Mercedes VT completed and additional charges (Advice appreciated pls)

[DJ90]

Hey Team - Hope all is well and you have been enjoying the festivities.


I successfully completed my VT with Mercedes in August 2019. I notified them of my VT using the templates from this forum, I did not sign their form. The only thing I have signed was the return confirmation when I returned at the Mercedes dealership on their iPad. I challenged signing at the time as I could not see the report printed until I had signed it. I took photo’s prior to giving the vehicle back, so I do have my own evidence.*

Since then, I have received charges for excess mileage and damage reported. I have responded with the below text in writing. Mercedes have since responded via email again this is detailed below.*

Further to this I have recently received another letter advising this will be taken to credit management agency DLC.

I have not discussed any of the detail on the phone or in email. I would be grateful for some advice in my next response please. Ideally I would like to contest these within the limits of law and not just cave to their request. Any help or advice on this would be much appreciated.

NB: The charges they are requesting is £1,450.


=====Letter from me to Mercedes contesting charges=====

I am writing to you with reference to the above matter and your letter dated 03 December 2019. Please note that liability in relation to the alleged outstanding balance for excessive damage to the vehicle is denied.*

Thank you for sending the revised invoice and request for payment. I can confirm that this is rejected.*

The vehicle was maintained in a reasonable condition throughout the period of the agreement and therefore such damage charges you are claiming would amount to fair wear and tear; the vehicle does not need to be returned to you in any better condition other than a reasonable one.*

Photographic evidence was taken prior to the vehicle being transferred to you which clearly shows that the vehicle was in a reasonable condition. The onus is on you to prove that the alleged damage caused was more than reasonable fair wear and tear.*

Furthermore, reviewing the industry standard guidelines for ‘Industry Fair, Wear and Tear standards’ it is clear the vehicle is not in breach of this.*

I do however note that the ‘Alloy Wheel Key’ is said to be missing and on the day of returning the gentleman did say he could not see in the boot. I urge you to take another look as both Mercedes Benz or Kwik Fit have never had a problem locating this to carry out vehicle checks. If this really cannot be located, then I accept the charge to replace the ‘Alloy Wheel Key’ ONLY as quoted within the correspondence.*

Excluding the ‘Alloy Wheel Key’, other sums you allege to be owed may only be recovered by a court order only and should you wish to pursue this matter in court, your application will be defended. There is no factual, measurable evidence to suggest otherwise.*

Please confirm by return that you agree to the above and this matter is now closed.*

Yours faithfully


====Email response from Mercedes=====

Dear Mr …..,

Further to your recent email received by our offices, after looking into the damage charges raised the damage is evident and falls outside of our Vehicle Return Standards.

To ensure you were aware of the expected return condition of the vehicle, we provided a copy of our Vehicle Return Standards at the start of the agreement and these are also available to view online. We believe this provided you with ample opportunity to familiarise yourself with our fair wear and tear allowances and to have any repairs carried out at your own cost.

Regarding the cost of the damage charges raised as you receive a copy of our damage charge matrix at the start of the agreement and this is available to view online throughout the agreement we feel this this provided you with ample opportunity to familiarise yourself with the costs of any repairs that would have needed to be carried out.

Should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact one of our advisors on 0370 240 1110. Calls to our numbers starting 03 will cost no more than calling 01 and 02 numbers.

Kind regards
De-Fleet Administrator

*

[R0b]

Hi

The VT guide has been updated, I suggest you take a look and that should help you put together a response.

https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...on-your-rights

[DJ90]

Thanks Rob. My case refers to excess milage and damage changes. After reviewing the updated guide I put together a response as below.
*

The vehicle was maintained in a reasonable condition throughout the period of the agreement and therefore such damage charges you are claiming would amount to fair wear and tear; the vehicle does not need to be returned to you in any better condition other than a reasonable one. Photographic evidence was taken prior to the vehicle being transferred to you which clearly shows that the vehicle was in a reasonable condition. I am able to share these with you on request. The onus is on you to prove that the alleged damage caused was more than reasonable fair wear and tear.

Whilst the agreement may state that the vehicle is assessed according to your standards, the CCA 1974 states that I am only required to take reasonable care of the vehicle, return in a reasonable condition, and this term takes precedence. Your custom standard sets a higher standard than the reasonable care standard and according to Section 173, any contractual term that imposes additional liability whether directly or indirectly that conflicts with the CCA 1974 is deemed void.
*

On that basis I suggest that the invoice is reviewed, and adjusted to include charges that is deemed in scope supported by ‘Customer Credit Act 1974’ only.

I have had the following response, below.

