VT Damage Charges

[Kevbev]

Good evening

I hope I’m doing this right

A brief description of my dilemma

I started a VT on my Citreon car about two moths ago, The process was pretty simple. The inspector came out and did his inspection, He struggled to find any faults with the car at all and commented on it’s immaculate condition apart from the 4 scuffed alloy wheels, after about 20 minutes on his 2nd or 3rd time round the car covering every angle he noticed that my car has had the back wheel arch re sprayed, I honestly struggled to see the colour difference it was so slight, now I know for a fact that I’ve never had a bump or anything in the car for me to have it resprayed. He said for me to dispute the charges and to say the alloy wheels were like that when I bought the car.
I wrote a brief letter disputing the £278 charges ( £40 ish per alloy ) and £114 for the wheel arch.
I told them the car is in amazing condition for its age 2014 and that I was 10,000 miles under the agreed mileage which would add value to the vehicle and only had 2 more months to go on the car, I mentioned both the inspector and the pick up guy were both iimpressed by the clean condition of the car.
Today I had a phonecall, asking for the full amount unless I can prove the damage was there when I bought the vehicle.
I told them that there is no way I can provide photographic evidence from 4 years ago, they said to ask the garage where I bought the car, I replied that the garage wouldn’t keep photos of every part of a vehicle, they said that unless I can provide evidence that the damage was there when I bought the vehicle within 7 days then I am liable to pay the full amount. I asked isn’t the onus on them to prove it wasnt resprayed etc .They replied that it isn’t and I need to prove that the car was resprayed before I bought it.
I will admit the damage to the alloys is down to me, but not the respray.
What can I do if anything to reduce the charges if anything.

Thanks in advance for any help

Kev

[pt2537]

Good evening

I hope I’m doing this right

A brief description of my dilemma

I started a VT on my Citreon car about two moths ago, The process was pretty simple. The inspector came out and did his inspection, He struggled to find any faults with the car at all and commented on it’s immaculate condition apart from the 4 scuffed alloy wheels, after about 20 minutes on his 2nd or 3rd time round the car covering every angle he noticed that my car has had the back wheel arch re sprayed, I honestly struggled to see the colour difference it was so slight, now I know for a fact that I’ve never had a bump or anything in the car for me to have it resprayed. He said for me to dispute the charges and to say the alloy wheels were like that when I bought the car.
I wrote a brief letter disputing the £278 charges ( £40 ish per alloy ) and £114 for the wheel arch.
I told them the car is in amazing condition for its age 2014 and that I was 10,000 miles under the agreed mileage which would add value to the vehicle and only had 2 more months to go on the car, I mentioned both the inspector and the pick up guy were both iimpressed by the clean condition of the car.
Today I had a phonecall, asking for the full amount unless I can prove the damage was there when I bought the vehicle.
I told them that there is no way I can provide photographic evidence from 4 years ago, they said to ask the garage where I bought the car, I replied that the garage wouldn’t keep photos of every part of a vehicle, they said that unless I can provide evidence that the damage was there when I bought the vehicle within 7 days then I am liable to pay the full amount. I asked isn’t the onus on them to prove it wasnt resprayed etc .They replied that it isn’t and I need to prove that the car was resprayed before I bought it.
I will admit the damage to the alloys is down to me, but not the respray.
What can I do if anything to reduce the charges if anything.

Thanks in advance for any help

Kev

Hi

You have a duty to take reasonable care of the vehicle, that doesnt mean keeping it wrapped up in cotton wool and not using it, cars will get scuffs, was the car new? Were the scuffs there when you brought it? or were they general wear and tear?

It seems to me that the lender is in difficulty with its claims

[R0b]

The onus is not on you to prove, it's their car and they are claiming the damage was caused whilst in your possession so they have to show on the evidence that you damaged the vehicle or failed to take reasonable care.

In the Court of Appeal case Brady v St Margaret's Trust, the following was said about the contractual clause to keep the car in good order, repair and condition which I think sums up the position:

I would like to say that it is not right to assess damages under this head on the basis suggested to us by Mr. Harris, namely, that you are to take the initial price as evidence of the condition of the car. The price in these hire-purchase agreements is no guide to the condition of a car.

There should be evidence by the hire-purchase company to show the condition of the goods at the time the agreement was made and to show how far the hirer has defaulted under it. As I read this clause, the hirer's duty is to keep the car in the condition in which it might reasonably be expected to be if he had looked after it properly. He need not put it in a better condition than it was when he hired it. He need only keep it in the condition in which a reasonably minded hirer would keep it.

Thus he would repair it if there was an accident, and he would do the immediate repairs in the course of running the car, but no more. The hire-purchase company should give evidence of any default on his part in that duty.

Although this case was based on "good order, repair and condition" you should be aware that your duty under the CCA is to take reasonable care and that bar is not a very high one. The above is a good useful starting point when looking at what duty you have in taking care of the car.

[Kevbev]

Vt damage charges
@rob
pt2537

Thanks for getting back to me.

I bought the car from Motorpoint and was financed by Close Brothers on the Boomerang scheme. I decided to Vt the car 3 months before it was due to end.I handed the car back with 10,000 miles spare which they don’t seem to care about as in the value it would add to the car. I will admit to bumping the alloys once or twice over the 4 years I owned the vehicle but was advised by the person who came to inspect the vehicle to say the damage was already there when I purchased the car. I had no idea about the respray I was the second owner before me it was owned by Avis Rent a car so I’m guessing the damage occurred there. It had 14000 miles when I purchased the car and was just over a year old . Is it better for me to offer a gesture of good will payment and pay half or still deny I damaged the alloys Evan though the front ones were pretty bad. I just don’t want to be charged for the respray which was a very good job in my opinion as I never noticed it until it was pointed out to me. The complaints department who phoned me seemed very un apologetic and would not negotiate and just stuck to his guns that unless I provide proof by next Monday I.e photos of a respray I didn’t know existed then I would be charged the full amount.

Thanks in advance Kev