Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Evans Halshaw/Halifax car finance - car purchased Apr 22 engine replaced Nov22 Faulty Turbo ***Resolved with Compensation from Finance Company***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 270 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

Hi

I purchased a Vauxhall Astra in April 2022 from Evans Halshaw using Halifax car finance. The car had 6500 miles on the clock and was first registered from new 31.01.2020 so still had 7 months manufactured warranty. 


In September 2022 I had issues occasionally getting the car into first and second gear, booked car into Evans Halshaw on the 14th October 2022, they contacted me on the 16th saying it needed a new engine, they replaced it with a new one. I picked the car back up in November 2022 - the car had only done 10,500 miles at this point.

last weekend I was driving on a motorway when a fault popped up saying engine power is reduced, i pulled off at services, switched on and off and engine management light appeared.

I drove home and took the car to a local garage for a diagnostic test as warranty now expired. The fault couldn’t be diagnosed by them as main dealer code so had to take back to Evans Halshaw again.

They had the car for 3 days before they checked it and rang me saying it needs new turbo at a cost of £2500 and are not prepared to cover any of this.

I complained as the car has only now done 15800 miles surely it is not fit for purpose having needed a new engine and now a new turbo in such a short space of time , given such low mileage.

I’ve complained to Evans Halshaw and to my finance company.

What else should I do?

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Evans Halshaw/Halifax car finance - car purchased Apr 22 from - Faulty Turbo

forget warranties they mean nothing.

under your consumer laws like the consumer rights act , as its outside 6mts you would need to provide a report that concludes the turbo was faulty upon purchase. i suspect if this were the case, as its already been in for an engine replacement, the turbo would have proved faulty then.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Evans Halshaw/Halifax car finance - car purchased Apr 22 - engine replaced nov22 - now Faulty Turbo

In addition to the above, you are entitled to have a vehicle which is of satisfactory quality and remains satisfactory for a reasonable period of time .

Clearly for a turbo to pack up so early in the life of the vehicle indicates very strongly that they can't was not satisfactory quality when you purchased it.

It will be helpful to get a second opinion from an independent garage including a comment relating to the life expectancy of a turbo which was in satisfactory condition.

I'm sure this would be at least 100,000 miles.

Get this opinion and then we will help you begin your claim.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning, thank you for your reply. I'm going to ring a garage today to try and get a second opinion and the comment ref life expectancy of turbo.

I don't drive on a motorway often and mostly just commute to work which is a 8 mile round trip, the journey i was on was the longest trip the car had been on since the new engine but was only a 2 hour trip - 2 hours there and 2 hours back. I drove there fine stayed over night and the error came on, on my way home. 

iI'll update once i have had a garage look at the car. 

Thank you 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some further thoughts:

Modern vehicles are very sensitive to the quality of oil used and adherence to specified service intervals. Although your vehicle is low mileage, it is over 3 years old, which would mean it should have been serviced several times by now. Does your service documentation include stamps to indicate this has been done? If not, that's all the garage will need to avoid this claim.

Something doesn't quite make sense to me here. I don't understand why a car having trouble engaging 1st or 2nd gear would need a new engine. Trouble engaging gears would normally indicate either a clutch or gearbox issue, not an engine issue. Is the OP certain the engine was replaced, and not the clutch or gearbox? I think that needs confirmed.

Also, if the engine was replaced, I would doubt the turbocharger was. When engines are replaced they're normally replaced as 'tall' or 'short' engines, which means they include the block and cylinder head (tall) or just the block (short). In either case, the accessories and ancillaries, like the turbo, alternator etc, would not be included and would be reused from the old engine. So even if the engine was new, the turbo would likely still be 3 years old. Still too young to have failed though, assuming all servicing was done properly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Didnt buy the car until April last year and when I took the car home, noticed the car hadn’t been serviced according to the service book since 2020 - can’t remember exact date as my car is now in a local garage. I rang evans Halshaw to ask for the car to be serviced as they sold with full service history, they booked this in and serviced the car May 2022 service book stamped. I had the car serviced myself May 2023.

The engine invoice dated 28.10.22 states investigate unable to select first gear intermittently due to clutch pedal sticking down. Carried out investigation, confirmed customer fault, clutch pedal sticking down. Checked for leaks, non present, checked TSBs, found TSB 21-E-3665 for this issue. Carried out checks for end float on engine as stated in TSB, found excessive end float in crank causing loss of clutch due to excessive crank movement. Vehicle requires engine. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, so there's a known fault with this engine (indicated by the Technical Service Bulletin [TSB]) that causes excessive back and forth movement of the crankshaft (end float), which was causing clutch problems, and so you needed the new engine to resolve the end float problem, which in so-doing would resolve the clutch issue. Got it.

