Tri Party contracts/advice needed.

[des8]

On the basis of what you have posted i would say you have a good chance of winning your claim

How long did you allow them to reply before initiating court action, and when will the period expire?

[steveeasy]

Hi Des8,
well I have only just sent a letter before action on the 25th January and given them 14 days to respond. Ive sent a copy today. I have not done anything more as yet. I was confussed over who was liable but your guidance made it clear both parties are equally responsible. I used the AA mediation as I believed it would support my case which I think it does. Its highlighted the dealer is prepared (we say be confuused!!) to first say no warranty with the vehicle, then say there was warranty but limited to 3000 miles. he states he has terminated it now as ive tampered with car and driven it for 600 miles with the oil light on. Given he wont even consider looking at it and has no evidence ive so much as opened the bonnet, his comments are baseless.
Ive shown I have tried to use mediation. he initially refused to take part. when it finished I asked to give him a final opportunity to inspect the car. I was happy for it to be repaired and simply asked for written information over warranty. finance company I get nowhere with.

This was the finance companies instructions to the engineer to guide him on the inspection. what do you think?

Ive copied it here in full. that is it word for word. clearly hes copied what the dealer said.

Exhaust cut then an insert fitted due to a flexible pipe being too short. (poor repair). Water hose had broken at some point. A piece of pipe had been fitted and cable ties used to hold it engine running and rattling can be heard. The oil light came on and the customer continued to drive it 3-4 days after it had illuminated after they said they wouldn’t. Dealer believes things have been tampered with

When I contacted the finance company over the inaccurate report they told me to go to them direct. the inspection company stated they were acting for the finance company. they did however add the additional change to the report. copied below. The finance company issued a final response stating the fault was not present at time of purchase.

The conditions listed on the instructions we believe came from the client and were the ones under review and this accounts for it coming from the RC1 section of the report, which is from the information provided. With regards to O3 of the report the water hose had been replaced when I inspected the vehicle yes. I did see a video of water pouring out of the hose this could have possibly have been when the engine was damaged as the coolant would rapidly become depleted and engine overheating was very likely.

The conditions sometimes are very hard to identify as they differ from the normal way that overheating develops on an engine, which usually is progressive rapid loss of coolant and often becomes apparent on the gauge, in the gauge reading and incorrect engine temperature often cold, which sometimes confuses the operator in believing that the engine is running at a lesser temperature than would normally be expected.

Although because the engine coolant is depleted rapidly the engine internal core temperature rises rapidly leading to the consequential damage. However, at this stage the internal condition of the engine has not been confirmed by dismantling.

The date on the report was the date given to me on the instructions. It appears that the client is suggesting if it failed on the 19 December 2022 not the 21 November 2022, however this makes no difference to the findings identified at the time of our inspection. The only effect it may have is it may be either further or closer to the end of the warranty provided.

Steveeasy

PS
Just a thought. would it be useful to suggest professional mediation with finance company?. might be helpful and show a judge I am trying to avoid court action.



Steveeasy

[steveeasy]

Hi,
JUst frustrates me so much this. I purchased the car with a very bodged exhaust with an old pipe inserted to extend the length to facilitate a extension to be fitted. then either a bodged coolant hose was already fitted, or to remove the catalytic converter the hose had to be removed. either it was broken or it was refitted like such. How a professional examiner can conclude the above could have caused the failure but they were not faulty at time of purchase.

Then the dealer to a professional mediator states the car was purchased with no warranty. then changes it to it was sold with warranty but( thats another matter.

Extract from mediation below

The ACE report confirmed there was no liability on their dealership as to the engine seizing. Mark also confirmed that there was definitely no warranty with this vehicle.

Complaint handler called customer - Advised customer that the dealer states that the customer purchase a warranty product and it was a return to base warranty included in with the price of his vehicle and the dealer felt there was negligence on the customers behalf so he retracted the warranty. Customer says the dealer has dismissed the amended report which states that the engine damage could have been caused by the coolant pipe not being fitted to a satisfactory standard. It was confirmed to the customer that the first mediation call made to the dealer, he stated there was no warranty taken out and on another email later that the dealer had retracted the warranty due to negligence

Ive no idea why I am giving this so much thought. Its just im doing little about it.

So my first step is to ensure my right to return is carried out.

If this fails I should be able to recover the cost of repair from the dealership unless he could proove a level of negligence. hes claiming the driver continued to drive for 600 miles with the oil light on. 3-4 days. and tampered with the car.

Steveeasy

[des8]

Suggest you start drafting your Particulars of claim, and also your witness statement

Probably worth naming Dealer and finance company as jointly liable defendants

[steveeasy]

Suggest you start drafting your Particulars of claim, and also your witness statement

Probably worth naming Dealer and finance company as jointly liable defendants

Hi Des8,
Yes I will do. Am I right in thinking my claim is focused on enforcing my rights under the consumer act which I notified both parties on the 18th November 2022. Highlighting how the finance company did not respond nor did the dealer.
The Reason for rejecting the car was having given the dealer two attempts resolve the bodged repairs they refused to adress the engine rattle and refused to provide details of warranty. Therefore I wrote to the dealer and finance company. they ignored all my correspondence. When the engine subsequently failed the finance company took no notice of the earlier matters that were evident at time of purchase.

