Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • P2P
    • By P2P 6th Feb 18, 3:25 AM
    • 11Posts
    • 0Thanks
    P2P
    Car Sales - Fraud
    • #1
    • 6th Feb 18, 3:25 AM
    Car Sales - Fraud 6th Feb 18 at 3:25 AM
    Hi

    I m looking for some advise.

    I have raised a MCOL to request a car firm returns a deposit on a car i was going to buy but they are refusing. Basically the car needed some jobs doing before i was prepared to buy it and left a deposit on the basis this work would be done but it wasn't.

    From their website i have taken the address details and raised a small claim to get my money back and they haven't responded within the time frames allowed, so i have requested judgement.

    Having now checked the companies address this is in fact different to where the car was seen and so i checked the details of their vat reg number and FCA. The vat and companies house details are somewhere completely different but the FCA registered address is the same as the car viewing address.

    Can the small claim be re-directed to the car viewing and FCA registered address to ensure notice is served on the business that they owe this money as currently the companies website address which is who i raised the claim with does not exist!!

    Any help would be appreciated.
Page 1
    • Johno100
    • By Johno100 6th Feb 18, 5:01 AM
    • 3,503 Posts
    • 3,929 Thanks
    Johno100
    • #2
    • 6th Feb 18, 5:01 AM
    • #2
    • 6th Feb 18, 5:01 AM
    Not unusual for the Registered Office of a company to be different to its trading address,

    Not quite clear how many different addresses you have got and you haven't told us if you got a receipt (and how much the deposit was?) and if so which address appears on there?
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 6th Feb 18, 8:40 AM
    • 16,368 Posts
    • 14,663 Thanks
    AdrianC
    • #3
    • 6th Feb 18, 8:40 AM
    • #3
    • 6th Feb 18, 8:40 AM
    Limited companies very often use a different address for their registered office - I've always used my accountant's address in the past.

    The important factor is not so much the address at which you dealt with the supplier, but that you are pursuing the correct legal entity. You need to look at the invoice you were given for that.
    • P2P
    • By P2P 7th Feb 18, 7:38 AM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    P2P
    • #4
    • 7th Feb 18, 7:38 AM
    • #4
    • 7th Feb 18, 7:38 AM
    Yes I have a receipt and the address shown on the receipt is the addressed used to file via MCOL.

    The amount is £1500:00 so within the small claims threshold
    • wgl2014
    • By wgl2014 7th Feb 18, 8:12 AM
    • 533 Posts
    • 328 Thanks
    wgl2014
    • #5
    • 7th Feb 18, 8:12 AM
    • #5
    • 7th Feb 18, 8:12 AM
    Out of interest was there a stipulated timeframe for the repairs to be completed?
    • Johno100
    • By Johno100 7th Feb 18, 8:21 AM
    • 3,503 Posts
    • 3,929 Thanks
    Johno100
    • #6
    • 7th Feb 18, 8:21 AM
    • #6
    • 7th Feb 18, 8:21 AM
    Yes I have a receipt and the address shown on the receipt is the addressed used to file via MCOL.

    The amount is £1500:00 so within the small claims threshold
    Originally posted by P2P
    In that case I wouldn't get to hung up on all those other addresses, if they can't make sure all their paperwork is in order and haven't got re-directs in place then that is their look-out if you get a default judgment against them.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 7th Feb 18, 8:23 AM
    • 2,631 Posts
    • 1,684 Thanks
    Car 54
    • #7
    • 7th Feb 18, 8:23 AM
    • #7
    • 7th Feb 18, 8:23 AM
    The thread title is "Car Sales - Fraud" but the OP is a simple question about an address.

    The only fraud appears to be in the misleading title.
    • worried jim
    • By worried jim 7th Feb 18, 9:04 AM
    • 8,935 Posts
    • 13,718 Thanks
    worried jim
    • #8
    • 7th Feb 18, 9:04 AM
    • #8
    • 7th Feb 18, 9:04 AM
    The thread title is "Car Sales - Fraud" but the OP is a simple question about an address.

