VT direct debit

[SPG]

Hi R0b, I am submitting a VT letter and email to RCI tomorrow for my Nissan. I spoke to them yesterday and paid the final amount to get me to 50% of the total amount of the agreement. I am planning to cancel the direct debit which will be due early January. I am assuming this is the correct thing to do but haven't seen anything on any forums to confirm this action. What do you think? Cheers

[R0b]

Hello

Once notice of termination is given you are not liable to pay any more instalments so you can cancel. As my guide suggests, you are better sending notice at least by email or if you want belts and braces, you can send by post too.

Usually, I would allow 48 hours before cancelling the direct debit but its up to you, so long as notice has been validly served you can cancel it.

[SPG]

Thanks@R0B.

I have emailed and am posting today. I’ll give it a week or so as next payment not due till January.

Thanks

[SPG]

Hi R0b, had contact from the VT team today via phone. They have stated that as I hadn't signed the letter I sent them they couldn't verify it was from me!! I will be resending a signed copy tonight.
They have now started heavy tactics re excess mileage. I signed up for 8000 per year in 2016. I have presently done 29,500 ish. They tell me the mileage is pro-rata so they've worked out the mileage should now be 24000 so they reckon I owe about £600 for this issue.
They have emailed me their pack that they want me to read and sign. I told her I would not be signing anything.. Should I send it back dated and record that I decline to sign the papers?? It asks for mileage, I plan to fill this part in but no signature..
They also say that the process normally takes 2-3 weeks but with Christmas round the corner they estimate it will be in January. I informed her the vehicle won't be insured when I receive my new car but I can store it in a secure works car park..

Any advice on the above??
Cheers SPG

[SPG]

R0b they also state I will remain liable for the monthly payments until they receive the completed return slip and they terminate the agreement!!
They state to exercise my right they need me to fully complete and sign the return slip...

[R0b]

You don't need to send a signed copy, they are playing mind games. Where in the legislation does it say you need to put a wet signature to your notice of termination or any signature at all? Notice has to be in writing, not signed and in writing, just in writing. It's a bit odd how they can't verify you because you never signed the document but they were more than happy to call you to tell you they can't accept it the VT?!

If you put the vehicle in your work car park, liability rests with you until it is collected. If you are prepared to take that risk that's fine, but I would be putting the onus on them as to risk and saying that its not unreasonable for them to have you to continue looking after the car for 3-4 weeks. You could offer solutions as to dropping the car off with them paying your reasonable costs of doing so.

If they are not able to verify you and then they must have reason to believe that the notice didn't come from you. Assuming you have correctly headed the letter with your address and full name and agreement number etc. then unless they would have to prove that they reasonably did not think that the notice came from you. The fact that they contacted you to discuss it and presumably you confirmed the notice came from you, is proof that they had no suspicions other than simply being awkward.

There is no obligation for you to continue making the payments until you have completed and returned the slip. You could also argue that because RCI refused to accept the VT notice, they are in repudiatory breach which entitles you to terminate the contract and claim damages (if any). In order to treat the contract as repudiated, you would have to affirm it by giving them notice that is what you are doing. Unfortunately, I can't see any benefit of you doing this on the face of it because you've already paid one half of the total price. Reliance on a repudiatory breach might be more beneficial to someone where they have exercised the right to VT and not yet paid one half of the total price (since there is no legal obligation to pay one half before you can VT).

In addition to the above, it could also amount to an aggressive commercial practice contrary to the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations, as well as any potential breaches under CONC of the FCA rules.

Anyway, I would suggest you trigger a formal complaint setting out all of the above, I'm sure there is a couple of recent formal complaint templates floating around, but if not, have a stab at drafting something and if you need feedback post it up and I'll give any comments to it.

[SPG]

Thanks R0b I’ll keep you posted.

[SPG]

R0b Brief update re this case.. After a couple of calls from RCI they accepted my signed letter.. Since then they've emailed me to say the VT is activated and Mannheim are coming to collect the car tomorrow. I await a battle in the New Year re excess mileage and I wonder whether they will try to claim monies for damage... There is a scrape on one alloy (about 2 inches) but really nothing serious (I have photos of every bit of the car) and there are very light scratches on various bits of the car. Nothing noticeably deep and definitely nothing a car that's 2.5 years old wouldn't have during fair wear and tear.. I have taken great care of the car and washed, polished and waxed it regularly but as the settlement figure and the we buy any car estimate are about £800 apart I assume they will try what they can. Let's see..

