Signed warranty both with Moneybarns name on it include express terms assuring me the product is a safe product and fit for purpose when as professional owe a duty of care to check.

 

Moneybarn are not exempt from these laws unless you know of any legislation that states otherwise? Moneybarn did not quote any at the court hearing!

 

Misrepresentation act 1967 - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/7

 

In order to understand the codes it is vital to understand the definition of a safety defect as this is core to its aims.

 

Also as previously mentioned, the FOS addressed this issue and both investigator and ombudsman have confirmed Moneybarn are liable, Also i think the court would have mentioned i misdirected claims during the 4 hour court case.

 

What i think the issue is... the legislation was updated in 2016 clearly all enforcement agencies are not keeping up to date, (Maybe Covid has a little bit to do with that also) the FOS were unaware when they initially ruled against me...when i pointed out the legislation as i have done here...they change their determination on the basis of ''new evidence'' there was never no such thing, just me pointing out things ''again'' them as professionals should already know, i went to them for advice not the other way around!

 

Similar with the court, the judge was not familiar with Safety recall either, he also admitted not to know what a diagnostics report was.

 

However, if despite the laws and so called consumer protection it is more a case of ''commercial sensitivity'' and i am fighting a losing battle I'm willing to admit defeat...

 

.I am not doing this to put the world to rights, simply to get a refund for the faulty and unsafe product i was sold to enable me to provide for myself and my children because i have no other option...i just expected more that's all.

 

 

[dx100uk]

sorry you are wrong on all fronts here.

 

dx

 

 

[Moneybarn victim]

What exactly do you disagree with?

is it, Moneybarn should not be held liable for purchasing an unsafe vehicle? 

 

Or is it you disagree Moneybarn purchased the vehicle in the first instance therefor you think Evans should be liable?

 

Please explain.

[dx100uk]

where does anything in the consumer credit act say that under an hp agreement a finance company purchases a vehicle and then resells it to you?

 

the seller , the retailer, evans sold you the vehicle.

 

sorry but for almost 4 years is it? you've been allowed to continue along this path? not once has anyone said... no dice ? that is what forums are for..

you've never actually interacted with any human being thats corrected you at any stage?,

but simply found stuff on the net that you think fits your narrative...and off you trotted..

 

to be blunt .

using your mental health or other issues is yet again, in yet another thread here, is being used here as an EXCUSE for doing thing WRONG when you knew all along you were not right in your actions. 

 

sorry but i don't pull punches...but i hate finance companies and DCA's , but in this instance this might be a hard pill to swallow.... but at some point, once you actually interact with real people, they must bring you the reality of your situation you've led yourself into.

 

i cannot believe that not once has any org, authoritative body or person , has ever said this truth to you...

 

i just can't believe after 4yrs of obviously searching the internet, you not once found information contrary to your actions time and again at each stage. but carried on.........

 

dx

 

[Moneybarn victim]

First of all, i have a recording in which Moneybarn openly admit....they bought the car and sold it to me.(all i need)

however please see - 75(1) of the Consumer Credit Act goods and services bought with credit 1974.... not like it matters

 

Plus iv spoke to the CEO of trading standards, Citizens advice, the Financial conduct authority and two People from the financial ombudsman who all agree Moneybarn are liable in this type of agreement (CSA)...its for Moneybarn to address the issue with Evans as they bought the car from them, For the purpose to sell to me for a profit! 

 

The reason its took so long is because their is incompetence everywhere, people claiming to know what they are talking about in positions of influence who haven't got a clue.

 

have you considered the fact you maybe out of the loop? what do you do again?

 

i think what your having trouble with is grasping the concept..Any person(s) or company who is in the vehicle supply chain which results in the sale of a used
vehicle or product to a consumer which includes Moneybarn... more Importantly the legislation does not distinguish between new and used products and gives the
same responsibilities to producer and distributors to protect the consumer. a product with an outstanding safety recall should not be passed to a consumer. Producers and distributors are professionals in their field and should therefore be fully aware that safety recalls exist and that they can occur on any product.

 

It states the following:
“The distributor (Moneybarn) shall act with due care in order to help ensure compliance with the applicable safety requirements and in particular he...shall not expose or possess for supply or offer or agree to supply, or supply, a product to any person which he knows or should have presumed, on the basis of information in his possession and as a professional, is a dangerous product ......to be honest I'm not sure whats hard to understand.

[AndyOrch]

Section 75 only applies if you bought the car using a credit card....for everything else its section 132 and the Consumer Rights Act 2015

 

Car financing options allow you to purchase a vehicle and pay in monthly instalments. Since it's not an outright cash payment, it can be unclear who the car's legal owner is on finance.