    The only fraud appears to be in the misleading title.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    and also their grammar since they want advice.
    "Only two things are infinite-the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not so sure about the universe"
    Albert Einstein
    • weejangus
    • By weejangus 7th Feb 18, 9:52 AM
    • 110 Posts
    • 86 Thanks
    weejangus
    • #9
    • 7th Feb 18, 9:52 AM
    • #9
    • 7th Feb 18, 9:52 AM
    The thread title is "Car Sales - Fraud" but the OP is a simple question about an address.

    The only fraud appears to be in the misleading title.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    and also their grammar since they want advice.
    Originally posted by worried jim
    Well done guys. I guess the "Newbie" alert wasn't enough to put you off having a dig at the OP for no real reason. Sure, his title wasn't up to your standard and, yes, there was a spelling mistake - so lets not bother giving him any useful advice but instead we can make a fool out of him.

    I'll remember not to give you guys any advice in the future either. Oh, and you better not make any rookie spelling mistakes because I'll be all over that.

    OP - I hope you stick around despite a couple of the "less than helpful" members. As others have mentioned, you have nothing to worry about regarding the listed address. As long as you have your receipt and the claim has been logged at that address, you should be okay.
    • debtdebt
    • By debtdebt 7th Feb 18, 9:55 AM
    • 425 Posts
    • 280 Thanks
    debtdebt
    It's not fraud. You should have done your due diligence before issuing the claim, not after.

    To change the address of the Defendant so that it is properly served on the right address you need to make an application to the Court on Form N244. Cost is £255 but that is probably beyond your means both financially and mentally.

    An easier route would be just to re issue.
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 7th Feb 18, 10:17 AM
    • 926 Posts
    • 682 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    Well done guys. I guess the "Newbie" alert wasn't enough to put you off having a dig at the OP for no real reason. Sure, his title wasn't up to your standard and, yes, there was a spelling mistake - so lets not bother giving him any useful advice but instead we can make a fool out of him.

    I'll remember not to give you guys any advice in the future either. Oh, and you better not make any rookie spelling mistakes because I'll be all over that.

    OP - I hope you stick around despite a couple of the "less than helpful" members. As others have mentioned, you have nothing to worry about regarding the listed address. As long as you have your receipt and the claim has been logged at that address, you should be okay.
    Originally posted by weejangus
    Other than being the self appointed forum police, do you have anything useful to add?
    • worried jim
    • By worried jim 7th Feb 18, 11:00 AM
    • 8,935 Posts
    • 13,718 Thanks
    worried jim
    Well done guys. I guess the "Newbie" alert wasn't enough to put you off having a dig at the OP for no real reason. Sure, his title wasn't up to your standard and, yes, there was a spelling mistake - so lets not bother giving him any useful advice but instead we can make a fool out of him.

    I'll remember not to give you guys any advice in the future either. Oh, and you better not make any rookie spelling mistakes because I'll be all over that.

    OP - I hope you stick around despite a couple of the "less than helpful" members. As others have mentioned, you have nothing to worry about regarding the listed address. As long as you have your receipt and the claim has been logged at that address, you should be okay.
    Originally posted by weejangus
    If errors arenít raised how can people learn?
    "Only two things are infinite-the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not so sure about the universe"
    Albert Einstein
    • George Michael
    • By George Michael 7th Feb 18, 12:19 PM
    • 2,956 Posts
    • 3,997 Thanks
    George Michael
    It's not fraud.
    Originally posted by debtdebt

    The title to this thread is "car sales-fraud"
    The seller of the car took a deposit for a vehicle and stated that certain work would be carried out before the car was collected and paid for in full.
    This work wasn't carried out and as it appears to be the case that the seller isn't refunding the deposit then I see it as a clear case of fraud.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 7th Feb 18, 12:50 PM
    • 2,631 Posts
    • 1,684 Thanks
    Car 54
    The title to this thread is "car sales-fraud"
    The seller of the car took a deposit for a vehicle and stated that certain work would be carried out before the car was collected and paid for in full.
    This work wasn't carried out and as it appears to be the case that the seller isn't refunding the deposit then I see it as a clear case of fraud.
    Originally posted by George Michael
    First, the title is misleading. The OP is asking about an address, not the alleged fraud.

