Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

[des8]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Whilst I agree he might well have funds, they could well be hidden in his partners name.
Vans in his possession ?being sold on commission.

Have you checked to see if he has any CCJs outstanding? https://www.trustonline.org.uk/
Might be worth seeing if he has any sort of record

Trying to scare you.... naturally as he doesn't want to do court!

[fandabby]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

No I haven't checked to see if he has any CCJ's currently.

I will presumably need to search on his name and his trading name or just his name ?

Thanks Des.

Spoke with OH and taking Dekra report to a third party garage for an estimate. Will also factor in bumper repair and like for like wheels/tyres and see what the estimate comes to. May then depending if the garage says favourable things like yes can all be repaired ask him to refund partially to get everything done but I suspect it will not be cheap with the faults it has and when he was talking tonight he said things like he can take a part of a van he has in and put it on this one. Pardon me so not even a fix with new parts. That is where the trust lacks. And he was saying the fixes are cheap to do, I can see why !

I suspect the vehicle's current value is around £6k with all faults and that would be £8k refund. If he doesn't have 14k he is not likely to have the 8k. But at least I can show that I am trying.

Thanks Des.

[des8]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

just search his name, as any judgements would have been issued in his name as he was not trading as a ltd company

[fandabby]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

So I went to see a third party garage who sell and service VW's, gave them them Dekra report and a section of my letter listing all the faults and described what is going on with the van. In his opinion he said the small things can be put right but there isn't much point as he thinks the engine and turbo need replacing which will cost £7/8 thousand. He doesn't think it was looked after and from our description of how the engine has a strong judder and all the smoke is indicative that the engine is done in as well as the turbo. Ironically the Dekra engineer said he thinks the engine is on it's last legs along with turbo again from his observations from looking at the engine running and seeing all the smoking The garage chap today thinks it will never be right and all down to not being looked after and had a hard life. His advice was not to negotiate fix either by the trader or have him pay the cost for a different garage to fix but push for full refund.

This garage I saw I have asked about and has a good reputation so I need to hang in there and stay on the path of getting refund as our original plan.

I am in the middle of typing up notes from our conversation with trader last night to include in our letter and then I will need to again say unless we get our full refund then it will be pursued in court. I think from a court point of view of trying to work it out, I should state that I had a third party garage look over the report and discussed the condition of the van as his opinion it's looking likely engine, turbo and all other faults need looking at etc.

Des, any recommendations please on how I word a paragraph to include that since our rejection 26th Nov ownership effectively passed to him (just want to make that point because of the bumper damage day of storm Doris). And that from rejection it is his responsibility being the trader who sold me the van to collect but refund cleared before he takes it away.

I will also include in there that he needs to advise me should he still refuse to refund when he is available to talk through the directions questionnaire so we can agree it's content before sending it off.

Many thanks

[des8]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Probably a wise decision to pursue the full refund.
You could point out to him that you are still willing to attempt mediation (looks good for the court!).
If he does agree you could negotiate round the amount by perhaps waiving some of your costs.
It would bequicker and save you some stress.

You could remind him that his vehicle is parked on your property since ownership reverted to him when you rejected the vehicle, and that as soon as you are in receipt of cleared funds you will require him to remove it.

[fandabby]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Thanks des8, if I post up the letter here which includes the transcript from last night telephone conversation will you let me know please what you think.

Thanks

[des8]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Of course, and others might chip in as well!

[fandabby]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Great thanks so much, just finishing it off...

[fandabby]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

So here is the letter I have worked on tonight. Please any recommendations for altering very welcome as I feel this is my last chance to get a refund before having to get to court room. Many thanks


Dear X

RE: <REG OF VEHICLE>
With regard to our telephone conversation on 27 March 2017, I would like to recap what was discussed. Just to let you know I did record the conversation in order for me to type up what was discussed for clarification.

I opened the conversation saying I waited to call you until my husband was home as he wanted to be present and involved in the conversation.

I confirmed that we had lost all faith and trust in the van and our position was that we still want the refund.

You confirmed that you have been buying and selling vehicles for so many years that you have not come across this, if you had a complaint you would have the vehicle back, fix it, and it would go away and you heard no more.

I then confirmed that the issue is that there is such a long list of faults with the van, not just one or two things.

You said that you are keeping <previous owner> out of it as you do not want to fall out with him as he is your friend so it is down to you to sort this out as you sold the van to us. You also want to do right by us.

You then said you have looked at the list several times and there is a list of faults but none of them are serious, none of them are major. You got a hinge, another set of wheels and good tyres identical to what was on van and you have checked them for cracks and there is not any, you have been collecting bits for it already hoping it is going to come back for you to fix. You have got a starter motor for it, wiper motor is easy enough as you can swap it out from one of the other vans for now to get a quick fix and not spend any more money.

