Unroadworthy car written off by Insurance and financed by Moneybarn.

[scs1962]

My son in law recently brought a second hand car from a dealer and it was financed by Moneybarn.



He only had the car around 6 weeks when 2/3 weeks ago he was driving home from work and said that the car went "all weird" and the wheels wouldnt steer and he lost control and hit a post. Luckily he was unhurt albeit very shaken up.



I advised him what I thought he should do but being a young man thought he knew best and told me that his insurance company was going to repair it. He did have a warranty on it but because the problem caused an accident they didnt want to know. Easy get out as usual! (I did post about this when it happened).



the insurance company instructed a garage miles away who came and collected it and they said the wishbone had snapped which obviously caused him to loose control of the car and crash.



Because of the damage caused, the insurance company have said its a right off, but buy the time they take off his £750 excess and the balance of the remaining premium which had only been in force a couple of months, he is £3,000 short to pay off the finance.



This is causing him a lot of anxiety because he now has no car, he cannot buy another car on finance because he will still have outstanding finance and due to the location of his work he cannot get their without a vehicle and so potentially will loose his job.



He has asked the insurance company if he can have the salvage back so he can get the wishbone repaired himself and be mobile to get to work but they have said he needs to get permission from Moneybarn that they can do that.



Moneybarn have said no because its against their terms and conditions The gap insurance he took out are not interested at all.



Having intervened as I cant bear to see him and my pregnant daughter in bits because they dont know what to do, I eventually got through to an asset manager at Moneybarn who wasnt much help although I did get him to send an email saying that once the insurance co had made payment to them they had no interest in the salvage. Not sure if this is going to do any good but possibly.



The car is due to be scrapped on Monday so time is not on their side and they have asked for it not to be scrapped.



I am of the opinion that the car was sold unroadworthy as the rust on the wishbone should have been picked up on the MOT and it wasnt as the car was brought with a new MOT.



I dread to think what could have happened especially if my daughter was in the car.



When I was having the conversation with moneybarn I told then that they had financed a car that was not fit for purpose and unroadworthy and they should be stepping up to sort something out and if my son in law cant get to work, they wont get any money.



I then went on to phone a consumer advice line, explained it all and they have said that the liability lies with Moneybarn as it is on HP.



They have said that under the Consumer Rights Act they must offer a free repair or replacement as the goods were not fit for purpose, the failure was not down to wear & tear, misuse or neglect and he must email them stating such also claiming any out of pocket expenses.

[scs1962]

I have written a letter to Moneybarn stating their obligations and liabilities and that I want them to provide a courtesy car for use as my son in law wont be able to get to work due to location.



I have told them that I will escalate it to the FOS/FCA and I will be prepared to go to court.



I emailed it so they got it today and I have sent a copy by post.



The insurance claim has now been cancelled and the car has been stopped from being scrapped but its now remaining in the garage until its collected by whoever and daily storage charges will be applied. I have made Moneybarn aware of this but its like water off a ducks back.



I offered to pay to get the car collected and repaired but the first person I spoke to this morning at Moneybarn said it could affect the complaint if we do that.



My son in law cant get to work and faces loosing his job if he cant get there tomorrow/Weds latest.



I have also lodged a complaint with car finance 24 but they have said it can take two weeks to respond and time is not on our side.



My son in law needs to get to work.



Any ideas as to what we should do now?

[atticus]

Why do all your links go to that other site? Treat what they say with extreme care.

[EXC]

Why do all your links go to that other site? Treat what they say with extreme care.

Indeed. Links removed.

[R0b]

Unfortunately, this will not be resolved within the next 24 hours and your son-in-law has to accept that. If there is no response from Moneybarn about a courtesy car then assuming there is no other means of transport e.g. work colleagues or getting a train and then bus/walking to the location then the only way may be for your SIL to hire a courtesy car himself (or purchase a very cheap car if possible to get him from A to B) and seek to recover the ongoing cost until such time the matter is resolved or Moneybarn agree to supply a courtesy car in the interim.

I have some questions if you don't mind answering:

1. You suggested in your original post that your SIL had gap insurance cover but they refused to pay out. On what grounds are they refusing as this kind of cover is intended to be used in these sorts of situations. It would also help to know what the gap insurance covered as that might depend on whether or not a claim can be made.

2. Are you able to upload or copy/paste the letter you sent to Moneybarn with all personal information redacted? Would be useful to see what you had sent to them so that we can consider if there are any other breaches you haven't yet considered.

3. Although I am not a mechanic, just because the car passed an MOT doesn't mean or suggest that the car shouldn't have passed. It may be that the car passed the MOT but had certain advisories and for your SIL to consider getting repaired. I would imagine that unless the wishbone was in such a serious state and it was about to fall off, the garage may have been entitled to pass the car on that basis but raised an advisory. Has your SIL checked the MOT certificate to confirm if there are any advisories related to the car? I'm tagging des8 for any comment as he is more of an expert on this point.

4. How old is the car when your SIL took possession and what was the total mileage?

5. As part of the documentation, did your SIL receive any pre-inspection checklist signed off by the garage?

6. Finally, and a word of caution, the act of telling Moneybarn that they will receive no payment if your SIL can't get to work or refusing to pay by cancelling any direct debit would more than likely constitute a material breach of the agreement which would allow Moneybarn to terminate and subsequently seek the remaining balance on the contract so I hope you discussed that with your SIL before sending the letter as ultimately he is going to be responsible whatever way this goes. Your SIL should continue to pay the monthly instalments and against attempt to recover the money for non-use of the vehicle at a later date.

[atticus]

Doesn't the OP's son-in-law have rights under the Consumer Credit Act and Consumer Rights Act which he can invoke against lender and dealer respectively?

[atticus]

As an aside, and about the links, having looked at that other site, I think the OP simply copied and pasted a couple of his posts there. That other site has a habit of automatically inserting links to its definitions of certain words and phrases.

[R0b]

Not sure what links were posted as they are removed now, but as for any rights, I don't think at this stage there is anything in the CCA that would help the OP but definitely in the CRA.

Without knowing more and just pure speculation there could be several breaches: satisfactory quality, fit for purposes, goods not as described, section 50 (information about trader or service to be binding), right to repair or replacement by failing to carry out the repair or replacement without causing the consumer to be significantly inconvenienced.

Limited circumstances in which the dealer might be held directly responsible i.e. fraud or misrepresentation (as to the agreement type and terms) because the contractual relationship for the sale of the car is between the dealer and the lender who in turn hires the car out to the consumer

[des8]

Re R0b 's comment in post 5 about wishbone failure:

assessment of corrosion on load bearing parts of a vehicle is not straight forward.
The tester has to assess for excessive corrosion visually or pressure testing by use of finger and thumb.
If he has concerns he may then use the corrosion assessment tool (basically a rubber hammer with scraper).
This is to be used lightly and not for heavy scraping or poking.

Now if someone has added a thick coating of underseal to the wishbone, the tester could easily fail to spot excessive corrosion

This doesn't mean that the car supplied was satisfactory, just that it would be difficult to pin any liability on the MOT tester.


Surprised that the insurance company need anyone's permission to sell what is now their car to anyone they wish.
Presumably it is a Cat S, so will be going for auction or their favoured breakers yard where it will be put up for sale.