premi-motor

...Whatever you make has to be worth your outlay, effort and risk.

Any advice on the following regarding Manheim Surecheck? Car 1 Surecheck Silver - 39 / 39. Buy the car. Get in the car, and the engine light is on. No codes showing. Didn't look inside when buying on this one - just read the window (so same as buying online I guess). Report submitted following day. Suggested to take the car to a garage. Did that. Undisclosed fault codes, yet these apparently indicate EGR valve. Surecheck claim rejected because mileage is exceeded. Car 2 Purchased Thu evening, Manheim sale. SC report says "Engine not smoking". Drove the car back and the car seems fine. (Surecheck report says uneven idle and gear change stiff - both are fine, so this is also wrong but checked these at the auction). Sits around awaiting a valet, pdr, etc. Gets valeted the following Wednesday as very busy. Sits on idle whilst the seats are drying out then we move it and plumes of smoke. Turns out it smokes after idle. Have a video. Blue / White smoke and smells of burnt oil. Loads of it and unsellable as is. I report the issue to Manheim that evening immediately via email (as it's after hours), then report it via the app the following day. Argument 1; - I'm told the time to report has expired, and the report "must" be submitted using the Surecheck App. -On the Surecheck inspection report, it expressly states that you have cover which is "7 Days from the fall of the hammer" (Their wording). They state exactly when the 7 day time period starts. Manheim AND Surecheck both argue that you have 7 days from the morning of the day of sale - This is NOT what it says in writing on their own form (and can be found in small print under the "tyres" section on the SC screen printout) Anyway, Manheim agree to inspect the car. It's dropped of at Manheim, inspection done the following day and a week and 11 days later, I'm waiting for the result. * I'm told the guy who inspected it has it written "condensation" after 10 minutes of idle (which is BS). ...It's currently been referred, but can foresee the argument I'm about to have regarding "condensation" (which it isn't) vs smoke. Any thoughts on this? Any similar experiences??? What do we think of Surecheck? G.

Same with an Alpina D3 Bi Turbo I had. Was £8995, then £7995, then £7650... Nothing. I bumped it back to £8350 after Christmas and got full asking...

Guilty on 1, 3 and 4 above! (...genuinely though! LOL!!!!!!).

Some great responses!!!! HAHAHAA!!! Council complaint formalised and submitted. "Subject Access Request" made to the council under GDPR - to get any and all info which the council holds on us, reference to my name and our property - including the Cllr's emails (The best bit is that I mentioned I have already obtained some of these and so I will be expecting duplicates - so not like they can pick and choose). It will be interesting to see if there's been any breaches of the Data Protection Act - but since the Cllr's email which names me was already FW'd to neighbours by the nob-jockey this may already constitute a breach. I've hand delivered a letter showing the grounds of my complaint to every neighbour who was included on the original email. I also wrote a covering letter pointing out that unlike his email, I am including everyone - including him. Since then, a neighbour has put a card through the post, and a couple of them have telephoned to say that they are sorry we had to deal with it and that they hope we get the apology we deserve. Other neighbours have laughed about the matter in the local pub, too - but EVERYONE has said that they have no business with what is parked on our drive and good luck to me. - It's made my mother feel a lot better and has shown her that people weren't finger pointing and it was only this nob causing the issue. I feel that I've pulled his pants down in front of everyone now so other than the Data Protection issue, I plan to leave it and move on. ...Hopefully he'll do the same.

Thanks everyone. Very happy about the visit today. I'm doing the official complaint as we speak - highlighting the pair's undisclosed friendship backed up with a facebook print out showing the connection. Its getting posted to everyone in his email chain (the neighbours) and unlike him who omitted me, I'll also include him, the councillor in question and the council complaints department. Should stick a few wasps up arses - if nothing else. G

Hi all. Sorry for the delay and radio silence. Unfortunately lost my father prior to Christmas so this hasn't been top of the priority list... However - had a surprise visit from the Planning office today who confirmed there is NO PROBLEM with anything I am doing. He said that the complaint was "nonsense" and wished me a good day! Next up is to draft up the complaint against the Cllr since he made our lives a lot more stressful in an already difficult time. Turns out he even knew my father - which winds me up even more. G.

