VT with FCA Automotive - damage charges

[KTMAC94]

Hi all/R0B I hear you are the man with the plan round here!

I've lurked in these threads for a while to help me get to grips with VTing my fiancé's car. As in so many of the threads on here, things have gone sour the minute that we disputed their fees and charges after the car was handed back.

Relevant info: the car was purchased 2nd hand at the start of 2016 and appeared to have been previously owned by a company, we were not made aware of that by the dealership only happened to notice it on the v5 a long time later. The car was first registered in May 2015.

The car was handed back at the start of August. We drove it to the auction house (Manheim) as requested and watched the inspection take place. After all was done, the condition report was signed to say that we did NOT agree with the condition. There is a hole in the drivers side carpet which was not caused by us and the dealership threw in some rubber mats to cover it and my other half wasn't too bothered about it as he would never see it. There were also various small scuffs and scratches on the car which were on the report, along with the sill plate on the drivers side being scratched.

A few weeks later, with no contact regarding us disagreeing with the condition report, FCA sent an invoice for all of the above damages and excess mileage fees coming in at almost £1100 (including over £400 for a holey carpet which is ludicrous).

After having done some digging on here I wrote to them and advised that they need to prove that we caused the damage and that the onus is on them to show that the car was returned in any worse state than we received it in (I included the court case often mentioned on here). I also advised them that the car was second hand when it came to be in our possession and had also previously been a company or hire car and it is well known that company and hire cars are not as well looked after as their privately owned counterparts. I also added in that they are not entitled to record anything other than a VT marker against the credit file. We offered as full and final settlement £330 which consisted of excess mileage fees and the cost of the valet on the invoice as the seats were undeniably in need of shampoo.

3 weeks passed, taking us to the start of September and out of the blue an email was received with an amended invoice attached. Their "findings" removed just over £200 of the damage charges (a small dent and a small scratch) and completely ignored the content of the letter that had been sent to them. This seemed to be to be a cynical attempt to get us to pay up and shut up "oh I'll knock a couple of quid off and see if that will do". I immediately replied and referred them back to the original letter which they had ignored every last sentence of and advised once again that the only thing we will be paying is the excess mileage fees and the valet (£330).

That now brings us to today, almost 4 weeks since the last email was sent to them. An email came in asking us for an appraisal document from the dealership to prove that the car was damaged (almost 4 years ago!) when it was purchased and proof that the car was second hand when it was purchased.

I'm getting really frustrated now, the DVLA will not give us ownership information as we don't have reasonable cause and the dealership don't have a clue what I am talking about. They also have once again conveniently ignored the fact that the onus is on THEM to prove that the car was damaged by us.

Do you have any advice on what I can do now? Are they only doing this because they are clutching at straws? Am I going to have to admit defeat and pay up because I don't have any evidence? Help!

[R0b]

The only real litiguous player at the moment is Mercedes and that's mainly in relation to excess mileage. I believe there's one or two others who have tried their hand but have either lost or withdrawn at a later stage.

I am not aware of FCA issuing legal proceedings in any circumstances but that's not to say they haven't. You don't have to pay anything unless a court orders you to pay up or like you say, you admit defeat and pay FCA.

You are right that it is up to FCA to prove that the damage was caused whilst in your possession, otherwise that will put FCa in a better position that they were at the start of the contract and that is not allowed.

The old adage, he who claims must prove still rings true - the burden of proof is on FCA not you, to show its condition at the time of entering the contract. FCA are trying to push that onus on to you but if they tried to rely on that in court, their case would be dismissed immediately.

Surely the dealership paperwork and/or the HP agreement should have the necessary information for them to know how old the car is at the time of purchase?

I suggest you kickstart a formal complaint to FCA. Ishould expect them to reject your complaint which means you can then take it to the Financial Ombudsman.

I don't know how old the car is but if it helps, you might want to read this recent decision from the Ombudsman that should assist.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org....DRN5042101.pdf

[KTMAC94]

Thank you very much for a speedy and helpful reply. At the time of handing the car back it was 4 and a bit years old so nowhere near as old as the car in the FOS case but some of the same points still stand - we didn't cause the damage and they have no proof that we did. We have also offered to pay for the valet that needs done as well as the excess mileage charges. We genuinely just could not be bothered with a long drawn out process over the mileage fees and for the sake of £280 thought we might as well just save ourselves the hassle.

I had very naively hoped that with legal precedent etc being laid down in front of them that this would have been a much quicker process but they clearly just don't give a stuff and I shudder to think how many people don't have access to the amazing resources on this site and just roll over and pay them. It's all very cloak and dagger and predatory. They literally rely on people being uninformed to get away with this.

The car was just under a year old when we got it in January 2016 and we didn't know any better about ex company vehicles - just that the carpet was damaged but it wasn't a big deal to us as the car and monthly payments were reasonably priced and it could be easily covered to prevent it worsening. We never went into this with the intention of VTing.

I am fairly certain that the agreement paperwork does state that it was a second hand purchase - I'll double check when at home and then tell them to actually look at the agreement if it is the case.

I think I will have one more stab at them by referring them to the court case once again as well as the FOS decision and if that yields nothing then I will proceed to formal complaint and FOS if necessary. Our case now seems to be with an end of contract "specialist" which is a title we haven't come across yet. We don't want this to drag on forever but neither are we willing to give in to their nonsense. The big concern right now is ensuring that they continue to stay away from the credit file while this is ongoing as we plan to buy our first house in the next few months!

I will update when I hear back from them which, at the current rate of their replies, will probably be in about a month.

[R0b]

In either case, you should make a formal complaint so you can then follow it up with the FOS. The majority of times, these finance companies don't uphold complaints unless their backs are against the wall and no where to go so you might stand a chance with the FOS providing you have sufficient reason and evidence.

I also came across another FOS decision partially upheld where the car was 7 years old. What's interesting is some of the comments made by the Ombudsman, in particular:

Clydesdale has assessed the damage against guidelines set by the BVRLA. But I think this guidance is intended for new cars that are returned before or at the end of their first finance agreement. I also note that they also specifically say that when the members "review deterioration to the vehicle's condition at the end of a contract or a finance agreement, the age, mileage and use of the vehicle are taken into account." So they do say the car's age and mileage needs to be taken into account. Further to this, the BVRLA has also confirmed to us that the guide is intended for cars around three years old coming to the end of their first agreement.

Whilst the car may have only been 4 years old on return and outside that 3 year period that the BVRLA uses as its baseline to assess damage, I think you have to factor in how the car was used in it's first year. If the car was an ex-company car then chances are that it would have had extensive use either from a particular employee or, if used as a pool car, several employees. Nonetheless, it's not unreasonable to think that a car intended for use as a company car, is likely to have sustained more wear and tear than the ordinary public consumer.

Might be worth throwing that in too and then trying to rely on the CAP conditions instead which are more realistic.

[KTMAC94]

Thanks very much for all the info, I really appreciate it I hadn't even thought to go through FOS decisions for some inspiration. I will get on to registering a formal complaint with them and then if, as is suspected, that doesn't get us anywhere then off to the FOS it will be. I guess we are in it for the long haul.

I managed to find the order form for the car which says in big letters at the top "used vehicle sales order" although the actual agreement paperwork seems to have wandered off. I'll send them this anyway and I tried the dealership again but they have nothing because it was so long ago.

If it's helpful to the site I will update with any outcomes?