Defence dispute

[jaguarsuk]

Re: Defence dispute

@Amethyst perhaps:

Now reproduced and marked Exhibit XX is a copy of the defence laid out in to paragraphs, I will attempt to address the issues raised individually.

@Rougeout once we have come up with the wording for this point I'll upload a final version for you to simply make the changes where the "X's" are.

[Amethyst]

Re: Defence dispute

Yeah something like that, I can't find the bit I was thinking of which is irritating - think it was off an old one of PT's defences (blatant plagurism... if I could have found it of course )

anyways.........

Now reproduced and marked Exhibit XX is a copy of the Defence, laid out as numbered paragraphs, for ease of reference in this response.

I'd say 'The Claimant has reproduced the Defence ( Exhibit X) laid out...... ', or 'I have reproduced ( Exhibit X) laid out.......... ' rather than 'Now', but that's just my preference for not sounding like you're trying too hard to sound lawyery lol. I've taken out the 'attempt' bit. I don't think you want to go into CPR'age or you just risk getting on the Judge's tits.

Just noticed this is in the guides section, so I'll shufty it down to court claims xx

[jaguarsuk]

Re: Defence dispute

Right then, here's a final version.

Good Luck and come back to give us an update when you hear back.

[Rougeout]

Re: Defence dispute

Thanks guys. Really appreaciate it

[Rougeout]

Re: Defence dispute

Right then, here's a final version.

Good Luck and come back to give us an update when you hear back.

Thanks. Thing is 11. (Paragraph 9 of the defence is denied, I evidenced with specialist reports and photographs, furthermore the Defendant identified the faults in their own inspection report one month prior to purchase)
im unsure as to whether they did know about the issues or not 1 month prior to my purchase as the inspection report i have obtained by carrying out my own research into the service history of the car after being fobbed off over the mot certificate, air con & having had an oil leak repaired by their garage was carried out by an independant garage on behalf of the previous owner but if they did know i wasnt told about it.
They fobbed me over the mot cert & my partner noticed an oil leak. I had a garage i regularly used to have visually inspect the oil leak before i got the air con re gassed, & contacted the dealer & was told to take it for their mechanic to look at which is when i mentioned the air con & got told that it was buyers responsibility so i got the air con regassed the next day. It got booked in at the dealers to repair the oil leak the next week. Which is when my partner contacted the dealers chosen repaierer who told him verbally he noticed the oil leak 2 weeks before when he did the cam belt (that i paid the dealers to get replaced before i accepted delivery of the car).
This wasnt rectified at the time the cam belt was fitted even though it had been noticed. Because of this & being fobbed off over their mot cert & air conditioning i no longer trusted the dealer or the car therefore didnt want any repairs carried out by the dealer.
Had the dealer researched the apparent excellent service history prior to re sale (it wasnt hard to do) they may have came across the inspetion findings then (not sure if they did this or not).
There was no history of cam belt change in service book, or any sort of visable sticker anywhere under the bonnet to show it had been done.
The car only came with the service book. Nothing else. No mot cert (they provided a re print of one 3 weeks after they said they'd post it to me). Other than what was in the service book, there was no more invoices to prove the cars history in any way

[Rougeout]

Re: Defence dispute

Oh and after they collected it, the same day they re advertised it as having recently been serviced (which my partner did ie replacing fuel & air filter to try to improve the car running poorly) having cam belt & water pump replaced! (That i paid for) for the exact same price i purchased it for! Therefore the dealer has profited from me replacing them items as these items should have been done at the dealers expense before i took delivery as they advertised it as having excellent history. Even brokers said its clear that they didnt check the car over at all.

