** Won ** Issuing court proceedings against car dealer (Small court claims) help

[mac132]

Bit of an overview of my situation,
Recently purchased a used vehicle from a dealer (2009 Mileage: 85k) for £2600. Vehicle had a short MOT we've agreed I'll take as it is but dealer would pay for repairs and MOT if fails.
Vehicle has an independent inspection and several faults found for which the vehicle would fail. (pre-mot)
I contact the dealer - dealer says to bring the vehicle back for repairs and suggests they'll put it through an MOT.

I bring the vehicle back to the dealer, and leave it to them to take care of.
When I left I checked the MOT status and found they've put it through an MOT and vehicle only failed for minor issues , (brakes, parking brake) none of the other issues were listed.
Week later I come to collect the vehicle and question the dealer whether the faults I've listed were repaired. Dealer simply told me MOT in my area is more strict.
Within couple of days I arrange another inspection to be carried out, this time I went with a respected car dealership group that specialise in these vehicles to get a second opinion.
Turns out dealer hasn't done any repairs just simply MOT'd the vehicle as this was in their best interest.
Following faults were found: (got a full report and a video)

Rear shock absorbers (both)
Rear bump stops (both)
Nearside front (cut) Offside front and offside rear need require immediate attention
Front tyres different sizes (Illegal)
Wipers smearing (dangerous)

Wishbones front (both) although I do not have this on paper
These repairs alone would cost me excess of £600.
In current condition the vehicle is not roadworthy , unsafe and would not have passed MOT.

Of course I get in touch with the dealer and sent my 30 day rejection letter along with report & video as evidence. (had the vehicle about 3 weeks at this point)
Quoting The Consumer Rights Act 2015 and under what grounds I am rejecting the vehicle.I have also informed the dealer I will be taking legal action if I don't receive full amount within 14 days allowed.

Dealer assured me he'll be very awkward and will take his time if I decide to reject the vehicle.

This would explain why dealer (director) keeps resigning and starting new company under different name as previous companies had a lot of negative feedback.

Dealer has acknowledged my letter and stated to leave it with him. (we communicate via whatsapp)

Its also worth to mention that I've paid extra for a 6 month warranty which I never received, I messaged the dealer, couple of times message marked as read but no reply, so I assume the vehicle is not under warranty as agreed. ( I have this written on invoice vehicles comes with 6 months warranty )

I have tried to resolve this matter without going to court, it has now been over 2 weeks and had no response so I am forced to take legal action.
I am fairly familiar with MCOL but need advise with particulars of claim section.

1. Any particular format this needs to be written in ? headings , bullet points, numbered, font size. I assume this part needs to be as detailed as possible giving an overview of the situation.
2.At what point do I attach the evidence? , videos, reports , messages (does that come at later stage?)
3. I need some clarification on this " Do you want to reserve the right to claim interest under the County Court Act? If yes please select 'yes' and complete the following fields. If you wish to claim interest under any other act or agreement please select 'no' and enter the full details of your interest agreement in the box below." (Please advise what would be more beneficial in my situation)

4. Amount claimed: XX I am claiming for £2600 as this is just the value I paid for the vehicle however I'd like court fees to be included as well as £500 for the inconvenience if I do win. Does that part come in the statement or in the amount claimed ?

Advice and help is highly appreciated.

[des8]

The 14 days time limit for your refund to appear is from the time the dealer agrees you are due it..... so don't expect miracles or quick payment!

How did you pay for the vehicle Cash/credit card/finance?

It is the Limited company you are suing.

Your particulars should be on the lines of:
At the material time the defendant was XYZ co ltd
On dd.mm.2018 th399e claimant purchased a vehicle Make & model Reg No xx 00 abc from
the defendant for £2600.00
The Defendant was in breach of implied terms of contract as.
the goods were not fit for purpose,nor of satisfactory quality, and were misdescribed.
contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015
The defendant has ignored the notices of rejection
Accordingly the claimant claims
(a)the sum of £2,600.00
(b) additional costs of £XX
(c)court costs
(d) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.