My husband said the problem is that when you pay £14000 for a vehicle you do not expect any of these types of things to be present, at all. You said you understand what he is saying but it is a 10 year old vehicle with 140000 on the clock, it is not a brand new vehicle, with a brand new vehicle it is sold with warranties and they have come backs as well. My husband said but to have your word that there is nothing wrong with the van and a week later it is smoking like anything, throwing out soot and fan coming on when it is not supposed to be coming on, split cv joint and caliper clip which is missing …. You then said it is all easy stuff to replace and cheap, none of it is expensive and none of it is difficult. The smoking is the worse issue, that could be the injector and you also said there is a mis-fire, that could be just down to a replacement injector. A couple of hours work you’ve got a new injector, you got a starting motor in at the same time, set of wheels swap them over, cv gaiter not an hours work, the wiper motor about 20 minutes to change, it is all simple jobs. You said you know there is a lot of them, but they are all easily rectifiable and that is stuff you do day to day anyway. It is all interrelated stuff for 140000 miles van.

I said that <previous owner> should have known the faults of the van and what were you doing selling it through your garage with these faults, it just does not add up. You said he is private and just like us if we sold our Zafira there will be faults with it. I said but I know what is wrong with the zafira.

You said you can’t explain for <previous owner> but all you can do is offer to repair at the Garage like you would do for anything else. You said once you get the van all fixed if we are still not happy with the vehicle then it is down to us to sell it on. You also said you are more than happy to sell it on for ourselves if that is the way we want it to go. You said you are trying to be as amenable as possible, you have never had to come across having to refund anyone before and you are not in a position to do it at the moment, even if we went to court you still could not cough up £14000 today.

Court is the last thing you want to do, time down the road, the judgement might come out that I can fix it for you so why don’t I. You have sourced legal advice from a Solicitor and he said it is one of those that the case could go either way. We could win, you could win. To you neither us are winning because we are going to court, it is aggravation. You are happy to collect the vehicle and repair it and go from there. You could have done this end of November and this could have been put to bed ages ago. I said the reason why I asked for refund was because day by day things were just not right and it completely blew us and we thought hang on a minute and the confidence in the van is gone. You said you understood as bought vehicles yourself which has had faults on them. You did a part x on a van on Sunday, he said it was all good, you jumped in to drive off and the engine management light came on.

You then went on to say the other thing you don’t understand is when you plug computer into the ODB port, you don’t understand why that is not working. Not one of those things that tends to break you don’t think you would have any problem plugging in and reading from it or you would take it to an auto electrician and have it done anyway. You remap the van through there, it has been remapped as you know, they plug into the OBD port and send software to the ECU that way. And normally if it does not work then it is just a fuse, nothing serious. Everything on that van, from the engineers report, is easily rectifiable and within a week would have the van done and back to us.

I said we need to discuss it this end, we have lost faith and confidence in that van and to think it was sold to us in that condition in the first place, there is going to be trust issues with getting everything fixed as well. You said yeah, but no, work from the list make sure, double check everything it’ll be fine, you can’t see why it would be an issue. You know there are a few bits and bobs on it but you have the list to work through and just tick them off and it is done.

You also said we have the other option instead of going to court, you have the van back and sell it on and you give us money back, you are not looking to make any profit out of it. Just be happy to get it gone for us and for you. You said you are not trying to hide from this, we know where you are. I asked you when you had your advice from your solicitor did they talk to you about the new Consumer Rights Act 2015. You said no, you showed him the letters and asked for his advice, he just said that sort of case could go either way. You said you know someone who been to court with similar sort of thing, not a van it was a car. Fault with brakes and customer said want their money back, went to court, trader said offered to fix it and the judge said to the lady why did you not let him fix it, she said she wants her money back and judge said he’s offered to fix the car, it is just the brakes which is wrong with it, just do them. Judge asked how much brakes would cost and trader said £200, judge said he awards customer £200, go and get your brakes done. I asked when was that and you said it was recently. Your trader friend told you his story because he could not believe this has got this far. It was on a £1500 car Citroen C2 you know it is different, ours is £14000 to £1500 but similar circumstances. I said but it is not just the brakes, there is quite a long list with this van. You said the brakes are good on it, it is just the spring that takes seconds to put on it and is not going to affect the braking on the van with spring being missing but it is meant to be there we will put it back on. You said from that list there is nothing on there that is not easily fixable and for us to not have any problems further on with the van from there on.

I said we will talk about it this end and we will let you know.

