Mechanic Uses My Car for His Own Use - Crime of TWOC!

Lilroost

Herzlos wrote: »

Was it a particularly intermittent fault, that only turned up sometimes through regular use? If so, it might have been reasonable for the mechanic to use it regularly to identify the problem. It would have been unfair for them not to clear that with you first (what if you were allergic to dogs?).

The repair is unrelated to any contracts you've got - this issue won't invalidate any contracts. They may offer you something like free servicing or a small refund on the servicing plan, a new boot liner, plus something for the inconvenience and the additional mileage.

I already got the hire purchase agreement cancelled after 2 years of fighting. That was April 2016. Out of the blue in Dec 2017 I got a letter from them saying I owe excess on the Fixed Cost Maintenance Plan. Surely if the vehicle was deemed faulty from inception that invalidates the contract?

Lilroost

DCFC79 wrote: »

That about the bluetooth doesnt mean she was in the car, it could have picked up the signal from when she was outside of the car and she played some music for her bf.

Just be focused on the more important stuff and not about the bluetooth and maybe the boot liner (unless they have admitted to it).
Its been going on for 4 years.

They already admitted all of that. The hire purchase agreement was cancelled after the vehicle was deemed faulty from inception. By the same token can the Fixed Cost Maintenance Plan be invalidated?

Norman_Castle

Lilroost wrote: »

Didn't hear anything from VWFS until Dec 2017 saying again that I owed them £219 for excess mileage on the Fixed Cost Service Plan

Exactly how many miles were done over the agreed mileage?
How much of the £219 is due to the extra 800 miles?

tykesi

Why did you take the HP and service plans if you didn't want them? Sounds like a scamming buyer who buys things then uses any loophole he can find to get out of paying what he owes.

How does a mechanic using your car more than he should invalidate a contract for servicing? Your mind must work in a very odd way to think it would.

Lilroost

tykesi wrote: »

Why did you take the HP and service plans if you didn't want them? Sounds like a scamming buyer who buys things then uses any loophole he can find to get out of paying what he owes.

How does a mechanic using your car more than he should invalidate a contract for servicing? Your mind must work in a very odd way to think it would.

I took the contracts out with good intent, however 2 years of the Stop-Start system faulting where the car would cut out in the middle of a junction or roundabout drove me round the bend! (Excuse the pun)
I know I'm clutching at straws but the way they've dealt with it has been entirely unethical

Norman_Castle

How much of the £219 is due to the extra 800 miles?

MEM62

Lilroost wrote: »

Can anyone advise under what circumstances I can invalidate the contract based on their actions?

You cannot. As you have already been advised, they are separate issues.

Take the matter of car usage and the subsequent damage /wear and tear to the MD of dealership as a formal complaint.

THB, I am stunned that the technician would be so blatant as it is obvious that the owner of the car would know that their vehicle had been abused. Perhaps he just not concerned about the consequences of his actions.

Samsung_Note2

MEM62 wrote: »

You cannot. As you have already been advised, they are separate issues.

Take the matter of car usage and the subsequent damage /wear and tear to the MD of dealership as a formal complaint.

THB, I am stunned that the technician would be so blatant as it is obvious that the owner of the car would know that their vehicle had been abused. Perhaps he just not concerned about the consequences of his actions.

Im not at all stunned...it happens more than folk realise.


Not sure if you remember the mighty Lotus Carlton (going back a few years now) it was a serious beast of a car (for its day) and when ever the Dealership I worked in, had one come in the MD and the Sales reps/or anyone who was "In favour" would take the Lotus Carlton up and down the local dual carriageway flat out (pre speed cameras) and that would have been 140mph ish maybe more.

Leaving the dealership they would wheel spin out like Smoky and the Bandit not giving a squid of consideration for the expensive tyres they just left black lines up the road with.

Some how I doubt the very well of Gent who owned it would have approved..esp if it ever got wrapped around another car or a Tree on these ummm what were they called, oh yes ""Test drives"" .


Never trust a Garage with your car..always check mileage and work has actually been done.

debtdebt

The car was never yours. The car isn't yours any more. The charge for the 800 miles has been dropped.

You have suffered no loss. Stop crying.

Mercdriver

DCFC79 wrote: »

That about the bluetooth doesnt mean she was in the car, it could have picked up the signal from when she was outside of the car and she played some music for her bf.

Just be focused on the more important stuff and not about the bluetooth and maybe the boot liner (unless they have admitted to it).
Its been going on for 4 years.

It will only show the bluetooth name of phones that have been paired to the car's handsfree. So that phone HAS been used with the handsfree.