However, I still think the lack of proper servicing, or at least the lack of evidence of it, is going to be a problem. It would be worth checking whether their systems have evidence of the car being serviced, hence the full history on the advert, and it's not just the book that hasn't been stamped. It might be worth calling in to Evans Halshaw and asking them if they have any service history on file for the car.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi just to update, I took my car to an independent garage today who ran tests and took the car on a run. They removed the engine management light and it hasn’t come back on. 
I don’t know why Evans Halshaw would say the car needs a new turbo? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does this mean that there is no fault and no more issue?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it looks that way, do I close the post, remove the post? 
Evans Halshaw told me it needed new turbo, I was advised to get an independent test which I have and the fault has gone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad it seems to be resolved but keep an eye on it and come back here if you get any more problems.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

urm..doesn't really mean the issue is resolved though.

it's classic for a failing turbo to do it only under motorway conditions/revs/speeds

id go take it for a good burn out down a quiet country road see if you get any whitish smoke out the back.

if the turbo is failing then it will dump oil into the inlets and then the exhaust = white smoke ....but only when its had a good trashing. 

get some kitchen roll or white cotton rag and see if it spits out drops of oil from the exhaust when you static rev it after a trash.

you don't want a fruked DPF filter.....

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be amazed if you're that lucky. ECU fault codes have criteria that must be met before the code is recorded, and criteria that must be met before the ECU fault light will illuminate.

For example, in most cases the engine's ECU must experience a fault several times across several drive cycles before the light will come on. That happens to guard against a transient problem causing the light to come on. 

I suspect you'll find over the next few days that light will come right back. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi you were all correct.

It’s gone again, re appeared today 🥲

The reduced engine power warning light came back on today with the engine management light, I took your advice and took it for a good run and this was the result.

I’m not sure where to go from here other then just pay the money to get the turbo replaced but i really don’t think the car has been fit for purpose.

I’ve done less than 10,000 miles in the car since I bought it in April last year and had the car serviced twice since I’ve owned it.

In the first 6 months of me owning the car it had a new engine under warranty and now according to evans Halshaw needs a new turbo - at a cost to me.

I cannot afford not to have a car or buy another one as my car is on finance.

I need a car to get to work and get my children to school.

Link to post
Share on other sites

did you try the exhaust blow out test.?

you should not have to pay anything here.

the car is on finance so its not yours, i think its time you involved the finance company.

 

dx

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In your first post on this thread you say that you complained to the finance company.

Has there been any response?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

the only response I have had from the finance company (Halifax ) is that it can take 8 weeks for them to fully investigate to their conclusion/ outcome.

I have sent them proof of the engine replacement (the invoice from evans Halshaw dated 31st oct 2022) plus an email from last Friday from evans Halshaw stating the car needs a new turbo and vac pump at a cost of £2400 +.

I raised the complaint with them last Friday and haven’t had any response yet other then them telling me the 8 weeks and asking me what outcome I would like ideally and I said rejection of the car.

I have really lost all confidence in the car given the engine replacement and the turbo issue.

When the engine light came back on this morning I did try ringing the finance company again for an update but their lines were closed despite their website saying they were open until lunch time. I will try them again on Monday. 
 

I didn’t try the exhaust blow out test as I really don’t know how to do this, I know you said about kitchen roll or rags but what do I do with them - bung them in the exhaust? 
 

thanks again everyone 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you have already told us, but could you then say again whether you are still driving the vehicle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn’t until I took it to the 2nd garage for a second opinion an independent garage as advised to do so on Monday who advised the car was fine.  Should I not be driving the car? The fault only came back on today.

I don’t see how I cannot drive the car. I’ve got two kids who go to different schools needing dropping off at breakfast clubs in order for me to get to work which is 5 miles away from my home, I need to work in order to pay the car finance . 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't made any comment as to whether or not you should be driving the car. I only ask what the position was.

However if you are advised by an expert not to drive the car then this is probably the advice that you should follow

 

I also realise that you haven't told us anything about how much you paid for the car. I think it will be helpful to know this.

I understand that a repair to the car will cost about 2 1/2 thousand pounds. Is that right?

Would you be able to afford to get the car repaired and recover the money later?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I paid £14,500 for the car in April last year.

I could pay the £2500 to have the car repaired but I’m a little reluctant to do so with no guarantee of getting this back - I’d have to pay this on a credit card. 


thanks again for your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

halifax finance should not, as the owner of the car, be treating this as a 'complaint' thus using the 8 weeks rule.

they are equally liable under a section 75 claim being the financier under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

if its relevant ...you simply hold a kitchen towel close to the exhaust pipe and rev the engine, though it's better to do this after a good thrashing to prove the turbo is blown and letting oil through ...black oil spots...

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, dx100uk said:

halifax finance should not, as the owner of the car, be treating this as a 'complaint' thus using the 8 weeks rule.

This is a great point. I had never thought about it but now that my site team colleague has highlighted it, it is clear that he is absolutely right.

The liabilities are clear – it is the finance company under section 75.
The question now is what action to take about it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously the car has been running well for some time. Please could you tell us how long have you been using the car without any difficulty in the year and two months which you have owned it.

It is important to know this because if eventually you are given some kind of award/damages, then it is likely that there will be a deduction for the time that you have had the use of the vehicle without problems.

We need to know exactly the value of the dispute

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, you bought a second-hand car and it has since been fitted with a new engine. Presumably this is a car that you would rather keep – especially if it is then fitted with a new turbo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...