Cam Chain snapped on new van after 20 months / 114k miles

[Frank1]

Sorry meant to write "too late without good reason "

[Frank1]

You could write a letter to Vauxhall officially about the recall for your van. keep your letter and if they fail to reply present your letter as evidence and state you are still waiting for a response.
Parkers have published an article about the Stellantis recall for the blue 1 5 hdi (DV5) diesel engine. The combo van is listed under Vauxhall and the years are given for affected vehicles. Info about the extended warranty is also stated

[WhiteVanMan5]

The hearing on 30th March has been cancelled as I raised no objection to the application.

[Frank1]

Unless the judge ordered you to rewrite the whole of your poc, my advice (and also google) is not to.
You could write a supplementary document titled *Evidence the claimant is relying on"
Refer to and include:
Proof of payment, the invoice for van purchase
Service invoices for the van
Video of the breakdown
Your letters and/or emails to Vauxhall and the bank and their replies
The expert report and evidence of the cost of the report
Parker's publicatio regarding Stellantis recall
Your letter to Vauxhall enquiring about your van's engine and their reply will be forwarded following receipt

[Frank1]

I should have said you need to include a title page with claim details etc and a statement of truth at the end.
Send a copy to the court and the other parties.

[Frank1]

Post 214
Add evidence you have to justify the claimed loss and expense you suffered

[WhiteVanMan5]

Unless the judge ordered you to rewrite the whole of your poc, my advice (and also google) is not to.
You could write a supplementary document titled *Evidence the claimant is relying on"
Refer to and include:
Proof of payment, the invoice for van purchase
Service invoices for the van
Video of the breakdown
Your letters and/or emails to Vauxhall and the bank and their replies
The expert report and evidence of the cost of the report
Parker's publicatio regarding Stellantis recall
Your letter to Vauxhall enquiring about your van's engine and their reply will be forwarded following receipt

My understanding is that the judge wants me to rewrite the whole POC. It can be very similar I understand, just needs to ensure that all of the evidence I intend to rely on is referenced.

I had a non response from Vauxhall today. Just totally ignored what I asked. I'll reply to them and try again!

"Thank you for your message.

You asked why no recall is currently listed on your vehicle, even though it appears to fall within the affected range. I can confirm that the recall applicable to your model is the following:

**High Urea Pressure Diagnostic – Diesel Engine**

This recall must be carried out by an authorised dealership. To proceed, please contact your preferred dealership directly and arrange a repair appointment with them.

Due to GDPR policies, Customer Care is not able to book appointments on behalf of customers. However, once you contact the dealership, they will be able to schedule the repair for you.

If you need help locating your nearest dealership or require any further clarification, feel free to let us know. "

I will respond to Vauxhall now to hopefully keep things moving. However I haven't had the chance yet to deal with anything and am unlikely to until the morning.

Kinda related, but also kinda not related. I'm not sure if I've mentioned this in here yet. After the Vauxhall Combo, my distressed, urgent, purchase was to buy the same van, with a different badge. A Peugeot Partner. It also came with a 2 year unlimited mileage warranty, which in my line of work was useful. I bought it October 2023, so should have the 8mm chain instead of the defective 7mm chain. Thought I would be ok. But maybe not. On 3rd February this year, I was driving in Belgium and lost power. I got recovered by RAC, in the first instance, to a garage in Belgium. RAC coulkdn't get anyone anywhere to look at it for weeks, so they repatriated me home (if I got my van to follow they said it would take them 4 weeks to repatriate the van!). Roadside mechanic thought it was a "Manifold Pressure Sensor" - a widely available part that is a quick fix. So seemed best to just get it fixed out there. When the garage finally got round to looking at it - their tentative diagnosis was "a worn timing chain". It's not snapped, it's not damaged the engine. They wanted EUR 500 to confirm the diagnosis and then EUR 3000 to fix it if the diagnosis was confirmed. Van has about 130,000 miles on the clock and is 2 years and 4 months old, so now outside of warranty. I asked the question anyway whether it was covered by the extended warranty for the timing chain recall, expecting a clear and firm "no". They couldn't/wouldn't answer at first until I provided evidence of the recent service history. I supplied the last 3 service history receipts, all with main dealers, and roughly twice as often as their service requirements - surprised when they came back to me yesterday to say they would fund the diagnosis under warranty (and by implication I assume they will also fund the fix if that is confirmed as the problem). I wonder why they feel responsable for the Peugeot but not the Vauxhall. I presume this is not worth going into in relation to the Vauxhall Court Case?

[Frank1]

Did the judge say the defendant can respond to your amended poc with a revised defence? That would be the normal procedure.
The most important document you are relying on is the expert report. The defendant should already have a copy of this.
What evidence do you intend to refer to?
My advice is not to muddy the waters with the peugeot issue.
What are you now driving?

