Yes it's The Car

Options
24567…15

Comments

  • wealdroam
    wealdroam Posts: 19,181 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    edited 15 March 2017 at 7:54PM
    Options
    mc303 wrote: »
    i should add, the CC turned me down, i went to FO on the basis that i was treated unfairly, the FO turned me down because,, CRA didnt come into it and the FO has no jurisdiction regarding car dealers, or words to that effect, they are saying the CC company treated me fairly because the dealer offered a repair, but i had already taken the vehicle back to the dealer 3 times? anyone?
    Thank you

    N.B FO are saying my case is against the CC for being unfairly treated, FO says CC has done nothing wrong conducting their decision?
    Quite simply, if you have a claim under The CRA against the car seller, then you have exactly the same claim against the credit supplier.

    That's what Section 75 of The Consumer Credit Act effectively says.

    Your last sentence above is a little confusing.
    I thought 'CC' meant credit card company, but perhaps not.
    Did you use a credit card to pay any part of the purchase price?
  • unholyangel
    unholyangel Posts: 16,863 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Options
    Are you definitely sure they were dealing with it as a section 75 claim and not a chargeback?

    If so, I would include (when appealing the FOS decision) that under section 75 of the consumer credit act, if the debtor has a claim against the supplier then he shall have a like claim against the creditor. You have a claim for a full refund against the supplier under consumer rights act therefore you have a claim for a full refund against the creditor.
    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride
  • naedanger
    naedanger Posts: 3,102 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    edited 15 March 2017 at 7:59PM
    Options
    mc303 wrote: »
    i should add, the CC turned me down, i went to FO on the basis that i was treated unfairly, the FO turned me down because,, CRA didnt come into it and the FO has no legislation regarding car dealers, or words to that effect, they are saying the CC company treated me fairly because the dealer offered a repair, but i had already taken the vehicle back to the dealer 3 times? anyone?
    Thank you

    N.B FO are saying my case is against the CC for being unfairly treated, FO says CC has done nothing wrong conducting their decision?

    I cannot understand CC or FO reasoning without seeing the detail of what they are saying. Did you pay at least something on a credit card?

    Did you make clear you complaint was that the credit card company is treating you unfairly by failing to accept that it is jointly liable (under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974) for the breach of contract by the trader.

    The trader breached the contract when they failed to provide a full refund as required under section 24(5)(a) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. That section requires a trader to offer a refund if their attempt at a repair or replacement is unsuccessful. In your case they had [x] unsuccessful attempts.

    As the trader will not provide the refund the cc company are legally obliged to do so. {in my view}
  • naedanger
    naedanger Posts: 3,102 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    unholyangel wrote: »
    Are you definitely sure they were dealing with it as a section 75 claim and not a chargeback?

    To the op: the above would explain the cc and FO response.
  • mc303
    mc303 Posts: 166 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    this is exatcly what i thought regarding the claim, there was a confusion in the begin about a chargeback because the CC did refund but later reversed the decision after the dealer defended the claim,
    i was just listening to the playback of the decision and the case worker clearly states that the CRA does not come into it, they believe because the dealer has offered a repair this is the best outcome the CC can offer???

    is it possible to upload the final decline telephone conversation i had today with FO?
  • naedanger
    naedanger Posts: 3,102 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    mc303 wrote: »
    this is exatcly what i thought regarding the claim, there was a confusion in the begin about a chargeback because the CC did refund but later reversed the decision after the dealer defended the claim,
    i was just listening to the playback of the decision and the case worker clearly states that the CRA does not come into it, they believe because the dealer has offered a repair this is the best outcome the CC can offer???

    is it possible to upload the final decline telephone conversation i had today with FO?

    I would respond along the following lines:

    I am unwilling to accept your decision therefore please ensure my case is escalated to a Financial Ombudsman. Your proposal that I offer the dealer yet another opportunity to fix the car gives me no confidence the matter will be resolved as I have, as you know, already given them [x ]previous attempts.

    I do not understand how you can conclude [name of cc company] are treating me fairly when they are failing to accept that they are jointly liable (under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974) for the breach of contract by the trader.

    The trader breached the contract when they failed to provide a full refund as required under section 24(5)(a) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015. That section legally requires a trader to offer a refund if their attempt at a repair or replacement is unsuccessful. In my case I have already given them x attempts all of which were unsuccessful and so I am now legally entitled to a full refund.

    As the trader will not provide the refund the cc company are legally obliged to do so.
  • mc303
    mc303 Posts: 166 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    i'm only allowed one PM every 60 mins lol, can you pm your email? only if this is allowed i would like you to read their decision
  • steampowered
    steampowered Posts: 6,176 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    Did you tell the TFO that you had been back for a repair 3 times and rejected the goods?

    Normally the Financial Ombudsman invites your comments on its proposed decision and allow you to appeal up the decision up to an Ombudsman if you are not happy?

    By the way, FOS decisions are public (http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/) so there are no issues giving us a link to the decision in your case.
  • mc303
    mc303 Posts: 166 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    yes told the FO i took the car back 3 times, dealer would not accept fault, dealer repaired other faults with the car would not accept the fault i was suggesting, i even got a report from the main dealer which cost £80 , they confirmed the fault, the FO said there was a new MOT on the car ?? yes i think i should up appeal the decision to the Ombudsman
  • waamo
    waamo Posts: 10,298 Forumite
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper
    Options
    What is the fault?
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 248K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards