Voluntary Finance Termination & Fair Wear/Tear!!!

simon.treacher

Hi All

My apologies for not replying sooner, been work, work, work!

I did some digging on here and other sites and it appears that most people who have dug their heels in and said they're not prepared to pay have more or less ended up paying nothing!

Letter will be written after my current set of night shifts and we shall see where that takes us.

FYI - the car was a 5 year old Ford Focus when we bought it, already some light scratches, which they are now billing us for! It is now an 8 1/2 year old car, still in good nick and no doubt will go from an auction house and give someone else the pleasure of driving it for a good few years yet.

It spooked me a bit at first, but the more I've searched and read and chewed this over.........:mad: they'll not be getting a penny!

Will keep you updated!
Cheers

Johnmcl7

There's a topic in the loans forum on rms receivables as well:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4875567

Unsurprisingly exactly the same pattern as detailed here.

John

simon.treacher

Quick update, the vehicle has been sold with no repairs done as they are not required to carry out the repairs just claim back the costings for the vehicle being returned in unsatisfactory condition. Any further advice folks? Did get quite heated on the phone when I asked the guy for invoiced repairs carried out and for legislative information as to expected condition of 8 1/2 year old cars - apparently there are industry guidelines only. He was however quite insistent that I owe the money and they are expecting to be paid in full!

burlington6

I can understand them not doing the repairs as the vehicle will probably make less than one without damage.

nanefy

simon.treacher wrote: »

Quick update, the vehicle has been sold with no repairs done as they are not required to carry out the repairs just claim back the costings for the vehicle being returned in unsatisfactory condition. Any further advice folks? Did get quite heated on the phone when I asked the guy for invoiced repairs carried out and for legislative information as to expected condition of 8 1/2 year old cars - apparently there are industry guidelines only. He was however quite insistent that I owe the money and they are expecting to be paid in full!

Yes, they told us the same thing. We told them in writing to stop phoning and emailing, that we would only accept written correspondence, something they haven't bothered to adhere to. They send us contstant emails and phone us all the time - we just ignore them.
The way you have to look at it is when any other (reputable) company are owed money, they ask for the payment a few times and then just pass it on to a debt collector - these guys just keep harrassing you and trying to scare you into paying, which essentially tells me that they are at it! They will not see a penny from me......unless it goes to court and I'm forced to pay, but I don't think it will get that far.

They play on fear and will try every trick in the book to get you to pay anything, which is why when you talk to them, you can quickly get them to drop the price - it's a total waste of time and energy.

My advice to you, would be to get some legal advice just to cover your back (if you don't have free legal cover on your home insurance, try Citizens Advice) and essentially.....just keep giving them the cold shoulder.

simon.treacher

Hi Again!

Received further correspondence 1 month after the below e-mail. Sorry if this is all a bit long but advice appreciated.

My Reply:

RMS

Thank-you for the electronic documents, however I already have paper copies of those you have sent. As discussed on the 27th August 2014 –I clearly stated during our telephone conversation that I dispute the charges and report from G3/RMS Receivables.

Attached is a copy of the inspection report at the time of collection and the only noted damage to the vehicle was some light scratches (LS) and x2 chips (C). One to rear bumper and one to the car bonnet. The car bonnet chip did not progress to the under-layer and was superficial. The inspector at the time has also noted x3 ‘S’ on the report – as there is no actual ‘S’ on your DAMAGE ABBREVIATIONS one can only assume he meant light scratch (LS) as the vehicle had no severe scratches (SS) at the time of collection. I’m sure your inspector would have noted such as he appeared very diligent and thorough during the inspection.

It is however with great concern that I note his report in no way reflects the damage your Damage Value report suggests; and I can again only assume that further damage has taken place once the vehicle left my possession. As such I refute the majority of the charges you are suggesting I have incurred.

Whilst the vehicle was 8 and ½ years old it was, and I’m sure still is, perfectly road worthy as you yourself said the vehicle has already been sold – without any of the work you stated being completed. However I am prepared to accept that the chip/scuff to the bumper was possibly excessive in relation to the age of the car and fair wear and tear for one that had done approximately 100,000 miles. I would be prepared to meet the cost of £45 that you have quoted for the bumper repair.

Should you wish to discuss this matter further I would appreciate all future correspondence to be in writing, via post, and I am quite prepared to issue a Cheque for the £45 when you confirm this is acceptable in writing.

I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

Followed by reply received today:

Simon,

We write with reference to your e-mail dated 2nd September 2014. The contents of which have been noted.

You were notified on your voluntary termination response/quotation form that there would be a cursory inspection upon collection and then there would be a second inspection carried out as well. This is also stated in the disclaimer on the inspection report you attached to your e-mail.

On your attached inspection report it states the vehicle was wet and a full inspection was unable to be carried out. This is why there is a second, more in-depth inspection completed on site.

Our client Peugeot Financial Services has no legal obligation to carry out any out repairs to the vehicle and as such hold the right to sell the vehicle sold as seen. The charges in relation to this claim are pursuant to contract and shows the estimate of repair, which is derived by obtaining a national average of repair charges from a database of approved repairers.

The car drove a total of 73 miles to site once it left your possession. The probability of all the ‘extra damage’ occurring in the 73 miles is extremely unlikely in comparison to the amount of time and miles covered by yourself.

Just because a vehicle is 8 and ½ years old does not mean the vehicle will have many scratches/dents etc. Also just because a vehicle is roadworthy does not take away the fact that you are obliged to honour your contractual agreement with our client.

We will not be accepting your offer of £45.00.

We are however willing to close this matter. Peugeot Financial Services agreed to accept the sum of £625.00, in Full and Final settlement of this Claim for damages. This will need to be paid in full on or by 10/10/2014

Failure to comply with this request will result in our client immediately demanding the payment of the original amount and reserve the right to issue legal proceedings against you for that amount should payment not be forthcoming.

We therefore politely request that you call our office on 0113 2014440 to make payment to the total sum of £625.00 by debit or credit card. Alternatively please pay into the following bank account on or before the date specified above.

RMS Receivables:
Sort Code: 20-11-81
Account Number: 13500314
(Our reference must be quoted with all payments

Regards,

RMS


So that's where I stand at present, thoughts anyone?
Simon