Bought a used car which developed a fault with 6 months of purchasing. The car is 10 years old with a little over 100 000 miles on the clock. The car is now a non starter.
I got 15 months warranty with the car but no garage has been willing to carry out warranty works due to bad experience with warranty companies. Also if warranty solution is sought, its in their policy that 50% contribution for repairs would need to be made since the car is over 10 years old. Also, if I paid for repairs and claimed cost back through warranty, I would be unable to claim back VAT. So this option is not reasonable to me.
My claim is that I wasn't given full disclosure of the cars condition at the time of purchase.
It came with a valid MOT but was never given a certificate, which I understand they are not obliged to do. However the finding were never disclosed to me.
The car was claimed to have undergone PDI checks. After the fault occurred, I requested proof 3 times before eventually getting evidence of this. However, this document did not bear my signature, but had actually been forged in an attempt to deceive me, committing identity fraud.
I have made several attempts to negotiate, offering to discuss through ADR company, as well as negotiate a contribution to the repairs.
The dealer has involved a legal consultancy business that is owned by a struck off solicitor who has been prohibited from acting as legal representation. I am unsure whether the car dealership is aware of this.
There are now major ethical and integrity concerns at play throughout this dispute.
the dealer agreed to take to car back for inspection but I raised concerns of over integrity, that any determination made by the dealer would be untrustworthy due to dishonest behaviour already at play. So I asked for either a third party to do the inspection or a for the option to get a second opinion.
As of yet, I haven't paid for diagnostics. The main reason being that I believed it is up to the dealer to provide this service under the consumer rights act.
My first query relates to GDPR
Since I have not given permission to the dealer to share my details, has he breached data protection and GDPR laws? As this business is not a soliciting firm providing legal representation, it is surely therefore a 3rd party business, isn't it?
Secondly, should I make the dealership aware of this information? Out of courtesy, I feel I should share this information since we are on the cusp of court proceedings and this consultancy firm is not going to attend because this struck off solicitor is prohibited from acting as legal representation in court. So I believe the dealership is either mislead or misinformed. I have read a Google review where it has indeed happened where a company expected this ex-solicitor to turn up to court and he never did, obviously because he couldn't, so they judge decided in favour of the claimant.
It's a moral dilemma, since not reporting it could work in my favour, as its likely no one will attend court. But it might also work in my favour since I have made further attempts to resolve the matter without a judge and showed good moral fibre.
What's your opinion?
I got 15 months warranty with the car but no garage has been willing to carry out warranty works due to bad experience with warranty companies. Also if warranty solution is sought, its in their policy that 50% contribution for repairs would need to be made since the car is over 10 years old. Also, if I paid for repairs and claimed cost back through warranty, I would be unable to claim back VAT. So this option is not reasonable to me.
My claim is that I wasn't given full disclosure of the cars condition at the time of purchase.
It came with a valid MOT but was never given a certificate, which I understand they are not obliged to do. However the finding were never disclosed to me.
The car was claimed to have undergone PDI checks. After the fault occurred, I requested proof 3 times before eventually getting evidence of this. However, this document did not bear my signature, but had actually been forged in an attempt to deceive me, committing identity fraud.
I have made several attempts to negotiate, offering to discuss through ADR company, as well as negotiate a contribution to the repairs.
The dealer has involved a legal consultancy business that is owned by a struck off solicitor who has been prohibited from acting as legal representation. I am unsure whether the car dealership is aware of this.
There are now major ethical and integrity concerns at play throughout this dispute.
the dealer agreed to take to car back for inspection but I raised concerns of over integrity, that any determination made by the dealer would be untrustworthy due to dishonest behaviour already at play. So I asked for either a third party to do the inspection or a for the option to get a second opinion.
As of yet, I haven't paid for diagnostics. The main reason being that I believed it is up to the dealer to provide this service under the consumer rights act.
My first query relates to GDPR
Since I have not given permission to the dealer to share my details, has he breached data protection and GDPR laws? As this business is not a soliciting firm providing legal representation, it is surely therefore a 3rd party business, isn't it?
Secondly, should I make the dealership aware of this information? Out of courtesy, I feel I should share this information since we are on the cusp of court proceedings and this consultancy firm is not going to attend because this struck off solicitor is prohibited from acting as legal representation in court. So I believe the dealership is either mislead or misinformed. I have read a Google review where it has indeed happened where a company expected this ex-solicitor to turn up to court and he never did, obviously because he couldn't, so they judge decided in favour of the claimant.
It's a moral dilemma, since not reporting it could work in my favour, as its likely no one will attend court. But it might also work in my favour since I have made further attempts to resolve the matter without a judge and showed good moral fibre.
What's your opinion?
Comment