All the other details come out in your witness statement later, if the claim is disputed.
You will be hard pressed to obtain "inconvenience" money, only your actual losses.
I suggest (a)*not fit for purpose" as it seems it should not be on the road.
(b) unsatisfactory is self explanatory but has to take into account price and mileage
(c) as described. Include this if it was misdescribed, either in advert or when talking to you.
You might need to obtain a written engineers report about the vehicles condition


Have you reported your concerns about the issuance of a dodgy MOT https://www.gov.uk/government/public...n-about-an-mot and
https://mattersoftesting.blog.gov.uk...s-and-vehicles

[mac132]

I'm not expecting quick refunds I am fully aware this is a lengthy process and patience is the key. The dealer won't agree as he doesn't want me to reject the vehicle. I have paid for the vehicle via debit card / transferred £2600 to his account quoting REG and vehicle. (on the statement its showing up with the dealership name)
It is a limited company I am suing.
I will post my draft particulars of claim on here taking out personal details etc. Feedback / areas to improve will be much appreciated.
How exactly do I prove what my actual losses were? My actual losses include paying for vehicle checks , petrol money (as agreed with dealer but never received) etc etc?
I am considering re-mot for additional evidence.
I have contacted DVSA which got back to me and wanted to carry out their own inspection, regretfully I have pulled out as it wasn't convenient for me and there wasn't much flexibility as these checks needed to be carried out by DVSA within 21 days of MOT.

[des8]

You can only state your losses and prove them the best way available eg bank statements, receipts etc.
if there is no proof, hope judge believes you!

[mac132]

You can only state your losses and prove them the best way available eg bank statements, receipts etc.
if there is no proof, hope judge believes you!

I have recently tried to get in touch with the dealer once again stating I will now take legal action as I haven't received a response via (text , whatsapp , email)
How much time is deemed sufficient before you can proceed with the claim ?
I have sent a formal letter via whatsapp which dealer has acknowledged and replied 3 weeks ago although it doesn't include "Letter before action" within or in the title but states actions will be taken. I am a little worried I'll need to re-send that which will add another 2 weeks. Would it also be worth sending a letter by post?

Car insurance counts towards my losses?

[des8]

Your letter, although not headed "LBA" was quite sufficient as it warned him you would initiate court action.
So if you are prepared, go ahead

Insurance costs as losses... not sure what your argument might be.
You need insurance so it is hardly a loss, though you may be able to argue that any penalties or charges for early cancellation are costs claimable

[mac132]

Your letter, although not headed "LBA" was quite sufficient as it warned him you would initiate court action.
So if you are prepared, go ahead

Insurance costs as losses... not sure what your argument might be.
You need insurance so it is hardly a loss, though you may be able to argue that any penalties or charges for early cancellation are costs claimable

Draft PoC - anything I should add / amend / remove etc?

BETWEEN:

XX (Claimant)

vs

XX (Defendant)

Ref: XX

At the material time the Defendant was XX Ltd

1. On 20 May 2018 Claimant purchased the vehicle referenced above from Defendant. On 27 May 2018 the vehicle had an independent inspection and Claimant was made aware that it was not of satisfactory quality due to the numbers of faults found.

1. Like agreed Claimant brought the vehicle to Defendant for repairs to be carried out and MOT.

1. From 2 June 2018 to 9 June 2018 vehicle was in Defendant’s possession to carry out repairs and MOT. Defendant has failed to repair and replace the defects listed despite agreement.

1. As of 18 June 2018 Claimant had another inspection carried out by XX. They have listed the faults as follows:

• Rear shock absorbers (both)
• Rear bump stops (both)
• Nearside front (cut) Offside front and offside rear need require immediate attention
• Front tyres different sizes (Illegal)
• (video and report available)

1. Claimant is led to believe the MOT which was carried out by Defendant on 2 June 2018 was not genuine and certain faults were hidden on purpose as it was in Defendants best interest. The vehicle in current condition does not meet safety requirements and is still not deemed roadworthy, has number of significant faults, is not fit for purpose. Claimant is not satisfied with the “repairs” carried out.

1. Defendant has assured Claimant, vehicle is free of defects and safe to drive. Defendant has misdescribed the vehicle and mislead the Claimant.

1. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires dealers to supply goods of satisfactory quality. However, the vehicle is clearly not fit for purpose and not of satisfactory quality. Defendant is therefore in breach of contract.

1. Despite numerous written requests on 19 June 2018, the Defendant has ignored the notices of rejection and remains indebted to the Claimant.

Accordingly, the Claimant claims the sum of £2600.
Court costs of £105.
Additional costs of £XX.
Interest in accordance with section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at such rate and for such period as the court thinks fit.


(not sure why all numbers changed to 1)

[des8]

Your POC needs to be simpler,and more like that suggested in post 2.
Much of what you have written is incorporated later in your witness statement, which you will write after the defendant lodges his defence (if he defends).
The POC should be quite a bald statement

Also be careful about making allegations of dishonesty which you cannot prove. Being "led to believe" is not sufficient grounds.