[SPG]

R0b Car collected today. They recorded a couple of minor dents and the scrape on the alloy. I recorded that I disagreed with the recorded damage and declined to sign the record. I have a printout so let’s wait and see what happens next.

[SPG]

R0b Had a letter from RCI today.. They are requesting payment of £1088.65.. The breakdown is £425 for recorded damage and £668.25 for excess mileage... When the vehicle was collected by Manheim the guy recorded damage and gave me a breakdown on location and cost of each issue. I declined to sign the electronic record but the Manheim man advised me to record that I disagree with the findings of his report.. I have a copy of this.. I obviously do not intend to pay the excess mileage due to CCA as researched on here. What is your advice now on the letter to send? I know I need to include the excess mileage letter. My issue with the recorded damage is that the vehicle was maintained in excellent condition.. There were two very small dents that I have photos of.. One that he recorded was on the sill on the inside of the door, again v small. He found a scratch on the inside C post panel.. I would deem these to be fair wear and tear for a vehicle that has been used by a family for nearly 3 years.. What do you reckon? Cheers

[R0b]

Your situation isnt any different to the many hundreds on this forum, the damage costs are subjective sononlynyou can decide what you are prepared to accept and reject.

Have you compared the damage against the CAP vehicle conditions and where does it sit? If you haven't done that then I would suggest that's your starting point to argue those costs. If therIs anything you are prepared to pay as a compromise then make it clear what you agree with and what isnt agreed.

[SPG]

Hi R0b further to the last post I sent a letter to RCI pointing out the charges for excess mileage are not enforceable and I wouldn't be paying it. I also stated that I felt the recorded damage was fair wear and tear for the age of vehicle and the fact I had maintained it to an excellent standard I also would not pay that. I received the below response via email this weekend....

I have read through your letter and can advise unfortunately as this is in your signed agreement, the charge is enforceable. The agreement advises of the annual mileage, pence per mile and also states if the vehicle is returned early it will be calculated on a pro rata basis. As this charge is contractual it will stand.

With regards to the damage, images are taken of the vehicle when collected and anything deemed outside the fair wear and tear standards are charged for. We follow standards set out by the BVRLA which you can find below under the definitions section.

I have reviewed the BVRLA and it does state they should give evidence/photos and a breakdown of the costs for the damage. I am thinking of replying to request both.. The email does not indicate a what next so I assume they feel that's it and I should pay.. What should I do next? Cheers

[R0b]

Hi SPG,

Not sure of the contents of your response to RCI but assuming you made the relevant references to the CCA, the County Court case etc. then their short paragraph does not actually deal with the issues raised. What does make it clear is that they are claiming that the charge is a contractual one and that it stands. Of course we know that any contractual charge is subject to the limited liability of s.100 so they aren't going to go anywhere with that argument. How you want to approach the next steps for this is up to you, either pay up or stand your ground.

In terms of the BVRLA damage argument, I've added some supplementary information to the VT Guide (Click Here) which gives you an idea on how you should approach vehicle refurbishment charges. That should give you a starting point.

Ultimately, it's a test of nerves and whether you are prepared to argue your case or eventually give when things get touch. No shame in either option, but that's something you need to consider yourself.

[SPG]

Hi @R0b... Thanks for your advice as previous... I decided that as RCI hadn't stated why the charges were still applicable against my letter where I outlined the relevant sections of the CCA I did not respond and thought I'd await their next move. I have now received a letter stating they have previously written to me and it appears the balance is still outstanding. They give options for payment and state if I don't contact them or pay within 14 days they will pass to their debt collection agent.. I have no intention of paying the excess mileage but would make a contribution to the cost of the alleged damage. Should my next contact outline this? What usually happens if I take this action? Cheers

[R0b]

Well I think it would be sensible to do what you suggested and write back to RCI. It wouldn't hurt for you to point out that they had failed to explain why the charges are still applicable despite you pointing out that the law says they aren't. Rather they have intentionally chosen to ignore your request for an explanation.

If you want to offer a payment of the costs but not the excess mileage then I think you need to clearly set that out in your response. I would offer a suggestion that you are prepared to pay X in relation to the alleged costs on the basis that it is (1) without admission of guilt and (2) in full and final settlement of any claims by RCI in respect of the agreement.

if that's your final position, you could also point out that you object to RCI passing your details to their nominated debt collection agency because your stance will not change, and any repeated persistence from the debt collection agency or RCI would constitute harassment, of which you reserve the right to pursue legal action.

Happy to look over any response if you post a draft up on here.