Voluntary Termination

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi Rob.....

Just a quick question as I am at work

Barclays say that they are not a member of BVRLA but Manheim who did the inspection are. Do they have to stick by guidelines? Just need to know before I take some quotes and stick them in my ranty email :O

[R0b]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Depends what the contract says, it might say the guidelines used are the BVRLA but as said, if where the car is second hand then it does not factor in the age of the car and so its not an appropriate standard and would provide a higher standard than the reasonable care standard in the CCA.

Manheim offer inspection services working usually to the BVRLA guidelines or the lender's own guidelines (though lenders generally don't have their own guidelines), so when they inspect the car the BVRLA guidelines are usually measured against the car. Consideration should be taken into account where the car is second hand where there may have been underlying problems contributed by the previous owner before you took possession and so you could not be responsible for that. there is also likely to be some damage or wear and tear on a used vehicle than a brand new one. I think the BVRLA guidelines are typically used to assess damage to cars that are brand new, not second hand hence the guidelines has no allowance taken into account for the age of the car.

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi....

Here is a quick update of what has happened with my case. It got passed over to another Ombudsman who said that looking at all the evidence that I had been messed around and was owed compensation which would be deducted off the bill. He said I had to sens him an email of what I was willing to pay and he would go back to Barclays and see what they said.

I have had this back today....

I’ve considered all your comments but in my view, it was reasonable for Barclays to seek repayment from you for the condition of the car.

However, I think the matter could have been handled better, and you were caused some unnecessary trouble and upset. You should be compensated for this.

I say this because of the circumstances surrounding your return of the car and the delay that occurred before you were told about what you would have to pay. In particular, there was a period where you were seeking clarification of what had happened and didn’t get a reply. You were passed between Barclays and Manheim and had to do a lot of chasing for information. This could have been avoided. As a result, you lost the opportunity to challenge the inspection, or get a report of your own. You’ve also explained to me that there had been some repairs to the car and, if you had known there were still issues with the car’s condition, you could have gone back to the repairers and raised this with them. Because of all the delay you weren’t able to do this. I can’t say what the outcome would have been, but you lost the opportunity to pursue these issues.

Taking all of this into account, I think it would be right to pay some compensation and the sum I think is fair is £250. I’ve contacted Barclays and it has agreed this. This sum would be deducted from the outstanding balance.

If you are willing to agree this, we can resolve the complaint on this basis. But if you don’t agree, I will need to issue a formal decision.

I am still not happy to have a bill which will be £900+ and my points are that:
1. I never had the inspection done on the day (Manheim and Barclays at fault)
2. I never had opportunity to question the damages or take the car away etc
3. I would have gone back to the garage to question the bad repairs (which to me as a woman looked ok at the time, but I am no expert)

Can you advise me on what might happen when I tell the ombudsman that I disagree with the decision.

Thank you

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Depends what the contract says, it might say the guidelines used are the BVRLA but as said, if where the car is second hand then it does not factor in the age of the car and so its not an appropriate standard and would provide a higher standard than the reasonable care standard in the CCA.

Manheim offer inspection services working usually to the BVRLA guidelines or the lender's own guidelines (though lenders generally don't have their own guidelines), so when they inspect the car the BVRLA guidelines are usually measured against the car. Consideration should be taken into account where the car is second hand where there may have been underlying problems contributed by the previous owner before you took possession and so you could not be responsible for that. there is also likely to be some damage or wear and tear on a used vehicle than a brand new one. I think the BVRLA guidelines are typically used to assess damage to cars that are brand new, not second hand hence the guidelines has no allowance taken into account for the age of the car.

Hi....

Here is a quick update of what has happened with my case. It got passed over to another Ombudsman who said that looking at all the evidence that I had been messed around and was owed compensation which would be deducted off the bill. He said I had to sens him an email of what I was willing to pay and he would go back to Barclays and see what they said.

I have had this back today....

I’ve considered all your comments but in my view, it was reasonable for Barclays to seek repayment from you for the condition of the car.

However, I think the matter could have been handled better, and you were caused some unnecessary trouble and upset. You should be compensated for this.

I say this because of the circumstances surrounding your return of the car and the delay that occurred before you were told about what you would have to pay. In particular, there was a period where you were seeking clarification of what had happened and didn’t get a reply. You were passed between Barclays and Manheim and had to do a lot of chasing for information. This could have been avoided. As a result, you lost the opportunity to challenge the inspection, or get a report of your own. You’ve also explained to me that there had been some repairs to the car and, if you had known there were still issues with the car’s condition, you could have gone back to the repairers and raised this with them. Because of all the delay you weren’t able to do this. I can’t say what the outcome would have been, but you lost the opportunity to pursue these issues.