[mac132]

Your POC needs to be simpler,and more like that suggested in post 2.
Much of what you have written is incorporated later in your witness statement, which you will write after the defendant lodges his defence (if he defends).
The POC should be quite a bald statement

Also be careful about making allegations of dishonesty which you cannot prove. Being "led to believe" is not sufficient grounds.

BETWEEN:

XX (Claimant)
vs
XX (Defendant)

Ref: XX

At the material time the defendant was XX Ltd

1. On 20 May 2018 Claimant purchased the vehicle referenced above from Defendant for £2600.

1. Defendant has not carried out the repairs despite agreement and therefore misled the Claimant.

1. Recent inspections revealed vehicle is still not roadworthy and illegal to drive.

1. The goods were misdescribed by Defendant, not fit for purpose, nor of satisfactory quality, contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 section.

1. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires dealers to supply goods of satisfactory quality. However, the vehicle is not fit for purpose, misdescribed and not of satisfactory quality. Defendant is therefore in breach of contract.

1. Despite numerous written requests on 19 June 2018, the Defendant has ignored the notices of rejection and remains indebted to the Claimant.

Accordingly, the Claimant claims the sum of £2600.
Court costs of £105.
Additional costs of £250.
Interest in accordance with section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at such rate and for such period as the court thinks fit.

Statement of Truth: I confirm that the contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.


Or is that still too detailed?
I've also added statement of truth.

[R0b]

In my opinion, the POC does not necessarily need to be short but concise and to the point and in sufficient detail to show a cause of action i.e. a breach of contract.

Based on your original post, there seems to be some crucial information lacking in that revised POC. How much detail your go into depends on whether you are trying to fit it into the limited character box on MCOL online (assuming you are using MCOL) or whether you are going to send a separate detailed POC (you put brief details on MCOL and then tick a box agreeing to send the detailed POC within 14 days of service of the claim form) which will allow you to incorporate the implied terms under consumer rights and other details e.g. what was agreed prior to entering into a contract, the results from the initial MOT, the second opinion etc.

I've contradicted Des somewhat (he won't mind ) but you only need to keep to the key facts of your claim and sometimes that might be more detailed than just a few lines.

Edit: I should also point out that you could argue breach of section 50 of the Consumer Rights Act

[mac132]

In my opinion, the POC does not necessarily need to be short but concise and to the point and in sufficient detail to show a cause of action i.e. a breach of contract.

Based on your original post, there seems to be some crucial information lacking in that revised POC. How much detail your go into depends on whether you are trying to fit it into the limited character box on MCOL online (assuming you are using MCOL) or whether you are going to send a separate detailed POC (you put brief details on MCOL and then tick a box agreeing to send the detailed POC within 14 days of service of the claim form) which will allow you to incorporate the implied terms under consumer rights and other details e.g. what was agreed prior to entering into a contract, the results from the initial MOT, the second opinion etc.

I've contradicted Des somewhat (he won't mind ) but you only need to keep to the key facts of your claim and sometimes that might be more detailed than just a few lines.

Edit: I should also point out that you could argue breach of section 50 of the Consumer Rights Act

Thanks for your input Rob, ill amend the revised POC. I'll see if it fix into the box on MCOL, if not ill have to send separately. What worries me about sending a more detailed POC is that defendant could argue it was never received. What does section 50 of the Consumer Rights Act refer to?

EDIT: Should I reference the faults or leave that for later stage? (witness statement)

[R0b]

The MCOL box has something like 1090 characters and you should number each paragraph in there (its a requirement but not strictly enforced) for ease of reference. As for the defendant arguing that it was never received there is the presumption that provided it is sent first class post to the defendant's registered address, then its up to the defendant to prove otherwise. If you really wanted to, you could hand deliver a copy too and take a photo of the claim form with the defendant's garage in view as evidence.

If you were to try to fit it in the MCOL claim box then you need to be really concise, something like the following:

1. The Claimant seeks damages arising out of a contract entered into between the Claimant and the Defendant on [date] in which the Claimant agreed to purchase a vehicle for the price of [amount].

2. It was a term of the contract that the Defendant agreed to carry out any repairs if the vehicle did not pass its next MOT test. Furthermore, the contract was a consumer one and sections 9 to 11 (inclusive) and section 50 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 were incorporated into the contract as implied terms.

3. On [date], the vehicle was inspected prior to its MOT identifying several faults that were likely to cause the vehicle to fail an MOT test. The Claimant returned the vehicle to the Defendant to carry out the necessary repairs and the Defendant presented the Claimant with a MOT certificate certifying the vehicle as roadworthy.

