The Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973 and damages?

nobby2012

Back in October I bought a vehicle using finance. There were several false points the salesman made when we were explained the agreement, such as not being able to cancel for the first 6 months etc. which the agreement clarified on its rear. Not being happy with the agreement I withdrew within the first few days.
The vehicle had several faults and these were pointed out to the selling dealer prior to collection, he failed to rectify the faults and as the vehicle was still under the manufacturer’s warranty we accepted his suggestion of taking it to a main dealer. I use the vehicle for my work (self-employed) and lost a day’s income whilst it under went repairs.
What’s the likelihood of claiming damages for lost income in this situation? I have already contacted the dealer who has basically said very little apart from stating he should not have to deal with complaints!
I have pointed out the The Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973 to the finance company as one of the faults was not covered under warranty and the finance company has offered to refund this amount as long as I sign to say I it is in full and final settlement and they do not admit any liability.
I have written back to the finance company suggesting a higher amount be paid taking in to consideration my lost income. They have failed to respond to my letter and to a copy asking for a reply within 7 days, is this standard procedure to ignore if they reject my comments?

bengalknights

They usually take some time to reply was it sent recorded delivery?

chanz4

Why didnt they give you a loan car? vw always give me one

nobby2012

Hi no it wasn’t sent recorded but I do have a receipt of postage for the letter chasing it up.

No loan car offered, the selling dealer is 80 miles from home otherwise I would have left them with it.

who do i pursue re damages, the selling dealer or the finance company?

bod1467

Receipt of postage is not proof of delivery. You need to send a chaser via Recorded delivery.

nobby2012

Ive had a reply from them, they have gone from offering £25 to meeting my request of £500 compo in full. Am I missing something here or is it the fact I mentioned approaching the financial ombudsman without futher notice thats caught their attention?

arcon5

The financial ombudsmen won't deal with cases relating to the dealer, they would deal with disputes with the finance company.

If it was agreed prior to the sale they would rectify these faults then you would have a case to be reimbursed for costs arising as a result of their breach of contract. Do you have this in writing or any kind of proof? The problems arise if they deny offering to rectify the faults.

nobby2012

arcon5 wrote: »

The financial ombudsmen won't deal with cases relating to the dealer, they would deal with disputes with the finance company.

If it was agreed prior to the sale they would rectify these faults then you would have a case to be reimbursed for costs arising as a result of their breach of contract. Do you have this in writing or any kind of proof? The problems arise if they deny offering to rectify the faults.

Yes I have emails and a text message. The selling dealer also admits he knew about them prior to the sale in a letter he has sent since.

Seems strange they jumped to the higher amount of compensation without a struggle.

arcon5

nobby2012 wrote: »

Yes I have emails and a text message. The selling dealer also admits he knew about them prior to the sale in a letter he has sent since.

Seems strange they jumped to the higher amount of compensation without a struggle.

Because you have evidence that they are in breach of contract, you would have a claim with the finance provider who are as equally liable for this breach under Section 75.

I imagine if you claimed under this showing the dealer has clearly and undisputedly breached the contract it would affect the contract between the dealer and the finance company.
This probably scared them into action.

Still a good result though with a happy ending

Hintza

You are claiming £500 for lost earnings? Why didn't you hire a car? Why did you buy a car 80 miles away?

I'm not sure you have mitigated your losses. I think you have been very lucky.

arcon5

Hintza wrote: »

You are claiming £500 for lost earnings? Why didn't you hire a car? Why did you buy a car 80 miles away?

I'm not sure you have mitigated your losses. I think you have been very lucky.

I imagine part of it was to cover some costs at the dealer ?