Trident

For us in these situations it helps massively that we close the loopholes in our warranty form and also always verbally advise customers they need a recovery cover in place because the vehicle must come back to us for repair! recently, we had a customer with a problem a couple of hours drive away with no breakdown cover, we offered to do a full repair if it was returned or contribute up to £250, he decided that the quote to get him recovered back meant it was better for him to take the contribution and close the issue. If it was me with this problem, knowing they had signed our warranty form, i would respond with a registered letter explaining his options, we can all play the 'i know the law' game also speak to your local Trading Standards office, they are always extremely helpful with us and can advise us on the best approach, they will also happily speak directly with the customer and explain their 'actual' rights. Always keep a written note of conversations dates times... helps when/if you have to quote anything back to them, got out of some sticky contractual agreements when having a row and start spouting 'when i spoke to you on...at 09.08 you said blah blah etc etc...!!!!!

I can't believe it! i remember being pointed in their FB direction in the early days and have watched them grow, TBH i loved what they did with social media as i'm sure you all did and only last night thought it was odd i hadn't seen a post of theirs lately! wishing them all the best..

Hi, when i spoke with trading standards,they suggested that a deduction of 50p per mile was a reasonable charge, i vaguely recollect him saying that the government recommend 40p per mile as reasonable, so a court would probably stand by 50p! we also advise on our invoice a deduction of £295 restocking fee for the addition of keeper to the log book. We have used this deduction on one occasion when a customer adamantly bought a car which he assured us would fit in his garage only to find it didn't, having been offered a test drive to see! he exchanged and accepted the deduction as fair due to it being his mistake!!!

'The Car Finance Company' for Super Sub prime, last stop for customers as they fit a black box system, customer makes payment, receives a code to enter into a keypad to drive the car till next payment and so it rolls on, have put a few through there and those customers are always desperate and grateful to manage to get out of a situation and get a car. Step up from that is either Pinnacle finance or as Rory said Evolution. Some people have no chance but a little explanation on how credit works goes a long way and repeat business is key with these guys! one in today after an upgrade!

From what little i know, the scammer intercepts the emails before you receive it, they effectively divert all emails at source, ammend the bank details then forward on as if nothing has happened, all appears a genuine email from a trusted supplier, who is non the wiser they have been intercepted, until of course they chase for a payment you have already sent. It has been very effective fraud with solicitors amongst others, never receiving property deposits or balances!... not sure how you can prevent it other than have a manual list of bank details on your desk that you check everytime you send a payment!! scary stuff, no matter how vigilant you are...

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Documents/Advice%20factsheets/Consumer%20Affairs/c-goods.pdf This is a link to Citizens advice on the act and I still think it fits in line with it, it goes without saying that, for us, it is merely a deterrant from the sort of customer that started this thread, it would be an extreme case or person that would mean we would invoke the charges, but it gives us the 'gesture of goodwill' option to give. It seems to me from the link ive attached, that if we do our job properly, we have as much if not more protection than previously.... both the customers in the opening thread, were not entitled to their money back as it was not impossible to replace or repair and it would be reasonably cheap for the seller compared with alternative remedies, see quote below taken from citizens advice: If :-  it is impossible to replace or repair the goods; or  replacement or repair would be unreasonably costly for the seller when compared with alternative remedies; or  the seller fails to replace or repair the goods within a reasonable time of having agreed to do so, or causes you significant inconvenience; or  the goods have worked for some time before they go wrong, or only one of their functions has gone wrong then:-  you can ask for a partial or full refund. The amount of money you get back may be reduced to take account of any use that you have had out of the goods.

Hi all, I don't know yet if what we have done is allowed or not as my trading standards chap is supposed to get back to me to discuss but our interpretation in the meantime... we now do a pdi, get the customer to view and agree and sign to confirm condition before driving away, we also have in bold red writing on the invoice, so at point of taking a deposit and also repeated on the warranty form, that, in the event a customer wishes to return a vehicle for refund under the soga, they must supply independant written proof the fault was present at time of purchase and we also get them to read and sign the statement that says that they will be liable for a £495 restocking fee due to additional keeper and 50p per mile used. I have to say, that while we were nervous to do it to start with, the response from customers seems very positive and they then know 'our policy'. It demonstrates to them that we work with an understanding of the soga and they have said more positive things about our 'professionalism' than the bloke down the road who seems a bit dodgy!!! their words not mine.. We also stipulate that the vehicle must be returned to us at the customers expense. POI no one has refused to buy because of it...