Thanks - I checked. He's not the cllr for the ward. In the email in which he is a participant in, the cllr made clear I was not a person who is known to him. However he omitted that he is a "facebook" friend of the complainant and I have a screen grab of his friends list in which he appears to prove they know each other. He has copied in planning enforcement saying that he has "witnessed the activity" - which can simply only be some cars parked in a private driveway. There is no "activity", unless I am washing one of my cars, which is perfectly reasonable. Having never spoken to me, he has acted in bias and shown discrimination towards me due to his personal friendship and subsequently forwarding the "facts" (term used loosely!) to the planning enforcement office. I understand from many people that he's not a nice person and has upset quite a few people. Referring to the code of conduct (in Bold), below for our local council I believe he has fallen short on these points - Any help here appreciated... G. 2.2 The Code of Conduct applies— (a) whenever you conduct the business, or are present at a meeting, of the Authority; or (b) whenever you act, claim to act or give the impression you are acting in the role of Member to which you were elected or appointed; or (c) whenever you act, claim to act or give the impression you are acting as a representative of the Authority (including representation on outside bodies); or (d) at all times and in any capacity, in respect of conduct identified in paragraphs 3.4(a) and 3.5; or (e) in respect of any criminal offence for which you have been convicted during your term of office. Also, 3. Rules of Conduct Integrity Holders of public office must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence them in their work. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends. They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships. Objectivity Holders of public office must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias. Accountability Holders of public office are accountable to the public for their decisions and actions and must submit themselves to the scrutiny necessary to ensure this. Openness Holders of public office should act and take decisions in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing. Honesty Holders of public office should be truthful. 3.2 In fulfilling your Duties and Responsibilities You must not: (c) bully or harass any person; or (d) do anything which compromises, or which is likely to compromise, the impartiality of those who work for, or on behalf of, the Authority. 3.5 Use of your Position You must not: (a) in your official capacity or otherwise, use or attempt to use your position improperly to confer on or secure for yourself, or any other person, an advantage or create or avoid for yourself, or any other person, a disadvantage; (b) use, or authorise others to use, the resources of the Authority— (i) imprudently; (ii) in breach of the Authority's requirements; (iii) unlawfully; (iv) other than in a manner which is calculated to facilitate, or to be conducive to, the discharge of the functions of the Authority or of the office to which you have been elected or appointed; (v) improperly for political purposes; or (vi) improperly for private purposes.

Update: The guy emailed several neighbours omitting myself. He CC'd a local councillor (who has a "reputation" shall we say, of being a twunt). Local councillor within the email stated he did not know me, and has "witnessed the activity first hand" - neglecting to say that he is friends with the complainant (Facebook screenshot already saved to my hard drive). Neighbour reported to police for harassment. I have an incident number. Local code of conduct for councillors state that they have to be impartial and words to the effect of not acting in a way which suggests they are working as part of their position. Clearly, the flavour of all of this wreaks of "gentlemans" auld-lang-syne cock shakery in the local badminton club, so next will be filing a complaint against said councillor as I belive he's abusing his position in an attempt to add credibility to the scenario. Local planning officer cc'd on the email. Another neighbour who recieved the email has been round and also told him to sort it out and leave it. My fathers in a bad way and there's a lot of in / out with carers, nurses, GP, hospice team - and my cars have been parked up for around 9-10 weeks as it's not been a priority... Could do without it, but bigger things to worry about right now! Thanks for the comments and I will keep you posted... G.

Only happened to me a few weeks back - a cheapy 308 1.6 HDi (surprise there) started a turbo whine an hour and a half in to the customers journey home. I offered him the option to get it looked at and let me know the outcome before doing anything OR bring it back for a full refund. He chose to get it looked at then brought it back via recovery truck for a full refund due to oil "around the turbo" (can see the PCV valve to air pipe is leaky, but the turbo doesnt have any play and looks OK...) In regards to the original post, what happens with the V5 in this case? (assuming it's been sent off?).

