Valuation of vehicles as per PCH guaranteed final value

[PChurch]

Hi,
I am in the middle of a MBFS voluntary termination of a car. The usual game is going on and no new forms signed and car sent off to auction and all well so far.

Have the usual invoice stating wheel damage and additional mileage charges however it occurs to me that any value achieved at auction at the moment should also take into consideration that Mercedes has been caught fiddling emissions and agreed a recall. Regardless of the models involved this has surely cast doubt on the value of the cars second hand values and as a result milage alone cannot be taken as the reason for a loss in value.

R0b any thoughts?

[R0b]

Hello

Any vehicle damage is subjective so you will have to make your own decision on that point but as for the excess mileage charges I am sure you've read on this forum that we reject any notion for excess mileage charges as being recoverable.

It is well accepted that vehicles sold at auction are not going to fetch the best value for the vehicle and you are likely to get more at dealerships or selling privately. You could argue that they have failed to mitigate their losses by choosing the car to be auctioned instead of attempting to achieve the best sale price.

You could argue that the emissions scandal has also jarred the reputation of VW (and others within the group) which is also perhaps the reason why the sale value may not have been as high as it expected. Anything beyond that, you would have to bring a claim or counterclaim against MBFS if you are suggesting that you were misrepresented. I'm curious if you had the car before October 2015 or after?

Ultimately, your main point should be that excess mileage charges are not recoverable under voluntary termination and you should remind them that they have tried to pursue excess mileage charges before and lost in the case of MBFS v Cahalane at Willesden County Court.

I also believe that MBFS rely on section 99(2) and say that the accrued liability does not affect termination. That's right, but Section 100 caps your liability under a voluntary termination so their argument is null and void. If you paid over 50% then you could also argue that you are due a refund of the overpayment.

You might wish to look at the link below and my post #40 as an example response to the commonly raised points by lenders on VT.

http://legalbeagles.info/forums/foru...-v-bmw-finance

[PChurch]

Thanks,
the car was bought in 2014 so as far as I can tell none of the mess with regards to vehicle emissions tampering was known. However, I was always a little suspicious as when we bought the vehicle the sales man had proffered a Brabus chip that apparently boosted performance while improving fuel efficiency. This never sounded like it was the right side of the law of physics so we took a pass. I have sent them an email quoting the points you mention. and also pointing out that they were under an obligation (Data Processing Act) to close the account in June with truthful and accurate information and pointed them to the case that stipulated the points we raised...

Will post the email trail when they have had a chance to go through their complaints process


Best regards,

P

[PChurch]

Just for update,
having gone through the usual complaints procedure with their internal team they have returned the standard nothing wrong with what we have done response inviting me to file a complaint with the FOS.

I have once again written back by email and taken each of their points and explained why they are wrong and placed the ball back in their court to invite them to withdraw their assertion that additional money is due.

The key assertions are
1) They failed to follow their own process and did not bother to inspect the vehicle in my presence despite agreeing to do so.
2) They have suddenly added a missing V5 to the bill when their own collection document shows it as present
3) The damage to the wheels was as a result of a failure of the clear coat and so would be a warranty issue and that they failed to follow BVRL process to allow me the ability to have a third party inspection of the vehicle in the case of dispute. As such noting only three areas of damage would place the car in the above average condition for its age and so negates their argument of failed to take care of the vehicle.
4) Usual additional mileage charges are a request for damages and as such not covered under the terms of a voluntary termination

Also threw in the fact that I find it disgraceful that the car engine model has since been recalled over tampering of emissions and that in all likelihood they misrepresented the technical specification of the goods that were sold to me under the contract.

Should I file a complaint with the FOS regardless or do I wait for them to come back and confirm that they refuse to budge?

thanks for the help

[PChurch]

As an update. We have been through the usual prevarication of complaints procedures within MBFS and I passed the complaint to the ombudsman a few months back. The main complaint that I levelled was that I had made MBFS aware of the fact that they have already been directed how their contract should be construed as part of the case that was lost with your help and that as a result they have failed to take that knowledge forward in the treatment of subsequent cases and knowingly misrepresented the facts.

We have received an update from the ombudsman stating that our case has now been complied with many others and that they will be looking at the matter as a whole.

Given that I more or less spoon fed them all the legal pointers that supported my complaint along with the supporting case evidence from the case that was won I think the ombudsmen is starting to shift towards the legal precedent rather than their historical stand. If this is the case then the car industry are about to have a very sad time in the coming year or so. PPI mk2

If anyone is making complaint to the ombudsmen on the matter of additional mileage charges themselves I would recommend mentioning the fact that you are aware of the wider investigation and request that your matter be added to that investigation...

[R0b]

Hello

See my last post on the thread below. You may wish to do the same thing, as the more evidence we can supply to the Ombudsman, the better chance of a positive outcome.

https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...ssues-with-bmw

[PChurch]

We have recently had a result from the Financial Ombudsman and we have Won our claim. MB removed all charges and closed the account.

[R0b]

Thanks for the update. re you able to share the particular reasons why the Ombudsman found in your favour as this will assist others on the forum.

[PChurch]

Thanks for the update. re you able to share the particular reasons why the Ombudsman found in your favour as this will assist others on the forum.

Sorry for the delay. I believe the result was part of a mass case that the Ombudsmen brought against several manufacturers for voluntary termination. I believe the snivelling little weasles from Mercedes Accepted an out of court settlement and as a result waived all charges etc. The Ombudsmen never explained what they agreed to accept.