I doubt it, i would consider the sale of the vehicle a seperate transaction to the part x (purchase) of theirs, they can have a full refund less costs incurred and then buy their car from you at forecourt price. Unless as a 'gesture of goodwill' you give refund for part x at cost, less all expenses - either way they will be out of pocket so highly unlikely to pursue it. We have introduced a hefty restocking fee if vehicle returned and clearly state to the customer what this is and the also a charge for miles used if they want a refund, so far, we havent had one person raise an eyebrow or question it, and it couldn't be any clearly in bold red writing all over everything and we verbally explain it too. At the end of the day it is simply a deterrant and would make a would be scammer think twice if they realise they have signed for substantial costs to be incurred. Can't ever imagine a situation when we would feel compelled to impose the charges, but that would be at our discretion.

Ok, so this is how it works on the green slip, you as the motor trader can apply for the tax to be put on it using the green slip 12 digit number, anyone buying it during the following, lets say, 6 months gets the tax included in the sale, because dvla are only waiting on the green slip to be sent in to them with new keeper details. So, as long as you sell it within the period you have taxd it, you don't have to put it into anyones name, untill sold and then, the remainder of the tax is included because you won't get a refund as it is in trade...hope that all makes sense, straight from the dvla's mouth, but you may want to ring to confirm the above, there, that's me off the hook for getting sued for incorrect data!!!!!

Hi Max, Be very careful, if it was me, i would only accept cleared funds by bank transfer into account, i would charge a delivery fee of say £1 a mile, which is non refundable if he changes his mind on arrival, but foc if he accepts it. Do a full test drive and pdi check on arrival, take a copy on your phone of his driving licence and make sure the delivery address matches it... if he is genuine non of this would be a problem, a scam and he will cough and splutter...good luck, boom another one...

Lawgistics recommend… that every vehicle is sold with a warranty and that every repair is carried out under that warranty, with the customer’s agreement. By offering the vehicle with a warranty and completing any repair under that warranty then the customers statutory rights are not being used and therefore the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act are not being relied on. Whilst any warranty can be used, if you provide your own warranty you will have more flexibility to authorise repairs and make goodwill gestures. Multiple repairs can be made under the warranty providing you with the best option to increase the right to repair without invoking the right to reject. So, the above is from lawgistics, I think the paragraph follows their recommendation probably apart from the word 'supercede' we are surely within our right to charge for additional keeper and useage and really this is simply a tool to deter the would be customer scammers, anyone genuine would not have an issue with repairing and resort to using any of the act, so with the above in mind do you still consider it an unreasonable paragraph? im trying to cover our ass like everyone will be and think a warranty form whilst it won't remove their statutory rights will provide some protection as lawgistic says..

Ok, im going to ask for opinions on the below paragraph i intend to enter on our warranty form, any one see any problems with it??? We confirm the vehicle supplied to you will be of satisfactory quality and is fit for it’s intended purpose. By signing below you confirm you have inspected the vehicle and you are happy it matches any description, as advertised. Should the vehicle be returned under the short term right to reject of the Sale & Supply of Goods Act – 1 October 2015, you agree to a full refund less the deduction of a £495 restocking fee to cover the cost of vehicle depreciation through additional keeper, together with 50 pence per mile travelled. Furthermore, should the vehicle require remedial action under this agreement, you confirm your acceptance that one OR MORE repairs may be required per claim. PLEASE CONFIRM BY SIGNATURE BELOW YOU UNDERSTAND THIS WILL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE WARRANTY PERIOD SUPERCEDE YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE Sale & Supply of Goods Act – 1 October 2015 in answer to your question See Cars Derby YES!!!!!!! someone bought a car from us in December last year, they had a problem rectified by us (or so we thought) in february got some parts replaced on said vehicle by another gge in August and guess what.....today... yes.... today... have got in touch to complain quoting Trading Standards to us!!!! gawd bless them....they will get an a4 page comprehensive response which could be shrunk to a two word reply!! or is that a bit harsh...

