Car refund refusal

[des8]

Re: Car refund refusal

You can always send the letter by ordinary post so it doesn't stand out. If you obtain a certificate of posting to prove you have posted it, it is assumed delivery has taken place within (I think) five working days.
You can then issue your MCOL without worrying if you have complied with preaction protocols.

[eifedwards]

Re: Car refund refusal

Thanks for that. I have complied with the protocols to the letter so I better dust down my suit ready for court!
I have kept all postage receipts from recorded delivery. I assume that they count as proof of postage. Not certificates as such.

[labman]

Re: Car refund refusal

Yes they do. Certificate of posting and proof of posting are one and the same. A receipt for recorded delivery actually states the post code and the number of the business on it, so is even better.

[charitynjw]

Re: Car refund refusal

Proof of posting is proof of receipt.

Interpretation Act 1978 s7
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30/section/7

[labman]

Re: Car refund refusal

Proof of posting is proof of receipt.

Interpretation Act 1978 s7
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30/section/7

Absolutely right - my poor wording. What I meant was it can be quite comforting for the OP to say this was signed for by Labman on dd/mm/yyyy. Many choose this over the basic legal requirement of proof of posting.

[ploddertom]

Re: Car refund refusal

Not wanting to put any spokes into this but I always thought the trader had to be offered the chance to put things right first eg a repair to the gearbox. Otherwise it may be seen you are jumping the gun. Now I'm not trying to defend anyone but first thing I do when picking up a new car is to head to the nearest filling station, I assume either the fuel guage didn't work or the bulb is blown on a low fuel light - mine gives an indication of how much further I can travel. As for the cambelt issue is the dealer a VW agent or just a car sales forecourt in which case he may have not known himself - I agree he should take the time to find this out but he may have been informed the work had been done. Not quite cut & dried I think.

[des8]

Re: Car refund refusal

Agree, trader must be given chance to put things right.
However he is not even accepting letters from OP, so what else can OP do?

Regarding preaction protocols Annex A, OP has complied by sending letter.
However letter has not been delivered as not accepted by addressee. The Interpretation act says,and this is in regard to papers which must be served, "that service is deemed to be effected...{by post}..... unless the contrary is proved". If delivery of a recorded letter is refused the documents have not been served.
For years it has been my practice not to accept recorded letters unless I know who they are from... saves nastier than normal surprises!

[labman]

Re: Car refund refusal

Have a read here:

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/faq/consumer-rights/

:beagle:

[eifedwards]

Re: Car refund refusal

If I ended up with a fully serviceable trustworthy car at the end of the repair then that would be acceptable. However, the car ran out of diesel in less than 2 miles of leaving the dealership after they had assured me that there was plenty left in it to get to the nearest garage! Due to this coupled with the fact that I was misled about the cambelt being overdue I have no faith in the dealership at all so therefore would not trust any repairs they claim to carry out.
I agree it isnt cut and dried and as yet undecided whether I will go to court. On balance I probably will as it will only cost me £210 I believe. I have complied with the protocols so shouldnt be liable for their costs if I lose.
The honest John link above has made me think though. Is it generally accepted by court then that the dealer should have been given the chance to repair the nail, ahem, car? If that is the precedent that has been set and courts slavishly follow it then I am stuck am I not? I thought my interpretation of the sale of goods act was correct and that I am allowed to go straight for rejection and refund.
Dont worry about putting any spokes in - the more info I get the better. I would prefer a spread of opinion anyway.

[eifedwards]

Re: Car refund refusal

One more question. The honest john link states that I have to return the car to the dealers with all paperwork and keys etc in order to reject it. If it is undriveable though does that mean I would have to fork out for transport etc?

[eifedwards]

Re: Car refund refusal

Does that mean if the letters are sent back to me unsigned for then I have not complied with the Practice Direction??!!
How does anyone take a car dealer to court then?

Agree, trader must be given chance to put things right.
However he is not even accepting letters from OP, so what else can OP do?

Regarding preaction protocols Annex A, OP has complied by sending letter.
However letter has not been delivered as not accepted by addressee. The Interpretation act says,and this is in regard to papers which must be served, "that service is deemed to be effected...{by post}..... unless the contrary is proved". If delivery of a recorded letter is refused the documents have not been served.
For years it has been my practice not to accept recorded letters unless I know who they are from... saves nastier than normal surprises!

[labman]

Re: Car refund refusal

Are you in RAC / AA / Green Flag? It could be taken to the dealers by them possibly.

[eifedwards]

Re: Car refund refusal

The scenario would pan out like this I am guessing. I take the car to the dealers using the AA (I am a member). I reject the car and hand the keys back. They refuse to accept. I go home with the car!
But, I suppose it would be an example of trying to reject the car in the courts eyes?
Is this something that a judge would have expected me to try?

[charitynjw]

Re: Car refund refusal

Absolutely right - my poor wording. What I meant was it can be quite comforting for the OP to say this was signed for by Labman on dd/mm/yyyy. Many choose this over the basic legal requirement of proof of posting.

If it was signed for by labman, the court might consider Transportation! :tung:

(You know I'm only kidding, Labman )

[labman]

Re: Car refund refusal

If it was signed for by labman, the court might consider Transportation! :tung:

(You know I'm only kidding, Labman )

Australia? T'would do! Say I signed for it.