Nice idea. Nope, I'd not thought about it! Worth looking in to...

Thanks everyone. This is really great info... and good to know I'm not the only one. @EPV - Appreciated your advice earlier too. It's exactly why I asked, and I need both sides to prepare so any input is incredibly valuable. In regards to off-site viewings, if a deal was to be done then paperwork can be sorted back at the house if need be. But I'd want to keep ANY and ALL activity at the house to a minimum. My father is receiving palliative care at home and is bed-bound so having visits isn't appropriate and all is adding to making things tough. This pr*ck is the icing on the cake right now and I don't need it. Had to laugh at the ironing the guy out comment too... I have anger management issues and managed to stop taking the meds, but it's taking everything not to go and have a chat right now. I know that's not the right way to go, but it's really winding me up - not least because potentially it could cost me a lot of money and time and for what? I dont want to g down the PP route simply because if I ask they *could* say no and I'm stumped - whereas as it stands, I actually don't think I'm doing anything wrong. What with him coming around the first time then the email, there is a course of action he is taking and I think I can now report him for harrassment... It's genuinely affecting my levels of stress at a very hard time. ...an interesting thought! G.

Thanks both. @EPV, the answer to all of the questions are actually no. The link is from the Government's own web-site: https://www.gov.uk/planning-permission-england-wales Q: Will your home no longer be used mainly as a private residence? A: YES: It will mainly be a private residence (both parents live here (retired) + myself as split up with ex so it is my home too) Q: Will your business result in a marked rise in traffic or people calling? A: No. I don't actually have many cars as stock. Any viewing would be by appointment only, and probably most would be off-site. Q: Will your business involve any activities unusual in a residential area? A: No. I am not working on cars. All work to vehicles is done away from home at a body shop, garage or MOT station etc. Will your business disturb your neighbours at unreasonable hours or create other forms of nuisance such as noise or smells? No. It goes on to say: "Whatever business you carry out from your home, whether it involves using part of it as a bed-sit or for 'bed and breakfast' accommodation, using a room as your personal office, providing a childminding service, for hairdressing, dressmaking or music teaching, or using buildings in the garden for repairing cars or storing goods connected with a business - the key test is: is it still mainly a home or has it become business premises? If you are in doubt you may apply to your council for a Certificate of Lawful Use for the proposed activity, to confirm it is not a change of use and still the lawful use." Only one person has an issue with it, and as far as I know everyone else in the lane seem to be supportive. Thinking of it, the guy also raised an issue "on behalf of the residents" as another neighbour kept a split-screen camper off road under a weatherproof cover next to his detached garage... G.

Hi all Being recently made redundant from a long-term position, I've started to try to work at home due to very limited funds meaning I can not commit to a site. I have a large, enclosed driveway and keep cars here - some of, not all, are for sale. None of the vehicles are marked up and obviously there are no signs to suggest I am trading vehicles. It is also the family home and we have lived here for 31 years. Last month, a nosey, non-immediate neighbour (who happens to be chairman of the residents association - you know the type!) has become offended that I have a few cars which are kept on the driveway - ost of them out of sight. He visited in person to say that "some of the residents" had raised it at the last meeting and it was his duty to tell me. He asked me what I'd like to tell them, of which I suggested that if it offends them come and see me and I'll happily talk to them. None of "them" have. He then stated me that he "used to be a solicitor" and explained that I needed planning permission "which I would not get" to operate such a business from home. A quick Google search indicates none of this is the case: https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200130/common_projects/56/working_from_home Today, another neighbour called me out of courtesy to let me know that this guy has now circulated an email to the residents of the lane of which I am excluded. It explains about me and that I have been "reported". (Interestingly, the same neighbour who tipped me off about the email has also experienced issues with him - He said that residents were concerned about building work taking place in his rear garden, when only he and one other house can actually see it). I'm considering lots of things as you can imagine, but the most realistic is reporting him for bullying and harassment as I think that he's the sneery type where things will only get worse. Has anyone else had this? Any advice on where I stand appreciated. G.