Voluntary Finance Termination & Fair Wear/Tear!!!

simon.treacher

Hello All

I recently returned my vehicle to Peugeot Financial Services after paying more than 50% of my original purchase figure.

The vehicle was collected by an employee of G3 remarketing.

The initial inspection before he drove the car away was 7 light scratches (very light!!), x3 scratches (2 bumper, 1 one near side passenger door) and x2 minor chips (one bonnet, 1 rear bumper). All scratches, in my opinion, could be polished out. Neither chips had exposed the underlayer of paint.

I thought, ok that's that done with and went on to purchase my next vehicle. However today I've received a Bill for £1691 worth of repairs to the car from RMS Receivables!!!! Damage to the sills neither I nor the inspector had noted, x6 Poor Previous Paint (Respray Required) & a dent with paint damage!!! The car was in good condition and at over 8 years old I'm utterly staggered that they have billed me for the best part of £2000! The car is only worth approx £3000!!!!!

Neither myself nor my wife are in a position to Pay in Full as their letter puts it and if I'm honest I don't think we owe for said repairs under Fair Wear & Tear! The car was well loved and had a good few years left in it!

Sorry to ramble, advice would be great - I'm worried sick!

AdrianC

If the scratches could have been polished out, why didn't you?

This is the BVRLA "Fair wear and tear" guide, the industry standard to what is and isn't fair wear and tear :- http://www.lexautolease.co.uk/assets/LEX_AUTOLEASE_DUAL_LICENCE_2014.pdf

simon.treacher

Whilst I appreciate you taking the time to post it wasn't helpful, nor did it offer any advice. I've already read the industry's guidelines and the scratches were minor thus acceptable under said guidelines.

I'm looking for others who may have had this issue or someone who can advise going forward..........however thanks for the post.

AdrianC

simon.treacher wrote: »

I've already read the industry's guidelines and the scratches were minor thus acceptable under said guidelines.

Forgive my lack of psychic abilities, with reference to what you may and may not have read already.

If the marks were, genuinely, within those guidelines and you have photographic evidence of them, then you should contest the invoice.

simon.treacher

Many Thanks again Adrian

I don't have photographic evidence, I do however have a Vehicle Inspection Report, which we both signed when the guy collected the vehicle. The Wear & Tear he noted is nominal. However a follow up report recently done is where they get their figures from!

I can't dispute that, I wasn't there!

AdrianC

Unfortunately, without photographic evidence, it's your word against theirs. And they'll say that they use experienced professionals etc etc. They'll also say that it's not uncommon for the person who collects the car to miss damage during the brief collection inspection, so the follow-up is the authoritative report.

Cynics may suggest that it's how they manage to produce such attractive lease figures.

simon.treacher

Ok, should I still dispute this and see if they are prepared to reduce any of the Invoice or am I stuck with the bill!!!

Not good, as we can't afford to pay that out..........ironic really just as we were getting on the straight and narrow!!

AdrianC

What do you have to lose? A bit of time writing a letter.

jbainbridge

It strikes me as very unreasonable to expect a perfect car at 8 years old. How old was it when you bought it? Were any of these 'defects' there when you got it.

nanefy

Hey Simon,


You are not alone!!!


We handed our Peugeot back about 8 weeks ago. When we bought ours, it was already second hand (2.5 years old) - half way through, just like you we did a VT.


We contacted Peugeot Finance and said we'd be contacted to arrange a collection. We had no idea it wasn't Peugeot that was collecting it, so when the guy phoned, my husband asked him over the phone what 'fair wear and tear' meant because we had a couple of scratches on the paint work. The guy told us, verbatim, that light scratches were totally fine, so long as none of the scratches were down to bare metal, we wouldn't be charged.
Hubby explained that we did have one scratch that was and could we delay collection until we got it fixed, which was fine. We repaired the damage and everything was good to go.
The guy arrived to pick the car up, it couldn't have been a sunnier, dryer day, it was perfect for inspecting. The guy went round the car, made a note of 6 LS (light scratches) and that was it - there was no other damage to the car - for a 5 year old, two owner car, it was in great condition.


So, we got our new car, everything was hunky dory and then my hubby called me at work to say he'd been sent a letter by this bunch of cowboys, RMS Receivables, and they were looking for over £1200 for repairs to the car!!!
It was claiming for stuff that wasn't on the report and for stuff that wasn't on the car when they collected it. The bonus is, we took a video of the car just before collection, so we have proof that some of the things they have claimed for were done after collection. The other scratches, definitely fall within the brackets of fair wear and tear.


We have free legal cover with our home insurance (if you have it, you should definitely use it!) so we contacted them and we were advised to send them a letter to say that we were disputing the charges.


Before we wrote to them, I did some digging about. I had remembered that when we signed the inspection form, it had Anaheim Motor Auction on the top - so I googled them, they are based in Shotts in Scotland. The car was already at auction and up for sale, and there were NO repairs carried out.
The car sold and then we sent a letter to them to let them know all of this and that we were not going to be paying them a penny.


We told them not to email or phone us, that all correspondence should be in writing only - they are still constantly harassing us, but refuse to write to us. So far, they have dropped the charges from £1200 odd, to £800 and now to £600.


Even if they had fixed the light scratches, there is no danger that it would cost even remotely close to £600.


If you do some digging on google, you will find MANY people who are having the same issues with these guys. My advice would be to get some legal advice and dispute the charges.


There was a post I came across a few weeks ago (I'll try to find it) and the guy was able to get them down from £2k, to zero!


They are just another bunch of scare mongerers who will harass you and threaten you in hopes you'll pay out.


Do not be fooled by them, but be prepared to fight them for it.


I'll try and keep you updated with how things go at our end!


Chin up

bigjl

Another bit of info if they are selling the vehicles via Manheim.

The vehicles will be photographed and inspected prior to the sale.

Mainly so they can out a little checklist on the window as it goes through the bidding floor and also so they can accept online bids.

I don't know how long such data/photos will be held on file but PFS will have likely signed a contract for all handbacks and snatchbacks so they will.more than likely all go to Manheim Auctions.