[WhiteVanMan5]

Did the judge say the defendant can respond to your amended poc with a revised defence? That would be the normal procedure.
The most important document you are relying on is the expert report. The defendant should already have a copy of this.
What evidence do you intend to refer to?
My advice is not to muddy the waters with the peugeot issue.
What are you now driving?

In the chat with the defence lawyer beforehand (he appeared to be constructive with me, but as a layman, it's sometimes not clear what is really going on) he said that I would probably need to redo the POC, particularly because I seemed to be relying on evidence that hadn't reached him yet from the previous lawyers (e.g. Stellantis recall and secone Expert Report) and that they would need to redo their defence. They would seek to recoup the cost from me of redoing this (but that might have been if it was on fast track). Having said that I don't remember costs for that coming up during the hearing (but I was a bit overloaded at times)

The original lawyers had both expert reports from me, however the new lawyers only had the first one (that didn't examine the vehicle). The 116 page bundle that the solicitors sent appeared to have some important ommissions, including the Stellantis recall and the second expert report.

I feel like my three primary pieces of evidence, in no particular order:
- the expert reports
- the Stellantis recall (I feel it's powerful that "Stellantis believe this latent manufacturing fault should be supported in this engine up to 150,000 miles or 10 years - well below my 114k miles and 20 months")
- the technical article from l'Argus in 2022 highlighting the exact issue 3 years before the recall from Stellantis.

I agree that bringing up the Peugeot issue isn't particularly helpful - I just wanted to feel sorry for myself and beat myself up for being stupid enough to buy another Stellantis van. The same van. The same engine

I mostly haven't been working/driving anything since 3rd February, which isn't great! Today and yesterday I managed to do a couple of deliveries to Belgium for a regular customer, in a car. Two long days (which is why I haven't given this my full focus any more. I have actually bought a new van which I collect tomorrow! No it's not a Stellantis van!!! (Renting might seem the sensible option, but it's not - insurance is a real obstacle and taking a hire vehicle out of the country is expensive. I don't get paid enough to cover those costs!)

[WhiteVanMan5]

I sent you a DM to say that if you wanted privately to see any of the evidence (e.g. Expert Reports) then I'm happy to share them with you. Not sure if you've seen the DM.

[Frank1]

All legal costs are severely limited on SMC. This applies whilst the claim remains in this track. The judge controls the evidence and will set latest dates for exchange and filing of witness statements and evidence. The time and money the solicitor spent drafting directions was wasted
You should receive court directions about the hearing you attended. They may or may not give permission for the defendant to amend their defence.
You should consider making amendments to your poc in a different colour to make it easier to see the changes. Don't forget to amend the title page and sign and date a statement of truth.
Sorry I haven't read your dm. I don't do pms. It's the experts opinion that matters, not mine.

[WhiteVanMan5]

All legal costs are severely limited on SMC. This applies whilst the claim remains in this track. The judge controls the evidence and will set latest dates for exchange and filing of witness statements and evidence. The time and money the solicitor spent drafting directions was wasted
You should receive court directions about the hearing you attended. They may or may not give permission for the defendant to amend their defence.
You should consider making amendments to your poc in a different colour to make it easier to see the changes. Don't forget to amend the title page and sign and date a statement of truth.
Sorry I haven't read your dm. I don't do pms. It's the experts opinion that matters, not mine.

Sorry, I should have said - the timetable from the draft directions was adopted.
The defence are also responsable for getting the document pack together ("as the only solicitors in the room") - rather than me, the claimant as would usually be the case.

I was told that the court that their directions about the hearing should be with me in about 10 days (I only have 14 days from the hearing to submit the POC).

Your opinion is the only one I'm getting (and I really appreciate it).

[Frank1]

The timetable for evidence in the draft directions is related to the fast track and over the top for SMC

[Frank1]

It is possible the first solicitor took advice on your second expert report, read about the Stellantis recall and decided their defence had little chance of success.
That may explain why the substitute solicitor agreed to continue the defence, unaware of the second report and recall.

[AGreen8]

Sorry, I should have said - the timetable from the draft directions was adopted.
The defence are also responsable for getting the document pack together ("as the only solicitors in the room") - rather than me, the claimant as would usually be the case.

I was told that the court that their directions about the hearing should be with me in about 10 days (I only have 14 days from the hearing to submit the POC).

Your opinion is the only one I'm getting (and I really appreciate it).

Hi, you have done the right thing for you, staying in the SMC, where costs directions cannot be made i.e. the defence cannot give you a bill of any type.
The very best of fortune with your case.