*

Further to your recent email received by our offices, Whether you are returning your car at the end of your agreement or upon use of the Voluntary Termination (VT) clause, as you have not exercised your right to purchase the car, an excess mileage charge will be raised should your return mileage exceed your total mileage allowance. This obligation is set out within the first page of your agreement, under key information. The provisions of the Consumer Credit Act that cover a customer’s right to VT their agreement do permit us to include these charges when determining what is 'not reasonable' upon the cars return. It is stated in your agreement under ‘Excess Distance’; ‘If the vehicle is returned to us (whether at the end of the period hire or an earlier termination), we will calculate the total distance travelled by the vehicle whilst in your possession (the “Total Distance”)’.
*
In your agreement you are also made aware of our Vehicle Return Standards and any damage outside of these standards would be charged for.
*
Your mileage allowance has therefore been re-calculated on a pro-rata basis in line with the length of time you have had the vehicle in your possession.
*
I would also like to kindly refer you to S99 (2) Consumer Credit Act 1974 where it states:
*
‘Termination of an agreement under S (1) does not affect any liability under the agreement which has accrued before the termination.’
*
As your agreement was subject to a mileage allowance prior to termination and you have exceeded the allowance, the charge has been raised correctly and remains payable.
*
The conditions of the Consumer Credit Act do permit us to determine what is considered reasonable condition. As excess mileage has a negative effect on the value of the vehicle, this is not considered reasonable and Mercedes-Benz therefore retains the right to charge for this following the voluntary termination of an agreement.

Should I use the detail within the "Failure to take reasonable care" section of the guide to challenge the above?

Once again help is appreciated.


*

[R0b]

Standard bumpf copy and paste response from Mercedes. There was a specific response type letter for excess mileage charges on page 22 of the VT guide and would have addressed many points they are raising.

The condition of the car and its value are two separate matters. The duty is to take reasonable care of the vehicle and doesn't (in my view) extend to pure economic loss. Again I explained this is explained in the excess mileage charges section.

Ultimately it's up to you as to whether you want to play ping pong correspondence, otherwise if you are feeling up for it, invite Mercedes to commence legal proceedings and get a final determination on the matter.

[DJ90]

Thanks Rob.

Interestingly my argument was never against excess mileage it was the damage which was way more significant. They have chosen to focus on this area, not the fact I fully disputed the damage charges. Ill prepare a response and post here, if you are able to cast your eye over it that would be appreciated.

*

[R0b]

If the focus is just the condition of the car I don't think there's much more you can say above and beyond what you've already said without repeating yourself. Condition is subjective and you can of courrse point out your previous reply made no reference to excess mileage but the physical condition of the car which they've chosen to ignore and send out what appears to be a template response.

Again, its either ping pong correspndence or tell them your not engaging any further but they're more than welcome to issue proceedings, or just ignore them altogether and see what they do.

[DJ90]

Thanks Rob.

Interestingly my argument was never against excess mileage it was the damage which was way more significant. They have chosen to focus on this area, not the fact I fully disputed the damage charges. Ill prepare a response and post here, if you are able to cast your eye over it that would be appreciated.

Actually just seen the template its spot on ill utilise this. :-)

[DJ90]

Hey Rob - So I utilised the template as suggested and I have had a bizarre response with regards to the grounds of this invoice has been issued. see response below.

*

Further to your recent email received by our offices, regarding you stating you have paid more than 50% you have stated you would then not be liable for this invoice.*I can confirm the 50% refers to the finance on the vehicle and that if you have paid more than 50% of the finance on the vehicle when it is Voluntary Terminated you would then not be liable to pay the remaining finance on the vehicle.
As this invoice is for End Of Contract charges and separate from the finance on the agreement this invoice would remain payable. I can confirm your outstanding balance is £1,434.99.

So my knee jerk reaction was to respond advising that this is contrary to previous arguments where he referred to CCA 1974 etc. However now with his above argument he is saying that the agreement covered me for the finance but these charges sit outside of this agreement. I want to respond asking what agreement legally says I need to pay this "End of contract" charges if its not in the finance agreement? As their finance agreement is under pinned by the CCA 1974 and that was the only thing I signed I'm not sure what his argument is.

Am I missing something obvious here? Any guidance is appreciated. I think this will be my last response before I disengage and welcome to issue proceedings.

Help is appreciated.
*

[montyzoomer]

I've just started my MB VT journey..... does anyone have experience with MB as to how likely they are to penalise me for having ONE of the services undertaken by a non-franchise garage? I had the service carried out at Halfords with the Halfords guarantee of using "OEM or better" parts, and adhering to the manufacturer's service schedule.......

[montyzoomer]

Hey Rob - So I utilised the template as suggested and I have had a bizarre response with regards to the grounds of this invoice has been issued. see response below.

Further to your recent email received by our offices, regarding you stating you have paid more than 50% you have stated you would then not be liable for this invoice.I can confirm the 50% refers to the finance on the vehicle and that if you have paid more than 50% of the finance on the vehicle when it is Voluntary Terminated you would then not be liable to pay the remaining finance on the vehicle.
As this invoice is for End Of Contract charges and separate from the finance on the agreement this invoice would remain payable. I can confirm your outstanding balance is £1,434.99.

So my knee jerk reaction was to respond advising that this is contrary to previous arguments where he referred to CCA 1974 etc. However now with his above argument he is saying that the agreement covered me for the finance but these charges sit outside of this agreement. I want to respond asking what agreement legally says I need to pay this "End of contract" charges if its not in the finance agreement? As their finance agreement is under pinned by the CCA 1974 and that was the only thing I signed I'm not sure what his argument is.

Am I missing something obvious here? Any guidance is appreciated. I think this will be my last response before I disengage and welcome to issue proceedings.

Help is appreciated.

DJ90 - how did you get on in the end? What was the result?