OMG...Green Giant you are amazing.... it works!!!

Unlikely, cause it is accessed via the 'advertising' portal, so i would probably reduce stock to minimum to keep facility and reduce costs, kind of a compromise to quitting completely, have you ever used the valuation tool from the AT website that customers view? I find it really helpful because no matter what the trade says, that is the info Joe Bloggs gets...

We were with them with no success, tried to cancel the agreement, but typically sly contract clause, because we didn't give notice the month before our 6 month term was up, we rolled over with a '12 month' cancellation period, SO BEWARE, luckily they couldn't prove this was advised to me on our meeting and so I was able to exit the contract. But they are really persistant and it was only because of the paper trail i kept they couldn't argue. FYI, their contract is ridiculous and it doesnt state the above clearly anywhere, you have to read paragraph 'a' which refers to paragraph 'b' which refers to paragraph 'c' which mumbles something vague about nothing relevant and means your tied in forever. Don't think it will stand up in court as the terms of engagement are not equally fair, or at least that was my argument with them, in case anyone needs an angle!!!!!

www.tridentvehiclesales.co.uk Happy to share, any thoughts on our site would be gratefully received, good or bad, we all need support...

We swapped out from Cap valuations last year, we went to glasses with the radar option mostly due to the cost of cap incorporating commercials, anyway, its useless, even with our settings at 'below' we end up with a usually inaccurate figure, generally higher than autotrader, so used guess work instead and it has seen us lose out to quite a few part ex deals, so we are biding our time to get out of glasses and go back to trusted Cap...Now we too have used autotrader for giving out part ex pricing I have found the autotrader tool really helpful, people take the figure as gospel, because often it will be the figure that they have accessed for themselves and when it prints the valuation its in such big print they cant dispute it, its not just a dodgy trader picking a low figure from the air to fleece them. So, in summary, I consider that to go to Glasses, may not give you what you are after, the radar side of pricing is reasonable but it's biggest benefit is the option to view 'sold' pricing, how accurate it is I have no idea...

I have always been told by our finance rep that the finance is down to the customer, it's great that your trying to help him out of the deal, but ultimately he needs to settle the finance before he brings the vehicle back, I don't see a way out of the deal, particularly if his trade in had finance on and now it doesn't, you can offer him a full refund, but he needs to pay off the finance with a personal loan before trading, so it is clear of finance, then you pay him, give him his car back and the difference is what he pays off his personal finance. The guy is being unreasonbable assuming you will get him out of a deal for a repairable fault, so i would point out the complexitiy of returning a vehicle he doesn't own and the cost implications he will be liable for to the finance companies and let him make the judgement about whether a repair is the cheapest and easiest option!! With regard to SOGA and their car, you are just returning their goods, its not a sale...

Steve92, I'm pretty sure it's second hand goods, would be very reasonable if it was for new...

"Seems fair to me? What are you taking exception to?" so, as I understand it and I could be wrong, if the car develops a fault within the 30 days, we repair, it develops another fault at any point up to 6 months and the customer will be entitled to a refund, so, at present we have a 'no refund' policy and repair under warranty, this deters people simple changing their minds and demanding a refund as has been the case on occasion... Having heard the podcast (thanks Umesh) I feel a bit clearer as it seems to be an 'at point of sale' issue, so we would be covered if we continue with pdi and mot test as we normally do, maybe taking the customer on a test drive upon collection signing to say he confirms it tested all ok would help??? I don't have a problem At all with the idea of ensuring a good product supplied to be fit for purpose, but so often the consumer simply doesn't understand their rights, the times I have been quoted that by law we have to supply a warranty!!!!!! Like this

Hi all, has anyone else heard about the impending changes to the 'Sale and Supply of Goods Act - from 1 October 2015' it appears to be saying that, we must refund within 30 days if the customer is unhappy with the goods OR if we are unable to affect a repair with the vehicle first time i.e. a recurrent intermittent problem MUST be fixed first time or they are entitled to their money back!?! Also, it seems to state that we will be responsible for the recovery or reimbursement of out of pocket expenses to cover any recovery, anyone else heard about these new regulations, they seem really one sided and arm the consumer even further, don't mind any new legislation, so long as it's fair to everyone, this one will really sort the men from the boys!!!!