Refunding customer

[Tony911 79]

23 minutes ago, Wilma said:

Consumer Rights says fit for purpose. You must have the opportunity to repair the car before a refund. At least, that's the way i have always known it to be. 

We never had the opportunity to repair as he is 6 hours from us he wouldn't bring it back just wanted a refund before we could have a chance to look at the car

[Arfur Dealy 823]

23 hours ago, ExCouncilJobsworth said:

My motto for everything or every hardship is "we got a roof we got food and at least we're not going through rubble and wondering if our kids have been shot like in Iraq Afghanistan and everywhere else"

When i think this i dont give a flying monkeys about someone shouting screaming at me or threatening court action or some daft parking ticket.

Always think of the worst of the worst situation Tone!

Here's to a happy new year !

ECJ, I like your thinking, good philosophy  

[Tony911 79]

Happy New year everybody 

[Dave2302 387]

Happy New Year to all

 

[DPF 18]

Happy New Year 2019

[Scooby who 40]

Can't wait to hear how this pans out! Keep us updated please Tony

[Tony911 79]

If you want i can forward your details on to him and you can deal with it. Lol

38 minutes ago, Scooby who said:

Can't wait to hear how this pans out! Keep us updated please Tony

If you want i can forward your details on to him and you can deal with it. Lol

[Tony911 79]

I don't know the guy is a full on prick

[MattR 177]

On 12/30/2018 at 1:36 PM, Contracts said:

Have an odd one ongoing.  We don’t normally sell out of manufacturers warranty but made an exception for a decent 15 plate Volvo XC60 with 50k, full Volvo history.  

Sold to a guy from Cornwall, the day after taking it says the collision warning auto brake system does not seem to work as he can get right up to the car in front in traffic.  Offered him to take it to Volvo which he said he will book in over the new year.

Have had a long e-mail today with a list of “faults” including sat nav maps out of date, gearbox holds low gears when accelerating hard, auto wipers slow to detect rain, wheel wobble at 80mph+, poor DAB reception, central locking noisy.

I don’t think any of these would be addressed by a normal warranty company but I have e-mailed him to ask him to book into Volvo to check all the faults and come back to us.

Hopefully they will give him he correct answers.

Let him see you in court for reporting wheel wobble at 80+. and other 'faults' which indicate aggressive driving. what sort of tool puts that in an email? 

[twerp 69]

Just copied this from other page. Don't forget your PDIs !

 

Ladies and Gents-

A few of you know I’ve been to court today-

The Case-

Gearbox fault with a Ford Galaxy 2012 Powershift, done 61k.

Bloke did 14000 miles in it in 7 weeks, travelling From London to Barnsley in it every night night- electrician on the rail network.

He did 10,000 miles in it before telling me about it, then a further 4000 miles in it after.

RAC refuses to pay out on the warranty, DEKRA make a report to say its wear and tear.

My defence-
How can it not be ‘fit for purpose’ when he’s managed to do that amount of miles in it?

Why did he carry on driving the car, for 4000 miles, after he’d said it was knackered?

I tried to buy the car back before it got to court, wanting to allow 25 PPM, bloke rejected it.

Summary-

I lost, ordered to pay £3520 including costs.

The whole ‘case’ was a charade, totally pointless as the judge had already made his mind up before I’d even got there.

The judge wasn’t at all interested in how many miles he’d done in a certain time, he wasn’t interested in the fact that he’d continued to drive the car after he knew there was a fault.

He just said ‘THE BURDEN OF PROOF’ is yours, you can’t prove the fault didn’t exist when you sold the car, the fact it happened in such a short time in you selling it suggests it did exist, regardless of mileage.

Conclusion-

DO NOT ALLOW ANY CASE GET TO COURT!! NO MATTER HOW CERTAIN YOU ARE YOU MAY WIN- YOU WON’T!!!

Edited January 4, 2019 by twerp

[Tony911 79]

5 minutes ago, twerp said:

Just copied this from other page. Don't forget your PDIs !