 

Once you make a vehicle purchase in the UK, you receive all the vehicle documents. This includes a V5 registration document that has your name, details, and address. As the person using the car, your name is listed as the keeper, but the finance provider has ownership until your loan is fully repaid.

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/part/IX/crossheading/hire-and-hirepurchase-etc-agreements

 

[Moneybarn victim]

55C, Copy of draft consumer credit agreement

 

(1)Before a regulated consumer credit agreement, other than an excluded agreement, is made, the creditor must, if requested, give to the debtor without delay a copy of the prospective agreement (or such of its terms as have at that time been reduced to writing).

 

(3)A breach of the duty imposed by subsection (1) is actionable as a breach of statutory duty.

 

57, Withdrawal from prospective agreement.

 

(1)The withdrawal of a party from a prospective regulated agreement shall operate to apply this Part to the agreement, any linked transaction and any other thing done in anticipation of the making of the agreement as it would apply if the agreement were made and then cancelled under section 69.

(2)The giving to a party of a written or oral notice which, however expressed, indicates the intention of the other party to withdraw from a prospective regulated agreement operates as a withdrawal from it.

(3)Each of the following shall be deemed to be the agent of the creditor or owner for the purpose of receiving a notice under subsection (2)—

(a)a credit-broker or supplier who is the negotiator in antecedent negotiations, and

(b)any person who, in the course of a business carried on by him, acts on behalf of the debtor or hirer in any negotiations for the agreement.

 

59 Agreement to enter future agreement void.

(1)An agreement is void if, and to the extent that, it purports to bind a person to enter as debtor or hirer into a prospective regulated agreement.

(2)Regulations may exclude from the operation of subsection (1) agreements such as are described in the regulations.

[dx100uk]

[Moneybarn victim]

 

[dx100uk]

we will say this one more time only.

 

where does anything in the consumer credit act say that under an hp agreement a finance company purchases a vehicle and then resells it to you? it does NOT. neither does a recorded phonecall with MB stating otherwise. they have not a clue ever what they are saying or doing.

 

the seller , the retailer, evans sold you the vehicle. they are your target for everything else but you won't ever get £10k...

 

use your appeal to try to get the hp agreement with moneybarn voided.

 

the end.

 

dx

 

 

[Moneybarn victim]

Please let me ask you a question....where within the consumer credit Act does it say Moneybarn or not liable?

 

Please provide something other than opinion?

[dx100uk]

are not liable... not or liable

 

@Andyorch has already clearly pointed to the relevant section. 

NOT a credit card payment ... so section 75 does not apply 

 

and has quoted the only other relevant section 132 already...

 

 

 

 

[Moneybarn victim]

Financial relief for hirer didn't really answer the question either, and the question you are asking is not relevant but I'm curious!

 

What i asked you was....where within the consumer credit Act does it say Moneybarn are not liable?

 

Can you answer the question?

[dx100uk]

where does it say they are? it does not.  its an hp agreement .

if it aint in black and white in something dont try and invent poss scenarios whereby it might

a judge has told you no.

the fos told you no.

 

the retailer is your target. under your consumer rights.

but you need to get mb  to cancel the agreement

 

dx

 

[Moneybarn victim]

So the answer to my questions....you dont have an answers! but if you look back through my posts you will see a number of question you have not provided 1 answer! Just asking irrelevant questions.

 

I have answered your question in a number of ways which you refuse to except.

 

The FOS ruled in my favor and requested rescission of the contract, this was rejected because the full facts were not considered by their own admission, therefor the amount of compensation offered was not proportionate and was rejected...has nothing to do with how you interpret it which is.... they said no! Im sorry what are you talking about?

 

Second of all...you changed the name of my post to won court case...now your claiming the also said no! very strange?

 

When i say... i have a recording which includes them openly stating and i quote, ''we purchased the car from Evans and sold it to you''...but  you again disagree and say... no they didn't and no you don't and anyway they don't know what they are talking about? again very strange?

 

which raises questions for me as to who's side you are on? who you are? what qualifications you have? and what you are doing on a site like with opinions like you do? any why you are trying to divert any accountability away from Moneybarn who sell unsafe vehicles (a fact regardless if you want to admit it or not) are you a troll? 

 

So i will post this 1 last time...please see below: consumer credit act -

57, Withdrawal from prospective agreement.

 

(2)The giving to a party of a written or oral notice which, however expressed, indicates the intention of the other party to withdraw from a prospective regulated agreement operates as a withdrawal from it.