4. Suspicious of the Defendant, a further inspection was arranged and confirmed that the repairs were not carried out by the Defendant in breach of contract and resulting in loss and damage to the Claimant.

The above comes to a total of 1046 characters which should fit into the MCOL box but you can see that it doesn't give as much detail as you'd hope. Personally, I am all for sending a separate and more detailed particulars of claim because its not just about putting ensuring that the POC are sufficient with enough facts to know what case the defendant has to meet.

A well drafted POC can assist you in showing that you have a strong case against the defendant which can make it more difficult for your opponent to defend. Also, many judges in county courts don't have much time to read all of the case and evidence and will usually try to get to grips by reading the POC and defence. IF you have a strong POC the judge is likely to form some sort of opinion before he/she has even seen you (and probably questions).

That said, cases on the small claims track are intended to be more informal and straightforward so that also doesn't mean going overkill with a 20 page POC when it could probably be condensed to 3 or 4 pages with all of the correct headings, spacing etc.

Section 50 of the CRA is about pre-contractual information that is binding on the trader. So, if the trader makes a statement a service and you take that into account when entering into the contract, then unless the trader qualifies that at the same time as the statement being said, then it becoming a legally binding term. The agreement to perform repairs is a service (not goods) and so that arguably could fall within section 50 - does that make sense?

[des8]

Cheers R0b. No problems at all with the improvement

[mac132]

The MCOL box has something like 1090 characters and you should number each paragraph in there (its a requirement but not strictly enforced) for ease of reference. As for the defendant arguing that it was never received there is the presumption that provided it is sent first class post to the defendant's registered address, then its up to the defendant to prove otherwise. If you really wanted to, you could hand deliver a copy too and take a photo of the claim form with the defendant's garage in view as evidence.

If you were to try to fit it in the MCOL claim box then you need to be really concise, something like the following:



The above comes to a total of 1046 characters which should fit into the MCOL box but you can see that it doesn't give as much detail as you'd hope. Personally, I am all for sending a separate and more detailed particulars of claim because its not just about putting ensuring that the POC are sufficient with enough facts to know what case the defendant has to meet.

A well drafted POC can assist you in showing that you have a strong case against the defendant which can make it more difficult for your opponent to defend. Also, many judges in county courts don't have much time to read all of the case and evidence and will usually try to get to grips by reading the POC and defence. IF you have a strong POC the judge is likely to form some sort of opinion before he/she has even seen you (and probably questions).

That said, cases on the small claims track are intended to be more informal and straightforward so that also doesn't mean going overkill with a 20 page POC when it could probably be condensed to 3 or 4 pages with all of the correct headings, spacing etc.

Section 50 of the CRA is about pre-contractual information that is binding on the trader. So, if the trader makes a statement a service and you take that into account when entering into the contract, then unless the trader qualifies that at the same time as the statement being said, then it becoming a legally binding term. The agreement to perform repairs is a service (not goods) and so that arguably could fall within section 50 - does that make sense?

I appreciate the condensed POC you've written here. I've attempted to fit your version into the box on MCOL and only got as far as point 3 with no lines remaining. I can see why it needs to be so concise now. Indeed very little information can be submitted which means I'll be sending a more detailed POC separately via 1st class or tracked delivery.
You've mentioned claim form that needs to be sent along with the detailed POC. I assume once I've submitted my brief POC , i'll receive court papers containing relevant documents ( claim forms) which I then forward to defendant with the detailed POC, is that correct?

Section 50 of CRA - yes thanks for explanation and clarifying.

[R0b]

The Claim form does not need to be attached with the detailed POC you only need to send the detailed POC to the defendant as MCOL will send the claim form for you.

On the same page of the particulars of claim box you will see a tickbox that says "you may also send detailed particulars direct to the defendant" and when you tick this box and go on to the next stage there will be some wording automatically inserted at the end of the POC that says something like you agree to send detailed particulars of claim within 14 days after service of the claim form.

As for the brief details of the claim, you can re-use point 1 so it says something like below

1. The Claimant seeks damages arising out of a contract entered into between the Claimant and the Defendant on [date] in which the Claimant agreed to repair the vehicle in the event that it did not pass its next MOT test. Despite the Defendant producing a valid MOT certificate certifying the vehicle as being roadworthy, an independent inspection confirmed that the agreed repairs were never carried out.

That should fit into the box and assuming you ticked the detailed particulars option, the additional wording will show underneath.

When you send the POC to the defendant you need to complete a certificate of service and send it to the court which is just a tickbox exercise (click here).