 

Ladies and Gents-

A few of you know I’ve been to court today-

The Case-

Gearbox fault with a Ford Galaxy 2012 Powershift, done 61k.

Bloke did 14000 miles in it in 7 weeks, travelling From London to Barnsley in it every night night- electrician on the rail network.

He did 10,000 miles in it before telling me about it, then a further 4000 miles in it after.

RAC refuses to pay out on the warranty, DEKRA make a report to say its wear and tear.

My defence-
How can it not be ‘fit for purpose’ when he’s managed to do that amount of miles in it?

Why did he carry on driving the car, for 4000 miles, after he’d said it was knackered?

I tried to buy the car back before it got to court, wanting to allow 25 PPM, bloke rejected it.

Summary-

I lost, ordered to pay £3520 including costs.

The whole ‘case’ was a charade, totally pointless as the judge had already made his mind up before I’d even got there.

The judge wasn’t at all interested in how many miles he’d done in a certain time, he wasn’t interested in the fact that he’d continued to drive the car after he knew there was a fault.

He just said ‘THE BURDEN OF PROOF’ is yours, you can’t prove the fault didn’t exist when you sold the car, the fact it happened in such a short time in you selling it suggests it did exist, regardless of mileage.

Conclusion-

DO NOT ALLOW ANY CASE GET TO COURT!! NO MATTER HOW CERTAIN YOU ARE YOU MAY WIN- YOU WON’T!!!

5 minutes ago, twerp said:

Just copied this from other page. Don't forget your PDIs !

 

Ladies and Gents-

A few of you know I’ve been to court today-

The Case-

Gearbox fault with a Ford Galaxy 2012 Powershift, done 61k.

Bloke did 14000 miles in it in 7 weeks, travelling From London to Barnsley in it every night night- electrician on the rail network.

He did 10,000 miles in it before telling me about it, then a further 4000 miles in it after.

RAC refuses to pay out on the warranty, DEKRA make a report to say its wear and tear.

My defence-
How can it not be ‘fit for purpose’ when he’s managed to do that amount of miles in it?

Why did he carry on driving the car, for 4000 miles, after he’d said it was knackered?

I tried to buy the car back before it got to court, wanting to allow 25 PPM, bloke rejected it.

Summary-

I lost, ordered to pay £3520 including costs.

The whole ‘case’ was a charade, totally pointless as the judge had already made his mind up before I’d even got there.

The judge wasn’t at all interested in how many miles he’d done in a certain time, he wasn’t interested in the fact that he’d continued to drive the car after he knew there was a fault.

He just said ‘THE BURDEN OF PROOF’ is yours, you can’t prove the fault didn’t exist when you sold the car, the fact it happened in such a short time in you selling it suggests it did exist, regardless of mileage.

Conclusion-

DO NOT ALLOW ANY CASE GET TO COURT!! NO MATTER HOW CERTAIN YOU ARE YOU MAY WIN- YOU WON’T!!!

So i have no chance even after his case was struk out due to non payment of hearing fees and we went to collect the car and refund customer but garage lost key, and want to return car back to us without us starting it or inspecting it? 

On 02/01/2019 at 3:58 PM, tradex said:

Let him try and f*ck you then, my guess the court will think he is c**t, not a prick afterall. 

 

[EPV 631]

43 minutes ago, twerp said:

Just copied this from other page. Don't forget your PDIs !

 

Ladies and Gents-

A few of you know I’ve been to court today-

The Case-

Gearbox fault with a Ford Galaxy 2012 Powershift, done 61k.

Bloke did 14000 miles in it in 7 weeks, travelling From London to Barnsley in it every night night- electrician on the rail network.

He did 10,000 miles in it before telling me about it, then a further 4000 miles in it after.

RAC refuses to pay out on the warranty, DEKRA make a report to say its wear and tear.

My defence-
How can it not be ‘fit for purpose’ when he’s managed to do that amount of miles in it?

Why did he carry on driving the car, for 4000 miles, after he’d said it was knackered?

I tried to buy the car back before it got to court, wanting to allow 25 PPM, bloke rejected it.

Summary-

I lost, ordered to pay £3520 including costs.

