Tweet
Looking for a bit of advice here about the best way to move forward.
Purchased a car from Arnold Clark back in 2015.
Due to a change in circumstances I began looking at what I would need to pay to bring me under the voluntary termination threshold and hand the car back, however upon speaking to the finance company I was informed that I was actually sold a Fixed Sum Loan Agreement and not PCP as I had originally thought.
I don't think I can argue with the finance company, as at the end of the day they have my signature on an agreement, but I feel I should be able to argue the point with Arnold Clark. I have the original front page of the agreement, stating manufacturer PCP, giving a breakdown of payments etc. The agreement we have is financially identical but with the consumer protections removed.
I have already taken this up with Arnold Clark, as well as the Financial Ombudsman. According the FOB, Arnold Clark have claimed that because we borrowed more than the value of the car, which as far as I can see is only because a 3 year service plan was tacked into the agreement, that we would not have been eligible for a PCP loan and therefore they have not miss sold.
As it stands the FOB is inclined to side with Arnold Clark unless I can provide further information.
I don't really know how to continue. As far as I'm concerned they have miss sold or at least misrepresented the deal, explaining everything in the original agreement, and at the last second having us sign something almost identical but the added protections striped out.
To use the example I put in my complaint, it's like showing someone a standard car, but trying to sell them the same model with airbags removed, at the same price. Assuming they don't get into a crash, the two cars are functionally identical, but if you properly explain no sane person would pay the same amount for a lesser deal.
Purchased a car from Arnold Clark back in 2015.
Due to a change in circumstances I began looking at what I would need to pay to bring me under the voluntary termination threshold and hand the car back, however upon speaking to the finance company I was informed that I was actually sold a Fixed Sum Loan Agreement and not PCP as I had originally thought.
I don't think I can argue with the finance company, as at the end of the day they have my signature on an agreement, but I feel I should be able to argue the point with Arnold Clark. I have the original front page of the agreement, stating manufacturer PCP, giving a breakdown of payments etc. The agreement we have is financially identical but with the consumer protections removed.
I have already taken this up with Arnold Clark, as well as the Financial Ombudsman. According the FOB, Arnold Clark have claimed that because we borrowed more than the value of the car, which as far as I can see is only because a 3 year service plan was tacked into the agreement, that we would not have been eligible for a PCP loan and therefore they have not miss sold.
As it stands the FOB is inclined to side with Arnold Clark unless I can provide further information.
I don't really know how to continue. As far as I'm concerned they have miss sold or at least misrepresented the deal, explaining everything in the original agreement, and at the last second having us sign something almost identical but the added protections striped out.
To use the example I put in my complaint, it's like showing someone a standard car, but trying to sell them the same model with airbags removed, at the same price. Assuming they don't get into a crash, the two cars are functionally identical, but if you properly explain no sane person would pay the same amount for a lesser deal.
Comment