The Car Perry's Sold Us

ashandton

Hi

Just after a bit of advice.

Basically me and my hubby bought an '06 reg' car from Perrys in August of last year - it had tinted windows applied, which we thought was a bonus as we were going to get this done on the car we intended to buy anyway.

Then, the police pulled us over in December and the front windows were only letting in 26% of light compared to the legal requirement of 70%. Rather than the nice policeman giving us a caution he made it go all the way to court.

We told Perrys about this and they admitted that the car should never have passed their NetworkQ check. They wrote a letter for the court to this effect.

The court fined us £55.00.

Perrys have never apologised or offered us any kind of compensation.

We were driving around in a car that would have had void insurance had we had an accident - we have been told it would have been void due to the car having 'modifications to the windows' and the windows being illegal.

Hubby has taken 3 days off work in total over this, we had to get the tints removed and have paid the fine out of our own pockets.

We are now considering asking for some kind of compensation as we tried asking for a deal on a new car and they said 'oh yes we will give you a great deal' but they haven't - Caffyns across the road from us will do near on the same 'deals' as what Perrys suggested.

What does anyone think would be the best way of getting some cash out of them - hubby has been talking about small claims court and how much do you think would be reasonable without taking liberties?

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

So you didnt notice you had illegal tints at all?

Unless its been through an MOT at their hands with the tints I personally think you're trying to pass the buck to them when you had every intention of wanting tints anyway

If you are so law abiding you would have surely enquired about the legality at purchase.

ashandton

Law abiding!! :mad: you dont expect to go to a main dealer and buy a car that is illegally unroadworthy - if i had bought it from some small garage at the side of the road then i could have took it on the chin - but not Perry's with their million point check list - the windows were checked as part of this process.

This has caused us great stress - we were advised by several motoring lawyers that my hubby could have got a large fine and 3 points on his licence.

And as for wanting tints it was because of the kids not a style issue and I didnt know there was a right or wrong limit to the amount of tints you could have.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

great stress?

The fact is whether perrys should have known or not you are coming across as compensation chasing leeches to society here.

You seem to know enough about tints therefore I simply dont believe you had no inclination they were illegal. You quite clearly knew, chanced it anyway and now are trying to get out of the punishment and further line your own pockets.

No wonder society and companies are in a mess when they deal with people like you.

BillTrac

Surely if you had wanted tints becasue of the kids it would have been the rear windows you would have tinted..not the front!!

And if you knew about tints then this problem would not have arisen

Move on nothing to see here

oh my god!! just realised I agree with LinasPilibaitisisbatman!!!!!


help, call out the men with the tranqs

CFC

uktyler wrote: »

I have a personal dislike for the compensation culture that is becoming a part of British life, however I do feel in this case compensation is justified.

I would be looking at getting the fine back, the costs of removing the tints from the windows, and money for loss of earnings for anything directly related to the incident.

Calculate what you think is fair, and write recorded delivery to the manager detailing how much you think should be paid, and for what.

Totally agree. When you buy a car from a large dealer, you have a consumer right to expect it to be legally roadworthy. You should follow uktylers advice and if nothing is forthcoming, go to the Small Claims Court.

Other posters, you are missing the point. The point is that a garage should not sell a car that is not classified as 'roadworthy'. It is extremely dangerous and reckless to do so.

motorguy

ashandton wrote: »

Then, the police pulled us over in December and the front windows were only letting in 26% of light compared to the legal requirement of 70%.

Thats a seriously heavy tint on the front screen.

goldspanners

pgilc1 wrote: »

Thats a seriously heavy tint on the front screen.

i doubt its the front screen, it will just be the front side windows.

motorguy

goldspanners wrote: »

i doubt its the front screen, it will just be the front side windows.

Ah.

Fair point. Just re-read it!

mealone

))Basically me and my hubby bought an '06 reg' car from Perrys in August of last year - it had tinted windows applied, which we thought was a bonus as we were going to get this done on the car we intended to buy anyway.((

Tints thats are not factory fitted should always be checked and you knew these were boy racer sticky back plastic that you would have had done anyway, so why are you moaning?

Having kids dosnt mean needing heavily tinted windows, there are plenty of blinds on the market.

Why should you claim anything from the supplier other that making the windows legal?

They were wrong and so were you so to me if they put it right you are equal.

ashandton

advice i was after not a slating

i did not know anything about the do's and dont's regarding tints when i bought the car - i only know now after being told all about the legalities by the police and lawyers

BillTrac - yes, tints for the back was the intention for the kids, but the back and front of the car was tinted by the previous owner all to the same percentage - 26%

LinasPilibaitisisbatman - you are quite offensive and we took no chances we just bought a car from what we assumed to be a reputable dealer

if you dont have any suggestions to make then please dont post - many thanks to those of you who have given advice