Tweet
Hi,
i have exercised my right to volumtary terminate my agreement for my vehicle. I have paid over 50% of the agreement. They have charged me for damage to the vehicle and excess mileage of £2000.
The original agreement was for 6000 miles a year and we returned it with 57000 after 35 months.
I disputed the excess mileage and they have stated that it’s because I have not taken ‘reasonable care’ of the car.
This is the main part of my response:
I do not consider the mileage limitation to be fair and reasonable. You state that mileage limitation is a measure of what is ‘reasonable care’ of a car. There is also no definition of what constitutes ‘Reasonable Care’. Section 6 of your PCP Agreement terms and conditions clearly state what Care of the Vehicle means, and this does not include any mileage limitation. In addition, my previous vehicle, purchased through PSA, was handed back to the garage with mileage of 65,000 yet nothing was stated to me when handing the vehicle over, yet I was given further finance through PSA to purchase another vehicle. This is irresponsible.
In paragraph 6 of your letter you state that the response form included with the VT letter, mentioned that I may have to pay an additional sum for any excess mileage charge, and you assumed that I was aware of the VT implications, however I was under duress as I could not terminate my contract without signing this form.
With regards to Section 100(4) of the CCA 1974, the duty is to take reasonable care of the vehicle and to avoid any negligent act or omission that causes physical damage to it whilst in my possession. I have yet to see any evidence from PSA which indicates that the excess mileage has resulted in physical damage beyond reasonable wear and tear. I would also point out that the same point was raised in the Mercedes-Benz case (see paragraph below) and failed on the basis that there was no correlation between the excess mileage and a failure to take reasonable care of the vehicle. The vehicle had a full-service agreement with the Peugeot dealership with full service history, and at no point was mileage mentioned as the cause of any physical damage.
The County Court case between Mercedes-Benz Financial Services (UK) Limited v Cahalane (Willesden County Court, 26 February 2018) District Judge Ellington (as she was then) held that excess mileage charges were not recoverable. Her reasons included, that the definition of total price excluded the recoverability of these charges, the statement “Termination: Your Rights” was explicitly clear that liability was limited and, in any event, she was bound by the Court of Appeal decision in Julian Hodge Bank v Hall [1997] EWCA Civ 1852, which established that “total price” excludes compensation and damages for breach of the agreement for the purposes of calculating the total price payable.
have I gone into too much detail? Am I making irrelevant points?
Thank you in advance
i have exercised my right to volumtary terminate my agreement for my vehicle. I have paid over 50% of the agreement. They have charged me for damage to the vehicle and excess mileage of £2000.
The original agreement was for 6000 miles a year and we returned it with 57000 after 35 months.
I disputed the excess mileage and they have stated that it’s because I have not taken ‘reasonable care’ of the car.
This is the main part of my response:
I do not consider the mileage limitation to be fair and reasonable. You state that mileage limitation is a measure of what is ‘reasonable care’ of a car. There is also no definition of what constitutes ‘Reasonable Care’. Section 6 of your PCP Agreement terms and conditions clearly state what Care of the Vehicle means, and this does not include any mileage limitation. In addition, my previous vehicle, purchased through PSA, was handed back to the garage with mileage of 65,000 yet nothing was stated to me when handing the vehicle over, yet I was given further finance through PSA to purchase another vehicle. This is irresponsible.
In paragraph 6 of your letter you state that the response form included with the VT letter, mentioned that I may have to pay an additional sum for any excess mileage charge, and you assumed that I was aware of the VT implications, however I was under duress as I could not terminate my contract without signing this form.
With regards to Section 100(4) of the CCA 1974, the duty is to take reasonable care of the vehicle and to avoid any negligent act or omission that causes physical damage to it whilst in my possession. I have yet to see any evidence from PSA which indicates that the excess mileage has resulted in physical damage beyond reasonable wear and tear. I would also point out that the same point was raised in the Mercedes-Benz case (see paragraph below) and failed on the basis that there was no correlation between the excess mileage and a failure to take reasonable care of the vehicle. The vehicle had a full-service agreement with the Peugeot dealership with full service history, and at no point was mileage mentioned as the cause of any physical damage.
The County Court case between Mercedes-Benz Financial Services (UK) Limited v Cahalane (Willesden County Court, 26 February 2018) District Judge Ellington (as she was then) held that excess mileage charges were not recoverable. Her reasons included, that the definition of total price excluded the recoverability of these charges, the statement “Termination: Your Rights” was explicitly clear that liability was limited and, in any event, she was bound by the Court of Appeal decision in Julian Hodge Bank v Hall [1997] EWCA Civ 1852, which established that “total price” excludes compensation and damages for breach of the agreement for the purposes of calculating the total price payable.
Thank you in advance