[jaguarsuk]

Re: Defence dispute

Thanks. Thing is 11. (Paragraph 9 of the defence is denied, I evidenced with specialist reports and photographs, furthermore the Defendant identified the faults in their own inspection report one month prior to purchase)
im unsure as to whether they did know about the issues or not 1 month prior to my purchase as the inspection report i have obtained by carrying out my own research into the service history of the car after being fobbed off over the mot certificate, air con & having had an oil leak repaired by their garage was carried out by an independant garage on behalf of the previous owner but if they did know i wasnt told about it.
They fobbed me over the mot cert & my partner noticed an oil leak. I had a garage i regularly used to have visually inspect the oil leak before i got the air con re gassed, & contacted the dealer & was told to take it for their mechanic to look at which is when i mentioned the air con & got told that it was buyers responsibility so i got the air con regassed the next day. It got booked in at the dealers to repair the oil leak the next week. Which is when my partner contacted the dealers chosen repaierer who told him verbally he noticed the oil leak 2 weeks before when he did the cam belt (that i paid the dealers to get replaced before i accepted delivery of the car).
This wasnt rectified at the time the cam belt was fitted even though it had been noticed. Because of this & being fobbed off over their mot cert & air conditioning i no longer trusted the dealer or the car therefore didnt want any repairs carried out by the dealer.
Had the dealer researched the apparent excellent service history prior to re sale (it wasnt hard to do) they may have came across the inspetion findings then (not sure if they did this or not).
There was no history of cam belt change in service book, or any sort of visable sticker anywhere under the bonnet to show it had been done.
The car only came with the service book. Nothing else. No mot cert (they provided a re print of one 3 weeks after they said they'd post it to me). Other than what was in the service book, there was no more invoices to prove the cars history in any way

Hi, that statement is taken from point 6 of the reply you typed up in which you say "1 inspection report being produced a month prior to my purchase"

Whom was that report done by?

[Rougeout]

Re: Defence dispute

That was done by an independant garage on behalf of the previous owner.
The garage i contacted about the mot cert as they had mot'd it.
At the time they mot'd it (they passed it) they were asked to investigate issues with it by the previous owner. The hpi report the dealer provided me with wasn't even done by them either. It was done by a well known uk dealers. I presume when it was traded or whatever. I suspect the dealer i bought it from may have bought it at auction. Ie when it was traded the well known uk dealers sent it to auction because of the problems with it. (I spoke to the place the hpi report came from who said they only send cars to auction if problems with it & leave the hpi report in the car)

[jaguarsuk]

Re: Defence dispute

That was done by an independant garage on behalf of the previous owner.
The garage i contacted about the mot cert as they had mot'd it.
At the time they mot'd it (they passed it) they were asked to investigate issues with it by the previous owner. The hpi report the dealer provided me with wasn't even done by them either. It was done by a well known uk dealers. I presume when it was traded or whatever. I suspect the dealer i bought it from may have bought it at auction. Ie when it was traded the well known uk dealers sent it to auction because of the problems with it. (I spoke to the place the hpi report came from who said they only send cars to auction if problems with it & leave the hpi report in the car)

Okay, does the HPI report detail the faults?

[Rougeout]

Re: Defence dispute

No. Nothing at all. Neither did the hpi report i paid to have carried out.

The inspection report i got from the independant garage has march 3rd dated on it, where it was advised not to drive to minimise further damage, with previous keepers surname but i bought car at the back end of april. I dont know if the previous keeper handed it over when they traded it or not.
Howver when cars are auctioned they are usually checked thouroughly by the aa & a detailed inspection is produced which is made known to buyers at auction

[jaguarsuk]

Re: Defence dispute

No. Nothing at all. Neither did the hpi report i paid to have carried out.

The inspection report i got from the independant garage has march 3rd dated on it, where it was advised not to drive to minimise further damage, with previous keepers surname but i bought car at the back end of april. I dont know if the previous keeper handed it over when they traded it or not.
Howver when cars are auctioned they are usually checked thouroughly by the aa & a detailed inspection is produced which is made known to buyers at auction

Unless you have those reports from the auctioneers showing those faults they can claim they sold the car not knowing of the faults or even the advert from the auctioneers catalog saying "repairs needed" or similar. Do you have these?