The whole ‘case’ was a charade, totally pointless as the judge had already made his mind up before I’d even got there.

The judge wasn’t at all interested in how many miles he’d done in a certain time, he wasn’t interested in the fact that he’d continued to drive the car after he knew there was a fault.

He just said ‘THE BURDEN OF PROOF’ is yours, you can’t prove the fault didn’t exist when you sold the car, the fact it happened in such a short time in you selling it suggests it did exist, regardless of mileage.

Conclusion-

DO NOT ALLOW ANY CASE GET TO COURT!! NO MATTER HOW CERTAIN YOU ARE YOU MAY WIN- YOU WON’T!!!

Other page?

 

34 minutes ago, Tony911 said:

So i have no chance even after his case was struk out due to non payment of hearing fees and we went to collect the car and refund customer but garage lost key, and want to return car back to us without us starting it or inspecting it? 

 

Wasn’t his case struck out because he didn’t pay his fees or didn’t cross a t or for an i he was supposed to?

I think the way he’s behaved in terms of refusing you access to the car etc etc would endear you but i imagine it’s all on the day. If a judge took the view that you can’t prove the fault wasn’t present at the point of sale then what’s to say the judge won’t find in favour of the cretin? 

[L-P 15]

 

17 minutes ago, EPV said:

Other page?

I saw it on the Car dealers group on Facebook EPV

[EPV 631]

3 minutes ago, L-P said:

 

I saw it on the Car dealers group on Facebook EPV

I see. 

I actually think his defence is wobbly. Instead of answering why the car is fit for purpose (a shagged gearbox on a 2012 plate 61k MPV isn’t fit) he should be arguing his case that the fault couldn’t have been present at the point of sale because here is my signed PDI mr judge and 10,000 miles since that PDI was signed strongly suggests that the fault has developed many miles after the point of sale and mr customer has been unlucky. 

 

[Arfur Dealy 823]

57 minutes ago, twerp said:

Just copied this from other page. Don't forget your PDIs !

 

Ladies and Gents-

A few of you know I’ve been to court today-

The Case-

Gearbox fault with a Ford Galaxy 2012 Powershift, done 61k.

Bloke did 14000 miles in it in 7 weeks, travelling From London to Barnsley in it every night night- electrician on the rail network.

He did 10,000 miles in it before telling me about it, then a further 4000 miles in it after.

RAC refuses to pay out on the warranty, DEKRA make a report to say its wear and tear.

My defence-
How can it not be ‘fit for purpose’ when he’s managed to do that amount of miles in it?

Why did he carry on driving the car, for 4000 miles, after he’d said it was knackered?

I tried to buy the car back before it got to court, wanting to allow 25 PPM, bloke rejected it.

Summary-

I lost, ordered to pay £3520 including costs.

The whole ‘case’ was a charade, totally pointless as the judge had already made his mind up before I’d even got there.

The judge wasn’t at all interested in how many miles he’d done in a certain time, he wasn’t interested in the fact that he’d continued to drive the car after he knew there was a fault.

He just said ‘THE BURDEN OF PROOF’ is yours, you can’t prove the fault didn’t exist when you sold the car, the fact it happened in such a short time in you selling it suggests it did exist, regardless of mileage.

Conclusion-

DO NOT ALLOW ANY CASE GET TO COURT!! NO MATTER HOW CERTAIN YOU ARE YOU MAY WIN- YOU WON’T!!!

Twerp. I am sure you are aware. The PDI is fundamental to our job, with it signed by the customer it proves the car was fit for purpose at the point of sale. A fresh MOT is also fundamental. Being responsible retailers and substantiating it is our job. If, as a retailer you do not understand this then you are just waiting to be raped. 

[twerp 69]

10 minutes ago, Arfur Dealy said:

Twerp. I am sure you are aware. The PDI is fundamental to our job, with it signed by the customer it proves the car was fit for purpose at the point of sale. A fresh MOT is also fundamental. Being responsible retailers and substantiating it is our job. If, as a retailer you do not understand this then you are just waiting to be raped. 