You confirmed that you asked solicitor how much to represent you in court and everything else and he said it can go into thousands and neither of us would get any benefit out of it. You said you did not want that you did not want to cost us any more money and you did not want to pay through the nose for it. You’d rather spend your money on your children.

You also said bear in mind I will sell it on for you but will fix the faults first and if I only get £13000 then I will add the £1000 to give you the £14000 we paid.

You would like this settled as it is giving you sleepless nights and I also confirmed it has affected my health too resulting in a doctor’s visit.

We said goodbye and be in touch next couple of days.


****************************************

This summarises our conversation and moving on from that, my husband and I have talked at length and decided to take the Dekra report to a third party garage to estimate the cost of work and for their professional opinion. This garage has a good reputation and deal mainly in second hand vehicles of the VW family of cars/vans. The garage has been established since 1985. We discussed the issues which we have experienced and he thoroughly read the report. Conclusion was that yes there are elements on the list which can easily be done but alarm bells with the intense smoking and the rocking of the engine. He suggested if it is the turbo, why has it faulted and even deeper what else is going on to the thought that the engine needs replacing, there is no history with the vehicle and suspects it has not been looked after hence the poor condition of the van.

Upon us re reading the Dekra report again and noting “together with the excessive plumes of exhaust smoke which, in the opinion of the engineer, is indicative of excessive internal turbo wear and internal engine wear.”, we do think the opinion is correct as this was picked up by the Dekra Engineer too.

There is no getting away from the fact you as a trader sold a vehicle in a poor condition and we have rejected the vehicle on this basis from 26^th November 2016.

We are still wanting our full refund please as stated in the claim, however are willing to do mediation with you to resolve this to prevent this claim getting to court and resulting in a hearing. Please bear in mind that should we win in court we will be seeking to claim all losses including court fees and interest.

I would like to point you to the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which I have done in previous letters - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents :

Chapter 2

What statutory rights are there under a goods contract?
9.Goods to be of satisfactory quality
10.Goods to be fit for particular purpose
11.Goods to be as described

and also

20 Right to reject

(1)The short-term right to reject is subject to section 22.

(2)The final right to reject is subject to section 24.

(3)The right to reject under section 19(6) is not limited by those sections.

(4)Each of these rights entitles the consumer to reject the goods and treat the contract as at an end, subject to subsections (20) and (21).

(5)The right is exercised if the consumer indicates to the trader that the consumer is rejecting the goods and treating the contract as at an end.

(6)The indication may be something the consumer says or does, but it must be clear enough to be understood by the trader.

(7)From the time when the right is exercised—

(a)the trader has a duty to give the consumer a refund, subject to subsection (18), and

(b)the consumer has a duty to make the goods available for collection by the trader


The short term right to reject is within 30 days and we rejected for refund one week following purchase because of the continuing discovery of faults which is unacceptable especially when being told it was a good working van with no problems except the disclosure of the wiper blade motor.

I would also like to remind you that your vehicle is parked on our property since ownership reverted to you when we rejected the vehicle 26 November 2016, and that as soon as we are in receipt of cleared funds we will require you to remove it.

Please let me know your decision as soon as possible, ideally within 7 days please, because if you are still saying no for refund then we need to be in contact to complete the directions questionnaire for the Fast Track Claims which is to be submitted to the Court Centre no later than 21 April 2017.

I trust you can appreciate where we are coming from and understand that we cannot accept a fix and the only route is refund.

I will look forward to hearing from you shortly.

[des8]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Sorry about the delay... I had writen a response, got interrupted and when I came back found computer frozen.Needless to say my post disappeared...Will rewrite and post later

- - - Updated - - -

I would be a lot briefer.
To open discussions with this man just postpones the inevitable
Thus:
I confirm our recorded telephone conversation of 27 March 2017.

I would remind you that you sold the vehicle and there was no mention of a third party at the time of sale. You are solely responsible for the vehicle sale.

You commented that the many faults on the vehicle could be fixed easily.
Firstly this begs the question why did you not fix the faults prior to sale?
You are admitting you sold goods which were not of a satisfactory quality contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015

However independent engineers have also confirmed there are major concerns with the engine and turbo.

You have suggested selling the vehicle on my behalf, and making good any shortfall yourself.
I have no intention of letting you attempt to sell an unsatisfactory vehicle on my behalf, and have no confidence that you would keep your word.

I am not qualified to comment on any legal advice you claim to have received, and anecdotal reports about others court cases have no impact on this particular case.

Following our conversation I confirm that I require a full refund as per my claim.
However I am willing to go to mediation with you to resolve this dispute so as to avoid court.
Costs of mediationto be met equally.
Please bear in mind that should we win in court we will be seeking to claim all losses including court fees and interest and costs.

