Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • 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

Arnold Clark - Failure to repair damage to infotainment screen


Recommended Posts

Hi,

Purchased a car from Arnold Clark, Nottingham branch, on 5th April this year. Car was located in a different branch of Arnold Clark (Glasgow I believe) so was purchased on the standard proviso that it would be checked over by them etc. 

Collected the car on 12th April,

when I inspected it prior to handover it was noted that there was a ding/paint chip on the driver's door, a mark on the roof and damage to the screen of the infotainment (radio) where there was a chunk taken out of the touch screen. At the time I was told by the staff member who did the handover all these would be fixed as I had pointed them out to him, I even sent follow up photos of the damage a few days after. I drove the car away, signed the paper work etc.

After some delays on their part the paint work was eventually booked in and fixed last Friday. The roof is still apparently being looked into (it's a standard wrap that appears to be a common issue with the car). The major issue here is the damage and chunk out of the touch screen infotainment system. This forms a major part of the car as you can change settings etc. in there.

Arnold Clark are now advising me, after having a few people, including a manager there look at it, that they won't fix this, despite advising that they would during the handover. I have raised this with their internal complaints team but am receiving the same response. The general manager of the branch, who already had a very aggressive/blase attitude, which has been downright rude at points to this whole thing, treating it like's a trivial little mark.

All this has left me with a very sour taste in my mouth and I'm now at a loss as to how to proceed and get this work repaired by them.

Do I go to the Motor Ombudsman/finance company or?

Thanks in advance for any advice you can give :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably very expensive to replace what car and model who is your finance with ?

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a GR Yaris - Finance is with Alphera, who are part of BMW I believe.

I'm sure the unit is very expensive to repair, I have even told them I would be happy with a refurbished/reconditioned unit, in trying to be reasonable as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

do you want to keep the car or reject it ?

 

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

ok

as to date your have not involved the finance co.

as it's THEIR CAR, i would be writing a simple, brief letter to them, outlining what to date with bullet points has happened and asking them to get it sorted FOC to you.

  • 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

I think you may as well take the opportunity in your letter to tell them that if they won't take responsibility for it then you will see quotations for the repair, provide copies of the quotations to them and then proceed with your own repair and recover the money back from them in the courts if necessary.

Separately, can I ask you whether this is the car that you then bought unseen and at some distance from you?

Has it come with an MOT and if so what date was the MOT and who gave it the MOT?

Have you read our used car guide

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we have a picture of the damage. It might be a lot easier than you think to do a cosmetic repair.

46 years at the pointy end of the motor trade. :eek:

HMCTS Approved Technical Expert and Independent Motor Trade Consultant

Link to post
Share on other sites

good idea

take some pix and put them in a PDF

read UPLOAD

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

21 hours ago, adz740 said:

damage to the screen of the infotainment (radio) where there was a chunk taken out of the touch screen.

Does it affect the working of the head unit ?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. bankfodder

The car was purchased unseen, yes.

It was from another branch of Arnold Clark in Glasgow and I purchased it from their Nottingham branch.

The first time I saw the car in person was on handover.

It came with an MOT, carried out by Arnold Clark in Glasgow on 18th March this year.

I'm just travelling so will add some photos later on this evening.

Andy:

In the sense it's a touch screen, yes.

Does it stop the unit working completely? No

Here's the photo of the mark as well...

 

screen dink.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, adz740 said:

In the sense it's a touch screen, yes.

that dink is prob <4mm looking at the 5 above

when something one the screen is behind that or near it, can you touch and select it ok?

there are easy ways to fill those screen dinks.

pers i think you are gonna have a hardtime getting a new one or refurbished for such a small dink if the unit functions ok. 

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

It's a fair bit bigger than that - Hard to show context but I'd say it was about 10-12mm and it's not just a mark, it's a chunk. Right where you use a lot of the touch functions for carplay etc.

You can but my concern is it will have damaged the capacitive bit (there's probably a better word for that!) behind the screen and will get worse over time. I've seen this plenty of times on other touch screens.

I understand what you're saying but to say they would repair it just so I'd drive away is poor. Especially without even offering any alternatives, which I'm more than reasonable enough to discuss with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there are methods to fill that the same as a windscreen repair , like epoxy etc to stabilise it.

there are firms they could employ to do it.

i'e> £150.

WWW.MAGPIEAUTOS.COM

Touch screen repair service compatible with the following Toyota vehicles (2018-2022) - Yaris Symptoms of a faulty touchscreen - touch operation...

 

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

Thanks for that. Much appreciated.

I would have assumed they would have had contacts to do such work as well.

I think it's just the general rubbish attitude from Arnold Clark as the amount of times the General Manager of the place was rude or kept referring to "it would have to come out of my margin" to fix issues.

Like it was my fault.

Oh well - Won't be buying anything from them again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

clarks are just like the rest of 'em.

couldn't careless, your advantage here is it's not legally your car, the finance co. should be bought into play .

as i think BF eluded too , or has in other threads, if dealer/finance co. dont sort it between themselves FOC to you, another option is to get it fixed then bill both for it, if they refuse, then a court claim is very simple and cheap option to recoup your losses.

see where it goes.

just musing.

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...