It doesn't mean they are any less liable to rectify the faults, as they should have inspected the condition to ensure it reflects the condition advertised.

[jaguarsuk]

Re: Defence dispute

I'm in the pub, so can't make the changes and post the document for you, so do the following:

Change:


2 "response" to "Reply"


10 to


Paragraph 8 of the defence is admitted and it is my belief that the report by a specialist demonstrated non conformity within the 30 days. The Defendant is to be put to the strictest of proof to demonstrate conformity.




11 to


Paragraph 9 of the defence is denied, I evidenced with specialist reports and photographs.


16 to


Rejection of the vehicle was made under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 S19(3) as demonstrated in points 13 and 14 of this Reply in conjunction with S22(3).


18 to


Paragraph 12 of the defence is denied, the Defendant sold the vehicle contrary to Consumer Rights Act 2015 S9 and S11 in that the description did not match the condition of the vehicle.


20 to


Paragraph 14 of the defence is denied, pursuant to paragraphs 3 to 18 of this Reply I believe I have demonstrated the Defendants liability in that I should not have been made to pay for repairs to bring the vehicle to the standard of “Excellent” as advertised.




Delete 15

[Rougeout]

Re: Defence dispute

Unless you have those reports from the auctioneers showing those faults they can claim they sold the car not knowing of the faults or even the advert from the auctioneers catalog saying "repairs needed" or similar. Do you have these?

It doesn't mean they are any less liable to rectify the faults, as they should have inspected the condition to ensure it reflects the condition advertised.

Yeah this is why im claiming for the timing belt because had they carried out their own inspection orior to resale (which a reputable dealer would carry out some sort of inspection) they would have noticed the coolant leak then & also it not having any history as to whether timing belt had been done.
If the car didnt still have the same faults diagnosed (apart from water pump & timing belt change that i payed for) then id have got the timing belt dobe without any issues but because there was no history of it being done & based on manufacturer recommendations, the dealer should therefore have had this carried out prior to selling it as in exellant condition throughout with exerlant service
history.
The inspection report i obtained wasnt difficult to obtain. All i did was contacted the last known place it was serviced as per service book (they only did an oil change not a full service) who told me there was numerous issues with the car. Surely the poor running of the car would given them an idea that there wasn't something quite right with the car so should of carried out their own inspection.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm in the pub, so can't make the changes and post the document for you, so do the following:

Change:


2 "response" to "Reply"


10 to


Paragraph 8 of the defence is admitted and it is my belief that the report by a specialist demonstrated non conformity within the 30 days. The Defendant is to be put to the strictest of proof to demonstrate conformity.




11 to


Paragraph 9 of the defence is denied, I evidenced with specialist reports and photographs.


16 to


Rejection of the vehicle was made under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 S19(3) as demonstrated in points 13 and 14 of this Reply in conjunction with S22(3).


18 to


Paragraph 12 of the defence is denied, the Defendant sold the vehicle contrary to Consumer Rights Act 2015 S9 and S11 in that the description did not match the condition of the vehicle.


20 to


Paragraph 14 of the defence is denied, pursuant to paragraphs 3 to 18 of this Reply I believe I have demonstrated the Defendants liability in that I should not have been made to pay for repairs to bring the vehicle to the standard of “Excellent” as advertised.




Delete 15

Thats more suited. Thank you

[Rougeout]

Re: Defence dispute

Little update....
Sorry its been a little while since i began the process & accepted very good advice. I've had quite a lot going on however...
Successfully got a payout from the dealers. We had mediation & came to an agreement of them paying me £175. Was £50 less than i had originally claimed but got something back in the end. They tried it on with the mediation though. Firstly offering £30! Add insult to injury or what! Then £120 which was also rejected but sticking to my guns & letting them see i wasn't backing down they finally offered £175. Still a little out of pocket but victory & peace has been restored. Hopefully it will now send them a clear message not to take folk for fools!

Thanks guys, your advice payed off! Couldnt thank you enough!