Taking all of this into account, I think it would be right to pay some compensation and the sum I think is fair is £250. I’ve contacted Barclays and it has agreed this. This sum would be deducted from the outstanding balance.

If you are willing to agree this, we can resolve the complaint on this basis. But if you don’t agree, I will need to issue a formal decision.

I am still not happy to have a bill which will be £900+ and my points are that:
1. I never had the inspection done on the day (Manheim and Barclays at fault)
2. I never had opportunity to question the damages or take the car away etc
3. I would have gone back to the garage to question the bad repairs (which to me as a woman looked ok at the time, but I am no expert)

Can you advise me on what might happen when I tell the ombudsman that I disagree with the decision.

[R0b]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi Lottie, if you disagreed with the Ombudsman's decision then you are back to square one with your dispute. Only if you accept the decision will it become legally binding on you.

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi Lottie, if you disagreed with the Ombudsman's decision then you are back to square one with your dispute. Only if you accept the decision will it become legally binding on you.

I am going to say that I am not happy with the decision and see what happens as its totally unfair. I think the ombudsmen offer £250 to anyone if they find the company is partially liable.

I will reply to his email and say why I think it is unfair. As you know my argument is the inspection not being done and the lack of opportunity for me to take the car back to the garage who did the repairs in the first place through the insurance company.

The guy at CRS advised me a couple of times that they could knock it down to half price which I don't understand but didnt mention that to the Ombudsman before.

Thanks Rob

Charlotte

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi Rob

Do you think I would get anywhere if it went to court? I am still fuming that I have to pay for something because they didn't follow their guidelines. I haven't heard anything from Barclays in all this time until today and it was a letter to say they have put a flag on my credit file.

Thanks

[R0b]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi Lottie,

Remind me again of your situation, are the charges solely made up for damages to the vehicle or does it include excess mileage charges?

When checking your credit file what does the flag show? perhaps you could take a screenshot of the flag and upload it. Just make sure to remove any personal info from it.

Also, was the car brand new or second hand when you took possession of it?

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi Rob

Thanks for the relpy. It was a 2011 plate which I returned to Manheim due to not being able to afford the monthly payments and I was over half way though the contract. The issue was that they did not do an inspection whilst I was there and then they informed my that they had sold it and I had a bill of over £1000 to pay. My issue is that I was not there during the inspection and didn't have chance to say that I would take the car back with me.


They said it was due to ill repair.....someone had gone into me and I took the car to a garage which was all done through the insurance and a few other little things such as rust. I am no expert and the car looked in good condition otherwise I would have never handed it back. I don't know who had the car before me or what had paintwork etc was like when I got it as I am merely a woman lol

It's a long complicated story but put most of it in my previous thread.......I have been through the Ombadsman and they have agreed that I have £250 knocked off the bill but I still don't agree with it because I was never there when the inspection was done or was contacted to say that they had found this that and the other etc.

I have not had chance to look at my credit file it was just a letter from Barclays to say they had put a flag on it. I will try and find that information and upload it.

I have all the other paperwork inc chain of emails between myself and Manheim and correspondence with Barclays and the Ombudsman.

I just thought is going to court and option?

Thanks for your help

Charlotte

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Barclays have now sent me some payment giro slips and said I have to pay the balance over 12 months!!

[R0b]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi Lottie,

Sorry I missed your post, I will look at it properly today over lunch (hopefully or at least reply in some way). I

If you post and I don't respond you might be better off tagging me using [MENTION=71570]R0b[/MENTION] and I will get a notification.

[R0b]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Hi Rob

Thanks for the relpy. It was a 2011 plate which I returned to Manheim due to not being able to afford the monthly payments and I was over half way though the contract. The issue was that they did not do an inspection whilst I was there and then they informed my that they had sold it and I had a bill of over £1000 to pay. My issue is that I was not there during the inspection and didn't have chance to say that I would take the car back with me.

They said it was due to ill repair.....someone had gone into me and I took the car to a garage which was all done through the insurance and a few other little things such as rust. I am no expert and the car looked in good condition otherwise I would have never handed it back. I don't know who had the car before me or what had paintwork etc was like when I got it as I am merely a woman lol

It's a long complicated story but put most of it in my previous thread.......I have been through the Ombadsman and they have agreed that I have £250 knocked off the bill but I still don't agree with it because I was never there when the inspection was done or was contacted to say that they had found this that and the other etc.

I have not had chance to look at my credit file it was just a letter from Barclays to say they had put a flag on it. I will try and find that information and upload it.

I have all the other paperwork inc chain of emails between myself and Manheim and correspondence with Barclays and the Ombudsman.

I just thought is going to court and option?

Thanks for your help

Charlotte

Hi Charlotte,

Did you manage to check your credit file and see what Barclays have done to your credit report?