(3)Each of the following shall be deemed to be the agent of the creditor or owner for the purpose of receiving a notice under subsection (2)—

(a)a credit-broker or supplier who is the negotiator in antecedent negotiations, and

(b)any person who, in the course of a business carried on by him, acts on behalf of the debtor or hirer in any negotiations for the agreement.

 

I think the above answers your question can you answer mine please in the same way? or explain why the above in not relevant?

 

Then can you please for the last time tell me.....where within the consumer credit Act does it say Moneybarn are ''not'' liable? to support the claims you are making Please provide something other than you opinion to back up the claims you are making!

 

Also do you know what a duty of care is?

And what it means when a duty of care is owed by professionals?

 

I think that in its self should of answered your question

[BazzaS]

Wow. OP starts thread at 19.02 on Monday 14th Nov 2022, on a complex issue, about an N161 that has to be filed with the High Court by 4pm Tuesday 15th November 2022. So less than 21 hours (including overnight!), for the volunteers here to advise, draft an,  (or feeback on a draft) application.

 

OP then wants to argue with the (well established) site experts. Nothing wrong with doing so in a constructive manner, but my perception is that the OP has done, and continues to do, themself no favours, both by their timing and behaviour.

 

9 hours ago, Moneybarn victim said:

Second of all...you changed the name of my post to won court case...now your claiming the also said no! very strange?

 

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

 

Also do you know what a duty of care is?

And what it means when a duty of care is owed by professionals?

 

I think that in its self should of answered your question

You won a case, but only for a small part of the case, and a small judgment sum.

I cant see how the site team have got that wrong.

 

Who are you claiming has breached their duty of care?.

If Moneybarn, dx and Andy have addressed that : they duty of care was between the retailer and you.
If you are saying dx and Andyorch owe you a duty of care and have breached it .... good luck with that!.

[Moneybarn victim]

Omg...thanks but no thanks! delete my information please and remove my thread

[BazzaS]

I’m not site team, but suspect you need to read the site rules both in general, but about post / thread deletion in particular.

 

I doubt you’ll get the posts / thread deleted outside of those rules. Report my post / the thread if you want the site team to take a look.

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/6-forum-rules-please-read-these-before-posting/

 

Edited November 16, 2022 by BazzaS

[Moneybarn victim]

I'm not bothered tbh iv got more pressing matters, if you've looked at the thread and come to the conclusion i am arguing, when I'm asking for him to simply put ''something in black and white'' as he puts it, and follow his own advice! which is.....,,if it aint in black and white in something dont try and invent poss scenarios whereby it might,,!!!

 

Surely you can appreciate i cant go back to anyone and say...because dx said so?

 

After reading dx very rude and inappropriate post's with silly emojis, rather than answering a simple question (well established you say?) when i went to the time any effort to answer him in black and white! (with only 21 hour as you say ) I'm at a loss!

 

So anyone can anyone volunteer? 

 

Clearly this was not the right place to get a straight forward answer.

You cant apologize for being blunt and when someone is less blunt in return ...take offence  ...playing the victim.

 

This is my last post , i did find the answer to my question thanks for your time

[AndyOrch]

Please come back if and when you resolve this matter @Moneybarn victim and let us know the outcome. 

 

Also, if your court claim was a small claim track claim Less than 10K you should be using the N164 Appellant's Notice not the N161 (Fast Track)

 

Best of luck 

Andy

[dx100uk]

black and white means something exists or it doesn't.

 

the consumer credit act states what the act covers, not what it doesn't cover, so obviously no-one can quote in black or white where it says you can't claim (+£80k) consequential losses under an HP agreement from the creditor because it doesn't say you can.

 

although we have not seen the FOS decision letter, even if they had had all the info, they would not have adjusted their decision to include your £80k consequential losses. they would have referred you to approach the retailer directly under the consumer rights act 2015.

 

however, they most certainly can make a decision upon if they think the finance org holds some responsibility, which they did, and suitably decided upon that, you refused the decision outright, p'haps wrongly thinking that would be the total end of all you could do in your situation.

 

it erks me this has been going since december 2018, now nearly 4yrs later. things would have been i'm sure so so different if you had come here long, long, long ago and we as a team would have been able to guide you to a better and quicker resolution position than you currently face today.

 

as much as i would love to get one so big over on moneybarn/provident, as you'll see i absolutely loath them with 20yrs history... pers i think i would drop the appeal and start again ....going after the correct target, the retailer using the consumer right act and consumer contract law.

 

and i'm sure the whole site team and members would assist you in the above...i will. you never know, MB might become get damaged in the collateral shrapnel of such a big explosion. evans-halshawe + their other trading names make them a very very big and vulnerable target to hit and rarely have bad press, possibly by design and could settle quickly, but i will also say you might need to reduce your targeted figure.

 

dx