Car is a right off - still have 4years to pay......help me get out of it please.

Aspiring

aj2703 wrote: »

- - - - - - The only reason he made that statement is because he is thinks that if he actually claimed the lights wern't working he'd get laughed out of court. Can you not see that..?.

And also take a look at the VERY FIRST line the OP wrote...

"Please some helpful advice."

- - - - - -
Aspiring i have no gripe with you but you say i am rude..?. I think it's more rude to not even read someone's comments and give advice based on what was actually written.

Re: point 1. yes, of course, I can see that. But, who is to prove that the fault with the lights was evident when the driver took the bus out? A fuse can blow at any time. The lights may have been checked at the beginning of the drivers "shift" and have been found to be working perfectly. If a fault developed during the course of the journey (which could happen to anyone ) then, as long as the driver/company can affirm that the vehicle was checked and deemed road worthy at the outset, then yes, of course the OP will have one heck of a job to disprove this.

Re: point 2. I most certainly did read the "VERY FIRST line the OP wrote" asking for helpful advice. Some people have given helpful advice, maybe not what the OP wished to hear, but helpful advice, nonetheless. Some have clarified the terms of the OP's agreement which means that he will be liable for the debt no matter what.

Of course, some have given their opinion (sarcastic or otherwise) which is not helpful but nonetheless valid (in terms of "that's life" )

The reason I called you rude (and I'm sure you read my post as intently as the OP's and know precisely why) is because of the generalisations you made to ALL who have posted.

you lot seriously need to READ and take in what has been said. There you all go as usual putting the person down - - - - - DID ANY OF YOU CTUALLY READ THEIR !!!!!!!G POSTS...?

I do agree with you that some people have posted off the cuff remarks, some sarcastic and shouldn't even be given the courtesy of a reply, let alone acknowledgement. So: ignore those.

Yours, I could not ignore because you incorporated my own post (and those who were helpful in clarifying the situation, if perhaps somewhat blunt) alongside the "you lot"s, the "you all" and the "any of you's".

aj2703

gomer wrote: »

Not until all the valid factors have been established, no.

LOL.. OK look i'm not gonna argue anymore, i'll just say that when i give advice i will base it on what the OP has asked. I don't judge people or question what they say, i only give advice on what question has been asked.:D

CHR15

So despite all the moral crusaders who want to cuddle everyone.... most people seem to be singing off the same hymn sheet.

The OP overstretched himself with the car finance
The OP cut corners with insurance
The OP has not learned to drive safely (this isn't the first infraction)
The OP needs to pay up
The OP should get a cheap runabout

We can all flower it up and give hugs and cuddles but ultimately, the OP has (hopefully) learned a valuable lesson and apart from one or two posters, we all think he needs to accept the consequences.

Having said that, even the people supporting the OP are ultimately saying the same thing as those "saying it like it is", the OP needs to continue payments.

Aspiring

aj2703 wrote: »

LOL.. OK look i'm not gonna argue anymore, i'll just say that when i give advice i will base it on what the OP has asked. I don't judge people or question what they say, i only give advice on what question has been asked.:D

So do some others, aj

Not everyone is sarcastic/judgemental: that was my point

cyril82

aj2703 wrote: »

I TOTALLY AGREE. !!!!!! you lot seriously need to READ and take in what has been said. There you all go as usual putting the person down saying they should have got this and should have got that etc. DID ANY OF YOU CTUALLY READ THEIR !!!!!!!G POSTS...?.

To the origional OP. You said you ran into the back of the bus (yes i actualy read what you said) the reason you hit the bus was because the break lights wern't working you have said. Now at the scene did you tell the police this..?. This maybe your saving grace because even though you hit the bus, if the bus was defective i.e no break lights then it shouldn't have been on the road in the first place let alone carrying passengers (if there were any on that is). If you can prove this then you maybe able to sue for the cost of your car. See a solicitor or cab quick sharp and see what advice they give. If the bus genuinely had defective lights then push that point.

who exactly are you addressing when you say you lot? i certainly read the op's first post and think my reply was very helpfull.

Aspiring

CHR15 wrote: »

- - - -- - - even the people supporting the OP are ultimately saying the same thing as those "saying it like it is", the OP needs to continue payments.

Yuppers, that does appear to be the bottom line

Of course, he could neglect to continue payment - - - - - but that wouldn't be helpful advice: if he chose that route, he'd be in an even bigger pile of do-do's

Aspiring

cyril82 wrote: »

who exactly are you addressing when you say you lot? i certainly read the op's first post and think my reply was very helpfull.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

gomer

aj2703 wrote: »

LOL.. OK look i'm not gonna argue anymore, i'll just say that when i give advice i will base it on what the OP has asked. I don't judge people or question what they say, i only give advice on what question has been asked.:D

So even when being asked for advice on how to help someone get out of having to pay back a large sum of money, you don't think it's important to question anything we are being told?

aj2703

cyril82 wrote: »

who exactly are you addressing when you say you lot? i certainly read the op's first post and think my reply was very helpfull.

I am sorry i can't even see your earlier post, my first post is number 30 your post number is..?

real1314

Didn't the OP specifically state that the bus was not stationary?

In which case, unless we are talking about an accident that occurred during the hours of darkness, why would the bus have any lights on?
You don't need brakes to slow down, you just take your foot off the accelerator. No lights come on. But the driver behind should still maintain an appropriate distance.