Section 75 - Used Car dealer is a toe-rag

chewonit

I have been doing a lot of research in to my chances here, and the more I do, the more concinved I am that I have a case.

The AA have now completed their comprehensive inspection and have stated that the Seatbelt, Hand brake and steering column Issues are all serious saftey concerns, and would be MOT failures.

Just looking at the Financial services Ombudsmen site, and they have this information on used car purchases, which re-enforces my thinking.

Please tell me if you think im over confident on this.

new and used vehicles

Consumers are entitled to expect a brand-new vehicle to be free from even minor faults, including cosmetic ones.


But the position is different where a consumer buys a used vehicle. Vehicles suffer from wear and tear during their working life and the price of a used vehicle is expected to take this into account.

Regardless of its age and price, a used vehicle must have a working engine and be safe to drive, unless it is sold with a clear statement to the contrary.

Consumers are entitled to expect that all vehicles sold will be of "satisfactory quality". What constitutes satisfactory quality for a vehicle will usually depend on all the relevant circumstances, including:

• the cost of the vehicle;
• the age of the vehicle;
• the mileage of the vehicle;
• what a reasonable person would expect of a vehicle of equivalent age and mileage; and
• any description given (for example, "excellent runner", "suitable for spares" or "restoration project").

When we consider the complaints that consumers refer to us, we use the available evidence to make our own assessment as to whether or not the vehicle was of satisfactory quality when it was sold.



:question:

dalesrider

chewonit wrote: »

I have been doing a lot of research in to my chances here, and the more I do, the more concinved I am that I have a case.

Can I ask a question here.

Why have you not taken the dealer to court?

By the time you have finished. you could have taken the dealer to the small claims court and been done and dusted.

pompeyred

dalesrider wrote: »

Can I ask a question here.

Why have you not taken the dealer to court?

By the time you have finished. you could have taken the dealer to the small claims court and been done and dusted.

It's a fair point, given all you have done I would certainly have started more formal proceedings, at best your credit card will only likely refund you up to the amount paid on the card. Sounds like you have had a rough time of this and could probably do with getting things resolved either way. Take a look at money claim online, google MCOL. It's the formal court circuit for very very reasonable costs. If anything it might make them wake up, listen and take action. If they ignore the court, then you will be awarded judgment by default.

chewonit

I did look at taking the dealer to court, but was told by my solicitor that even though my chances of winning are good, actually getting the money from him would be a lot harder.

You see if I win in the small claims court they will order him to pay me money + costs, he can and probably will appeal against this. If he loses the appeal and still doesn’t pay up, I will have to take enforcement action - he will probably dispute this, and it will go back to court. and so the costs will mount. If after losing this appeal he decides to shut up shop, and open in a different name (as car deals do) then I will get nothing.

The easier route for me is section 75, as the bank/ FSO sorts it out, and there is no cost to me, and if I win the bank pays up. On which I have just spoken to the CC company and they told me that £9K had already been 'ring-fenced' from his account pending this investigation. As a small trader, I’m guessing this will be quiet a hit for him. (**sniggers**)

The case has already been presented to his bank (who have ring-fenced the moneyin preparation for a chargeback). If the case is proven, the money gets transferred to me, The car dealer then has 45 days to prove that the car was sold with a clear statement of the faults and my acceptance of them. If he can’t, the transfer becomes permanent

Fingers, toes and anything else..Crossed!

windingroad

I'm surprised your getting anywhere with "section 75" as I have a dispute and Barclaycard are about as much use as a chocolate teapot.

chewonit

Ok just spoke to the CC company today and they tell me they have sent a second letter to the merchants bank at the und of July as it never responded to the first.- they now have 35 days to respond. if they fail I get an automatic refund. if they respond the case gets investigated.

Watch this space at the beginning of september. cant believe how long this is taking...

lisyloo

It sounds like they are doing a chargeback.

chewonit

Yes, he did mention Chargeback - however i was confused as they can only charge back the £6K i paid on CC - the banks makes up the shortfall of £2800.

However based on that the dealer stands to make a profit on this as he will get back a car worth £8K, but only have £6K chargedback...is that right?

fart

I don't understand why you would pay for and take a car with the 'verbal agreement' that you'd bring it back later to have minor repair jobs done? You should have agreed a reduction on the price to compensate for the work or negotiated some sort of refundable deposit and then agreed to have the work done before full purchase of the car, taking back the deposit if it wasn't done.

The other stuff should come under warranty, but you'll never get the dealer to complete these original jobs when he's only told you verbally he'd do it.

lisyloo

However based on that the dealer stands to make a profit on this as he will get back a car worth £8K, but only have £6K chargedback...is that right?

I wouldn't have thought so.
I would have thought the bank would pursue the car dealer either through the courts or they probably have terms and conditions in their merchant agreement where they deduct it from him.

If it was £20 they might just take the hit, but I would expect them to pursue him for a 4-figure sum.
Anyway that's their problem not yours isn't it?