Audi Complaint, VT, Excess Mileage

[notsure]

I'm new to this site so apologies if I get etiquette wrong.

I VT'd my car last week, cancelled my DD with Audi and paid 1.5k to VT (that was my shortfall to reach 50% of credit repaid).

I signed up for a 3year lease, 10k per year but moved cities one year into the agreement. Consequently, I am 7k over on mileage. I have utilised this forum and other web research and concluded that the mileage charge cannot be enforced. Audi (unsurprisingly) completely disagree and after I complained have sent me the attached response which I have anonymised.

From my very limited legal understanding, they seem to be saying their Terms & Conditions supersede the Consumer Credit Act terms. Can someone help with a template response or legal input as I'm now nervous about not paying and landing myself in legal trouble.

Thanks in advance for all advice/help offered.

[R0b]

Hello

Standard template letter from Audi. You are correct in making the assumption that the letter suggests the terms and conditions take precedence over the CCA or that Section 99(2) allows them to recover the excess mileage. The short story is (in my view) that is not correct. You have to read the CCA provisions as a whole and not, like Audi and other financial lenders, simply focus on one section of the CCA.

The only way you would be liable for excess mileage and have no recourse or defence, is if you carried on the agreement until the end and then decided to hand the car back (and arguably if they terminated the agreement for breach or default). Therefore, strictly speaking, the excess mileage clauses are legally enforceable but only under limited circumstances.

I would suggest you read the following links so you get an understanding of how VT works and what you may be liable for. If you want to understand the reasoning and arguments behind Section 99(2) I would recommend you read in full, the court case link.

VT Guide

County Court Case - Mercedes v RachRad (Won)

[notsure]

Hello

Standard template letter from Audi. You are correct in making the assumption that the letter suggests the terms and conditions take precedence over the CCA or that Section 99(2) allows them to recover the excess mileage. The short story is (in my view) that is not correct. You have to read the CCA provisions as a whole and not, like Audi and other financial lenders, simply focus on one section of the CCA.

The only way you would be liable for excess mileage and have no recourse or defence, is if you carried on the agreement until the end and then decided to hand the car back (and arguably if they terminated the agreement for breach or default). Therefore, strictly speaking, the excess mileage clauses are legally enforceable but only under limited circumstances.

I would suggest you read the following links so you get an understanding of how VT works and what you may be liable for. If you want to understand the reasoning and arguments behind Section 99(2) I would recommend you read in full, the court case link.

VT Guide

County Court Case - Mercedes v RachRad (Won)

Thanks Rob, 2 last questions if you don't mind offering an opinion:

1 Would you recommend a strategy of ignoring letters or replying?
2 If you recommend replying, is there "mileage" (excuse the pun) in quoting the legal case that you refer to within my reply content?

Many thanks for the advice offered.

[R0b]

Sometimes a strategy of not replying might work and the matter will go away, other times it can only make matters worse. For a dispute like this, I generally respond unless there's been several correspondence back and forth and you are only going over the same ground, I would then write and tell them that you've made the position clear and no further correspondence will be entered into save for any commencement of legal proceedings.

It might also help to see that, should something like this end up in court, you have been engaging throughout rather than what might be seen as burying your head in the sand or dismissing it entirely. Equally, the lack of reply might give Audi the thinking that if you ignored the letter, chances are you might ignore legal proceedings too. Going to court should never be at the forefront of someone's mind as you are letting someone else decide your fate, so wherever possible, it's best to attempt to head of claims like this. I can't see any tactical advantage that you would have if you ignored it, but again it is your dispute so I can only provide you with an (fairly) objective view.

About the second point, it is probably worth mentioning because it will put them on notice that you are aware of a case that was won by a consumer on the same point you are arguing about. The likelihood is that they will dismiss it or acknowledge it but in the end, they will probably maintain that the excess mileage charges are still owed. County Court decisions are not binding on any other County Court judge (higher court decisions are) so they are free to depart from a case already decided if they feel it is warranted. This might happen for example, if one of the parties puts forward an alternative to the decision that the judge finds persuasive or the judge (rarely) finds that the decision is somewhat perverse or wholly wrong. Chances are, if the judgment is a reasonable one, they will generally accept that position in the absence of any other binding authorities put forward.

The OP in the Mercedes case has kindly provided me with the case number and date of the hearing so I have ordered the transcript of the judgment which I am hoping will be useful for others to use.

[notsure]

Hi All (and hopefully Rob)

Just returned from holiday to find an updated letter from Audi charging me interest on my non-payment excess mileage charge (depersonalised and uploaded). I'm getting nervous as they mentioned an impact on my credit file which I cannot afford to have. All help appreciated

[ostell]

A quick write back informing them that there is no agreement in place that can be terminated and suggest that they sort out their filing system to avoid letters like this in future.

[notsure]

A quick write back informing them that there is no agreement in place that can be terminated and suggest that they sort out their filing system to avoid letters like this in future.

Could you expand on this a little please? I'd welcome any further feedback/advice

[ostell]

They are saying that if you don't pay the arrears then they will terminate your agreement. Your agreement was terminated when you submitted your VT in May so there can be no arrears on a non existent agreement.

Also query the rising amount. Why is there any amount allegedly owed as you paid the 50% and why is it increasing?

I suspect one department has not told another that you have VT'd the agreement.

[R0b]

Sounds like an automated letter but as Ostell has said, there is clearly a number of anomalies in the letter and how can you be in arrears for a contract that has been lawfully terminated, unless of course they are suggesting it has not terminated.

Best to draft a letter of response outlining these points, but if you want any feedback on your response post it up before you send it and will provide feedback.

[notsure]

Many thanks to Rob and Ostell for the advice. I enclose draft response as suggested. All feedback appreciated.

[R0b]

Hello

I've attached a very quick marked up version of your letter, feel free to use what you want from it.

[notsure]

Many thanks to Rob and Ostell for the advice. I enclose draft response as suggested. All feedback appreciated.

Great Rob, many thanks

[notsure]

Hello

I've attached a very quick marked up version of your letter, feel free to use what you want from it.

Hi Rob

I utilised your letter in July 2018 and presumed it had done the trick as I had heard nothing until yesterday (22 months on) when I was contacted by a Debt Collection Agency (DRS, www.my-drs.co.uk) and received the enclosed letter from Audi. I'm now being advised by the debt collection agency that this could impact my credit score (which is a challenge for me due to my job). Can you offer any more updated advice or a recommended path forward.

As always, all help appreciated.

[R0b]

Debt collection agencies have no powers to put a credit marker on your file, only the creditor (in this case Audi) could do that.

You could ignore them if you want, or simply a letter to DRS saying that this has been rumbling on for 22 months now and you've made your position clear to Audi that you do not consider these charges to be legally owed by you - the fact that Audi has not commenced legal proceedings at all reinforces your point.

You can round it off by saying to DRS that your position remains the same and you will categorically not be paying the charges alleged owed. If Audi wish to recover these sums, then they need to commence proceedings, otherwise they should stop harassing you as your position has already been made clear.

Of course if you want to pay up then do so.