You have to weigh up your options and do what you feel is best for yourself. If the vehicle was second hand then it is likely more difficult for Barclays to prove that the damage occurred whilst in your possession - they can't make any assumptions on this. I think £1,000 for damage to the vehicle is substantially high and unless that was all caused by you and you don't dispute it, I can't see how they can claim that amount given the fact that the car was sitting around for some time before it even got inspected.

Obviously Barclays are making being quite forward with the Giro slips assuming you agree to the liability, but have they actually said anything about going to court? That might also depend on what has happened on your credit file. So court is an option for either or Barclays to take, but your choice as to whether you want to or not.

You can always negotiate as a full and final offer, but Barclays may reject it or accept it as its better than nothing, if you do this then you should start your offer low somewhere perhaps around 25-30% of the total balance and then set a limit as to what you will agree and if it doesn't reach that stage, walk away.

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Thanks Rob @R0b

I have not checked my credit file yet, I am looking into it and will do it ASAP. I have a lot on with work etc at the minute and not had much free time.

The car was 4 years old when I had it so anything could have happened to it prior to me having it. They say the majority of the cost was poor repair from when a car went into me but I took it to a garage and it was all done through the insurance. The ombudsman agreed that the inspection should have been done on the day in front of me and I should have been made aware of the costs. If I had I would have turned around and driven back home. The ombudsman said it was for me to take it up with the insurance and garage but that doesn't seem fair and also the car was sold on so how can I even fight that??

The ombudsman said that Barclays should knock £250 off of the total for the inconvenience which I was shocked about due to them saying that it should have had the inspection with me there. Barclays have not taken that off and are leaving it to me to get back in touch with the Ombudsman. I have been passed from pillar to post with the whole thing and still don't agree with most of what was on that inspection report.

Surely rust on wheels is wear and tear?

I will try writing to them and put an offer forward and see what happens. If they don't agree then maybe mention going to court but that scares me and I don't want to end up with court fees if I lose. Its little old me against a massive organisation

- - - Updated - - -

Hi Charlotte,

Did you manage to check your credit file and see what Barclays have done to your credit report?

You have to weigh up your options and do what you feel is best for yourself. If the vehicle was second hand then it is likely more difficult for Barclays to prove that the damage occurred whilst in your possession - they can't make any assumptions on this. I think £1,000 for damage to the vehicle is substantially high and unless that was all caused by you and you don't dispute it, I can't see how they can claim that amount given the fact that the car was sitting around for some time before it even got inspected.

Obviously Barclays are making being quite forward with the Giro slips assuming you agree to the liability, but have they actually said anything about going to court? That might also depend on what has happened on your credit file. So court is an option for either or Barclays to take, but your choice as to whether you want to or not.

You can always negotiate as a full and final offer, but Barclays may reject it or accept it as its better than nothing, if you do this then you should start your offer low somewhere perhaps around 25-30% of the total balance and then set a limit as to what you will agree and if it doesn't reach that stage, walk away.

Thanks Rob

I have not checked my credit file yet, I am looking into it and will do it ASAP. I have a lot on with work etc at the minute and not had much free time.

The car was 4 years old when I had it so anything could have happened to it prior to me having it. They say the majority of the cost was poor repair from when a car went into me but I took it to a garage and it was all done through the insurance. The ombudsman agreed that the inspection should have been done on the day in front of me and I should have been made aware of the costs. If I had I would have turned around and driven back home. The ombudsman said it was for me to take it up with the insurance and garage but that doesn't seem fair and also the car was sold on so how can I even fight that??

The ombudsman said that Barclays should knock £250 off of the total for the inconvenience which I was shocked about due to them saying that it should have had the inspection with me there. Barclays have not taken that off and are leaving it to me to get back in touch with the Ombudsman. I have been passed from pillar to post with the whole thing and still don't agree with most of what was on that inspection report.

Surely rust on wheels is wear and tear?

I will try writing to them and put an offer forward and see what happens. If they don't agree then maybe mention going to court but that scares me and I don't want to end up with court fees if I lose. Its little old me against a massive organisation

[justask4lottie]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Thanks Rob @R0b

I have not checked my credit file yet, I am looking into it and will do it ASAP. I have a lot on with work etc at the minute and not had much free time.

The car was 4 years old when I had it so anything could have happened to it prior to me having it. They say the majority of the cost was poor repair from when a car went into me but I took it to a garage and it was all done through the insurance. The ombudsman agreed that the inspection should have been done on the day in front of me and I should have been made aware of the costs. If I had I would have turned around and driven back home. The ombudsman said it was for me to take it up with the insurance and garage but that doesn't seem fair and also the car was sold on so how can I even fight that??