I would also like to remind you that your vehicle is parked on our property since ownership reverted to you when we rejected the vehicle 26 November 2016, and that as soon as we are in receipt of cleared funds we will require you to remove it.

Please let me know your decision within 7 days, because if you are still refusing a refund or mediation we need to be in contact to complete the directions questionnaire for the Fast Track Claims which is to be submitted to the Court Centre no later than 21 April 2017.

yours etc.

There really is no need to quote CRA in full as it is mentioned in the claim

Anyone else want to comment?

- - - Updated - - -

[fandabby]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Many thanks Des, and don't you just hate computers when they do that.....

Sorry about the delay... I had writen a response, got interrupted and when I came back found computer frozen.Needless to say my post disappeared...Will rewrite and post later

- - - Updated - - -

I would be a lot briefer.
To open discussions with this man just postpones the inevitable

Thus:

I confirm our recorded telephone conversation of 27 March 2017.
So I leave out the full transcript?

I would remind you that you sold the vehicle and there was no mention of a third party at the time of sale. You are solely responsible for the vehicle sale.
I won't be able to say here no mention of third party at time of sale as he said in the beginning he sold the van to his friend in the summer but was selling it again now. My OH and I questionned that on the day and asked who was infact selling the vehicle him (the trader) or his friend and he said he was selling it through his garage. He also had from his Ebay account a classified ad in the November when we bought the van which I have printed too, does not mention third party in advert but he did mention it when I telephoned to enquire about the van and we discussed it at length at his garage on the day as we did not want a private sale and he said he was the one selling it. Although previous owner was initially there at the garage, he left after a while and we continued dealing with the trader, it was the trader who answered most of our questions and I paid money into the traders account and it was the trader who got the van ready for sale and handled all the V5 documentation in his office. When we had an early conversation with him about refund we reminded him he was the one who sold us the van and whom we paid therefore responsibility lies with him. All communication has always been through the trader

So would I change it to " I would remind you that you sold the vehicle. You are solely responsible for the vehicle sale. "

You commented that the many faults on the vehicle could be fixed easily.
Firstly this begs the question why did you not fix the faults prior to sale?
You are admitting you sold goods which were not of a satisfactory quality contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015

However independent engineers have also confirmed there are major concerns with the engine and turbo.

You have suggested selling the vehicle on my behalf, and making good any shortfall yourself.
I have no intention of letting you attempt to sell an unsatisfactory vehicle on my behalf, and have no confidence that you would keep your word.

I am not qualified to comment on any legal advice you claim to have received, and anecdotal reports about others court cases have no impact on this particular case.

Following our conversation I confirm that I require a full refund as per my claim.
However I am willing to go to mediation with you to resolve this dispute so as to avoid court.
Costs of mediation to be met equally.
Please bear in mind that should we win in court we will be seeking to claim all losses including court fees and interest and costs.

I would also like to remind you that your vehicle is parked on our property since ownership reverted to you when we rejected the vehicle 26 November 2016, and that as soon as we are in receipt of cleared funds we will require you to remove it.

Please let me know your decision within 7 days, because if you are still refusing a refund or mediation we need to be in contact to complete the directions questionnaire for the Fast Track Claims which is to be submitted to the Court Centre no later than 21 April 2017.

yours etc.

There really is no need to quote CRA in full as it is mentioned in the claim

Anyone else want to comment?

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks Des. Appreciate your input.

[des8]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Many thanks Des, and don't you just hate computers when they do that.....





Thanks Des. Appreciate your input.

Yes.. amend as suggested.
IMO theres no point in sending him a transcript of the 'phone call.

[fandabby]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

Yes.. amend as suggested.
IMO theres no point in sending him a transcript of the 'phone call.

Thanks des8.

Do you think him selling for his friend has a negative impact in this? I think not because he said he was the one selling it, advertised on Ebay as a classified ad and we paid him not his friend and was all handled at his garage/yard. Just wandered how this might stir things up if in court.

I will get this letter off signed for today.

Thanks again for all your continued advice.

[des8]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

He sold it, you paid him..... his responsibility

[fandabby]

Re: Court Claim issued, Storm Doris now damaged van UPDATE

He sold it, you paid him..... his responsibility

That was our view too. Letter gone now. The 7 day wait begins.

I plan to go back to the body shop place tomorrow and ask them to put an estimate together for putting on a bumper, wing and paint. Get prepared for the next step incase he does refund me and collects vehicle and threatens to take me to court. But then he should have collected vehicle last year when I first rejected so I should not have to suffer this as well. I will also get police to send me a copy of the incident report to have proof date of bumper going missing.

Thanks des8.