I know, which is why I said 'Don't forget your PDIs' at the top

[Stalker 180]

I couldn’t sleep at night if I sold a powershite gearboxed car.... Ive mistakenly bought two over the years and sent them both straight back to BCA as I thought I was buying manual cars. They even try to palm them off! 

[trade vet 697]

Hi Twerp

Sorry to hear about your loss.I know how you feel.The thing is if you had a PDI signed you would probably have still lost.I would have thought his consumer rights would have been diluted anyway if he had failed to declare it was to be used in connection with trade or business.RAC must have thought that.

I hope everyone takes notice,I think these part time judges enjoy taking the piss because there is no appeal process.14k in 7 weeks,busy taxi drivers don’t do that,incredible. Get the judges name and complain,I have done that before.It won’t do you any good,but it will give the judge a headache.I understand these cases are recorded.

 

[twerp 69]

Its not me TradeVet but thanks all the same !

I just copied it from another forum

[BHM 994]

Being a civil court, I didn’t realise, but the burden of proof is always on the defendant. It makes it so much easier for the plaintiff to win.

[EPV 631]

21 minutes ago, BHM said:

Being a civil court, I didn’t realise, but the burden of proof is always on the defendant. It makes it so much easier for the plaintiff to win.

I believe a reverse burden of proof exists for the first 4 weeks and beyond 6 months. 

[BHM 994]

21 minutes ago, EPV said:

I believe a reverse burden of proof exists for the first 4 weeks and beyond 6 months. 

I think you’re getting the actual small claims court (which is a civil court) and the CRA regulations mixed up. Far from every case heard at court involves the CRA.

In the case of the Galaxy the issue occurred at around 5 weeks & the shit hit the fan at 7 weeks which is within the CRA 1-5mth zone hence why the retailer got his arse kicked.

I’m just instigating a small claim that doesn’t involve the CRA and much to my pleasant surprise the defendant is the once who has to prove me wrong. It’s no wonder most small claims end up as a win for the plaintiff.

[EPV 631]

5 minutes ago, BHM said:

I think you’re getting the actual small claims court (which is a civil court) and the CRA regulations mixed up. Far from every case heard at court involves the CRA.

In the case of the Galaxy the issue occurred at around 5 weeks & the shit hit the fan at 7 weeks which is within the CRA 1-5mth zone hence why the retailer got his arse kicked.

I’m just instigating a small claim that doesn’t involve the CRA and much to my pleasant surprise the defendant is the once who has to prove me wrong. It’s no wonder most small claims end up as a win for the plaintiff.

I don’t quite follow. 

If someone brings a case against you to reject a vehicle (as the Galaxy case) then the CRA would be cited? The conduit to bring the case would be the small claims court? 

I assume your case refers to your spat with DA? So as you can’t use the CRA (as in this case you’re not a consumer) you’re having to use common law? 

In the galaxy case, which would have been heard in the small claims court, the CRA would be cited and under the CRA a reverse burden of proof exists. Maybe I’m confused as to what you’re saying here. 

[trade vet 697]

The point being,if you are a car dealer you have little chance of winning.Unless the rules have changed,you can’t bring a solicitor/barrister with you to argue points of law. Over the years,I have been to the Small Claims Court 8 times,won 6,5 of these were non motor trade.The motor trade case I won was with BCA,the 2 I lost were with punters and we had a strong defence in both cases and the judgements were a joke......Sorry if I keep repeating my Small Claims experience

[EPV 631]

5 minutes ago, trade vet said:

The point being,if you are a car dealer you have little chance of winning.Unless the rules have changed,you can’t bring a solicitor/barrister with you to argue points of law. Over the years,I have been to the Small Claims Court 8 times,won 6,5 of these were non motor trade.The motor trade case I won was with BCA,the 2 I lost were with punters and we had a strong defence in both cases and the judgements were a joke......Sorry if I keep repeating my Small Claims experience

I think it’s information worth repeating. I am 100% of the mindset that court is to be avoided at all costs unless it is a chancer wanting brake pads changed after 4 months and 4,000 miles.