    Second, it is not a "clear case" of fraud. There is a world of difference between a breach of contract, which this seems to be, and the crime of fraud. Even the BOC is not a "clear case",unless the OP has written evidence which he hasn't mentioned.
    • weejangus
    • By weejangus 7th Feb 18, 1:42 PM
    • 110 Posts
    • 86 Thanks
    weejangus
    Other than being the self appointed forum police, do you have anything useful to add?
    Originally posted by AndyMc.....
    I believe my post did address the OP and reiterated the useful advice he had already received. Not policing anything however the two posts in question were clearly not called for. The forum is here to help people, not ridicule them. If long standing members treat new members like that, those new members won't hang around for long.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 7th Feb 18, 1:55 PM
    • 2,631 Posts
    • 1,684 Thanks
    Car 54
    I believe my post did address the OP and reiterated the useful advice he had already received. Not policing anything however the two posts in question were clearly not called for. The forum is here to help people, not ridicule them. If long standing members treat new members like that, those new members won't hang around for long.
    Originally posted by weejangus
    Can you point out which part of my post ridiculed the OP?

    Luckily, in this case the OP has received helpful advice, but the chances of that happening are greatly increased if the thread title is descriptive of the actual problem.
    • weejangus
    • By weejangus 7th Feb 18, 1:57 PM
    • 110 Posts
    • 86 Thanks
    weejangus
    If errors aren't raised how can people learn?
    Originally posted by worried jim
    Depends on how far you want to take it. Personally, I wouldn't bother raising errors if someone has just made a simple mistake or typo. As long as the meaning isn't lost (as was the case here).

    For example, your statement should have a comma part way through in order for it to be grammatically correct. "If errors aren't raised, how can people learn?".

    If we all start doing that, most posts on this forum would be to correct others mistakes.

    The OP is a new member and I feel that we should be welcoming them to the forum, not driving them away.

    Just my opinion.
    • weejangus
    • By weejangus 7th Feb 18, 2:07 PM
    • 110 Posts
    • 86 Thanks
    weejangus
    Can you point out which part of my post ridiculed the OP?

    Luckily, in this case the OP has received helpful advice, but the chances of that happening are greatly increased if the thread title is descriptive of the actual problem.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    "The only fraud appears to be in the misleading title"

    So you genuinely think that the OP was acting fraudulently when he / she gave the thread it's title? It may not be 100% in line with the advice they were looking for, however, it's not inaccurate and certainly not fraudulent.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 7th Feb 18, 2:17 PM
    • 2,631 Posts
    • 1,684 Thanks
    Car 54
    "The only fraud appears to be in the misleading title"

    So you genuinely think that the OP was acting fraudulently when he / she gave the thread it's title? It may not be 100% in line with the advice they were looking for, however, it's not inaccurate and certainly not fraudulent.
    Originally posted by weejangus
    OK. My fault for not including a smiley to identify what I thought was obviously tongue-in-cheek.

    I agree it's not fraudulent, but it's certainly inaccurate: the question is nothing to do with fraud.
    • weejangus
    • By weejangus 7th Feb 18, 2:34 PM
    • 110 Posts
    • 86 Thanks
    weejangus
    OK. My fault for not including a smiley to identify what I thought was obviously tongue-in-cheek.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    You know something, a smiley would've completely changed the way I read your comment. I apologise for misinterpreting what you said. Initially, I thought it was sarcasm at the OP's expense which is why I reacted the way I did - a similar thing happened to me on my first post (along with the usual "You're a newbie therefore must be Dark Matter"). It almost put me off returning.

    Both yourself and Jim are well established forum members and your comments within the forum are usually very helpful and well meaning. Thanks for clearing that up, I can enjoy the forum again!
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,607Posts Today

8,265Users online

Martin's Twitter