Thank you
Steveeasy

[des8]

Your claim is for breach of contract.
Your contract includes implied terms as set out in CRA 2015
One of those terms (goods to be of satisfactory quality) appears to have been breached in that the goods were not satisfactory

The defendants have rejected your notice of rejection or failed to bring the vehicle to a satisfactory condition

[steveeasy]

Your claim is for breach of contract.
Your contract includes implied terms as set out in CRA 2015
One of those terms (goods to be of satisfactory quality) appears to have been breached in that the goods were not satisfactory

The defendants have rejected your notice of rejection or failed to bring the vehicle to a satisfactory condition

Hi Des8,
Thanks for clarifying it for me. the witness statement ?. is that my account of the above.

Thanks
steveeasy

[des8]

The witness statement is your account of what has happened.
There are examples in the SHORT CUTS panel on the right of this page

If this is your first foray into court you might find these links helpful:
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/...+web+FINAL.pdf
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/..._in_Person.pdf

[steveeasy]

Hi Des8.
I’ve managed to get legal response from dealer. I’ll remove details then post it. Pretty much telling me it’s nothing to do with dealer and I suspect the usual threat if I say anything about his business he will sue. Not that I have.
steveeasy

[steveeasy]

I thought I’d share this which is quite amusing. The law firm that wrote to me representing the dealer has a website. It’s a dealer association support thing. Anyway the text below was on the home page offering support to thier members. How ironic

irstly, there is no legal requirement to provide a warranty. In most cases, a consumer will have the protection of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and any warranty given will only be in addition to those rights.

Most issues arise when the dealer has given a warranty either verbally or by writing something on an invoice, but has not provided any terms.

The lack of terms not only means the dealer has breached the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 but also means the dealer has gifted the consumer a great opportunity to get money from said dealer to which the customer would not otherwise be entitled.

To clarify, dealers do not have to offer a warranty. But if they do, they must provide full terms, so everyone is clear as to what is and, often more importantly, what is not covered.

[des8]

That sounds like our old friends "Lawgistics"

[steveeasy]

That is correct. They described my car as well used. Id interprete that to be some rusty wreck ready for the scrap yard. The reality it looks like new inside and out..
it did not break down initially thru mechanical fault but by poor bodged maintenance repair. There is a difference.
steveeasy

[des8]

Even a well used car has to be satisfactory i.e. in the words of CRA 2015: 9 (2)
"The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of—..."

[steveeasy]

Hi Des8,
Thanks for the above. been waiting for a response from finance company nothing. Ive added letter from dealers solicitor below. If I can ask a couple of questions please.
The car was sold to the finance company. they rent it to me. Section 35 sets out I pursue the finance company for breach of contract. and my right to reject the vehicle regarding the initial faults. After giving the garage 2 attempts and 15 days in the garage. I wrote to both finance comany and garage stating I was returning the car and for the garage to refund the money. these requests were just ignored. then the engine failed that they focus on a month later. thats why they say the fault was not present at time of purchase.

The matter of warranty. Should have been a back up to repair the car. the garage clearly breached 2015 consumer rights here . but was it provided to me or the finance company. the finance company are not interested in the warranty at all.

Is there a risk of nameing both finance company and dealer as defendants or a procedure issue. how can Ilegally deal with the warranty matter?. I ask as I am going to prepare the final notice of intended action this week with a final 14 days.

Many Thanks
steveeasy





Dear Mrxxxxxxxxxxx Our Client: we xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxwrite to you on behalf of the above-named client in response to your letter dated 26 January 2023. First, we note on 6 October 2022 our client sold a Ford Fiesta motor vehicle, registration number GF65 SJO (the ‘vehicle’) txxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxfinance for the price of £4,995.00 and for the onwards supply to you under a separate regulated finance agreement. At the time of supply, the vehicle was 7 years old and had an odometer reading of approximately 95,570 miles. Patently the vehicle was well used at the time of sale and the issue of satisfactory quality must be viewed in such context. We are privy to the events that have arisen post-sale, which we do not intend to rehearse at this juncture. We understand the vehicle broke down on or around 16 December 2022 and as such, you seek to reject the vehicle. As you are already aware, the finance company instructed an independent expert to inspect the vehicle. The inspection was carried out on 29 December 2022. The report confirmed that the oil warning light was illuminated, the engine was knocking and rattling. The engine will need stripping and further investigation works to find the cause of this issue. The report concluded that based on the mileage covered since sale, the faults would not have been present at the time of sale and as such, the selling agent is not responsible for assisting with rectifying the faults. We understand the finance company have already informed you that they would not be accepting your rejection of the vehicle and likewise, our client will not be accepting your rejection of the vehicle. We remind you that your contract is with the finance company. Therefore, should you wish to escalate your complaint, then it would be as well that you raise issue with the finance company and not our client. Finally, whilst we trust this action will not be necessary, we put you on notice that if any defamatory, derogatory or offensive comments or statements are made against our client’s company then appropriate action will be taken through the High Court. We trust this clarifies our client’s position on the matter.

[des8]

Section 75 of CCA 1974 clearly states "[the debtor] shall have a like claim against the creditor, who, with the supplier, shall accordingly be jointly and severally liable to the debtor."

This means you may claim against both of them (jointly liable) or either of them (severally liable)
They are both equally and wholly liable for the complete deal, ie including the warranty debacle

I thought you had already sent LBAs to trader and finance house, so why send another?