When is a 'new' car not new?

motorguy

napoleon1769 wrote: »

I was under the impression that the refund and return were two mutually exclusive events? I thought the retailer had to refund the money within 30 days of receiving my notice of cancellation and that they could not insist that the goods were returned before providing a refund. Also, since the contract does not state otherwise, I was under the impression that they were liable for the cost of returning the vehicle.

It's all good in principle, but I guess enforcing it is a different matter...

May be the case. I do think however they would just ignore your request for a full refund.

You would be best to speak to a solicitor on the actual legal stance.

napoleon1769

Joe_Horner wrote: »

(b) As the V5 makes very clear, the registered keeper is not automatically the owner. So the car can be bought, paid for and owned by the OP from the moment it leaves the factory, but still registered in the dealer's name because they're currently in possession of it.

One thing that I forgot to mention is that the vehicle was registered on the morning of delivery. The first registered keeper seems to be a bogus fleet company whom I have never heard of or had no dealings with.

motorguy

napoleon1769 wrote: »

One thing that I forgot to mention is that the vehicle was registered on the morning of delivery. The first registered keeper seems to be a bogus fleet company whom I have never heard of or had no dealings with.

Just because you havent heard of them doesnt make them "bogus". It no doubt exists as an entity somewhere - even if just paper.

Inch_High_2

napoleon1769 wrote: »

One thing that I forgot to mention is that the vehicle was registered on the morning of delivery. The first registered keeper seems to be a bogus fleet company whom I have never heard of or had no dealings with.

Bit like when rental companies don't register in their own name.

motorguy

napoleon1769 wrote: »

One thing that I forgot to mention is that the vehicle was registered on the morning of delivery. The first registered keeper seems to be a bogus fleet company whom I have never heard of or had no dealings with.

Out of curiosity, if you have been the owner / keeper since day one, surely the DVLA are updating the paperwork to say, at very least, you took ownership the day of or the day after first registration, NOT from when they were informed?

Joe_Horner

napoleon1769 wrote: »

One thing that I forgot to mention is that the vehicle was registered on the morning of delivery. The first registered keeper seems to be a bogus fleet company whom I have never heard of or had no dealings with.

In that cas, even less to worry about.

When DVLA finally get the paperwork sorted the V5 will show something like:

(you) Aquired vehicle on: (say) 01/05/14

(previous registered keeper) xyz shysters inc, aquired vehicle on 01/05/14

Which will make it crystal clear to any buyer that it was never actually "owned" by them because it was registered to them and then transferred to you on the same date.

napoleon1769

Joe_Horner wrote: »

In that cas, even less to worry about.

When DVLA finally get the paperwork sorted the V5 will show something like:

(you) Aquired vehicle on: (say) 01/05/14

(previous registered keeper) xyz shysters inc, aquired vehicle on 01/05/14

Which will make it crystal clear to any buyer that it was never actually "owned" by them because it was registered to them and then transferred to you on the same date.

If that was the case, then I would be less bothered. Unfortunately, the fleet company (whether bogus or otherwise) claim that they had the vehicle for the first two months. It will therefore show something like

(me) Acquired vehicle on 01/05/2014
(previous registered keeper) Dodgy Fleet Company Ltd. acquired vehicle on 01/03/2014

neilmcl

napoleon1769 wrote: »

If you are interested, these are the Terms and Conditions which I agreed to. I signed the bottom of the document, scanned it and returned it by email.

s30.postimg.org/g9a6qev9t/Terms.png

I have only just noticed how shocking those Terms and Conditions are. The company have even forgotten to fill in their company name in several sections!

(I'm a newbie, so I can't post links sorry)

I think we'd need to see the terms laid out in xxxx.com/terms

napoleon1769

neilmcl wrote: »

I think we'd need to see the terms laid out in xxxx.com/terms

That would divulge the name of the broker, sorry. These Terms and Conditions do not mention anything about who is the first registered keeper and I doubt they are relevant because they were not considered to be durable.

neilmcl

Joe_Horner wrote: »

In either case, the OP bought, and received a "new" car by any sensible definition of the word.

However, he bought the "new" car in the reasonable expectation that he'd be the first, registered keeper.

And I'm sorry but to the posters who say the number of registered keepers has no effect on the resale of the vehicle are just not being realistic. Yes registered keepers does not equal no. of owners but at the end of the day the number of keepers IS what most private buyers are concerned with and is factor when trading a car in, otherwise dealers wouldn't bother asking the question.