The ombudsman said that Barclays should knock £250 off of the total for the inconvenience which I was shocked about due to them saying that it should have had the inspection with me there. Barclays have not taken that off and are leaving it to me to get back in touch with the Ombudsman. I have been passed from pillar to post with the whole thing and still don't agree with most of what was on that inspection report.

Surely rust on wheels is wear and tear?

I will try writing to them and put an offer forward and see what happens. If they don't agree then maybe mention going to court but that scares me and I don't want to end up with court fees if I lose. Its little old me against a massive organisation

- - - Updated - - -




Thanks Rob

I have not checked my credit file yet, I am looking into it and will do it ASAP. I have a lot on with work etc at the minute and not had much free time.

The car was 4 years old when I had it so anything could have happened to it prior to me having it. They say the majority of the cost was poor repair from when a car went into me but I took it to a garage and it was all done through the insurance. The ombudsman agreed that the inspection should have been done on the day in front of me and I should have been made aware of the costs. If I had I would have turned around and driven back home. The ombudsman said it was for me to take it up with the insurance and garage but that doesn't seem fair and also the car was sold on so how can I even fight that??

The ombudsman said that Barclays should knock £250 off of the total for the inconvenience which I was shocked about due to them saying that it should have had the inspection with me there. Barclays have not taken that off and are leaving it to me to get back in touch with the Ombudsman. I have been passed from pillar to post with the whole thing and still don't agree with most of what was on that inspection report.

Surely rust on wheels is wear and tear?

I will try writing to them and put an offer forward and see what happens. If they don't agree then maybe mention going to court but that scares me and I don't want to end up with court fees if I lose. Its little old me against a massive organisation

Shall I mention the Ombudsman on the letter and reduction of £250 or just the offer I am willing to make. They should have everything on record. I find it really odd that not one person from Barclays has ever spoken to me or returned my call.

Oh and also when I returned the car to Manheim I didn't sign any paper work what so ever which I thought was a bit dodgy at the time and did question. I said so you want me to leave my car and keys and not sign anything and they said yes it was ok as I had signed my log book so I didn't agree to anything and obviously then the inspection was done without me being there @R0b

[R0b]

Re: Voluntary Termination

Thanks Rob

I have not checked my credit file yet, I am looking into it and will do it ASAP. I have a lot on with work etc at the minute and not had much free time.

The car was 4 years old when I had it so anything could have happened to it prior to me having it. They say the majority of the cost was poor repair from when a car went into me but I took it to a garage and it was all done through the insurance. The ombudsman agreed that the inspection should have been done on the day in front of me and I should have been made aware of the costs. If I had I would have turned around and driven back home. The ombudsman said it was for me to take it up with the insurance and garage but that doesn't seem fair and also the car was sold on so how can I even fight that??

The ombudsman said that Barclays should knock £250 off of the total for the inconvenience which I was shocked about due to them saying that it should have had the inspection with me there. Barclays have not taken that off and are leaving it to me to get back in touch with the Ombudsman. I have been passed from pillar to post with the whole thing and still don't agree with most of what was on that inspection report.

Surely rust on wheels is wear and tear?

I will try writing to them and put an offer forward and see what happens. If they don't agree then maybe mention going to court but that scares me and I don't want to end up with court fees if I lose. Its little old me against a massive organisation

In terms of the 'poor repair' resulting from the accident, you have to keep in mind that you are only required to take reasonable care of the vehicle. In other words, the question you have to ask is whether or not you have been negligent in looking after the car whilst it has been in your possession. The fact that you took it to an insurer who arranged for the repairs to be done (no doubt through one of their authorised repair centres) then I would say you have discharged that duty. Whether the lender disagrees with that stance then that is entirely up to them to prove otherwise. There is case law to support this position in Brady v St Margaret's Trust where it was said that:

"The price in these hire-purchase agreements is no guide to the condition of a car. There should be evidence by the hire-purchase company to show the condition of the goods at the time the agreement was made and to show how far the hirer has defaulted under it ... the hirer's duty is to keep the car in the condition in which it might reasonably be expected to be if he had looked after it properly. He need not put it in a better condition than it was when he hired it. He need only keep it in the condition in which a reasonably minded hirer would keep it. Thus he would repair it if there was an accident, and he would do the immediate repairs in the course of running the car, but no more.The hire-purchase company should give evidence of any default on his part in that duty. "

As for the Ombudsman and Barclay's not getting back to you, I think you need to decide whether to accept the decision of not - if you do then you will be legally bound by it and can't change your mind at a later date. As I always say on here, the burden of proof lies with Barclays not yourself. You just need to make sure that you document all the discrepancies in relation to what has happened as that will be needed should Barclays issue a claim and you wish to defend it.

By all means send Barclays a letter, and if they don't respond then they don't respond. You will still need to decide whether to accept the FOS' decision.