Mileage Adjustment on Renault Clio PCP Car Handed back?

laticsforlife

Just handed back a (14 plate) 4-yr old Renault Clio to RCI Finance near the end of the PCP contract.

I paid for 36,000 miles which pro-rata I make should be 34,200
however the car has only done 27,400, meaning a shortfall of roughly 6,800 miles.

It's been Renault serviced, and is in very good condition.

The 'damage' report talks about 1 alloy which he says I should argue as it's not kerbed it's minor corrosion - which it isn't, it's just a bit of poor finish when they were repaired!, and 1 small mark on the back bumper reducing the value by £53.

One other alloy does have a bit of kerbing done 2 days prior to it being picked up, doh! (not bad but they still picked up on it).

The chap suggested that when RCI ask for the £150 or so, I argue that it should come from the mileage they 'owe' me and call it quits.

How much is that 6,800 miles worth??

Anyone got a Glasses guide that tells such an answer. Must be more than £150, surely!

King_Nothing

I don't think you can use unused miles in a PCP deal as currency to pay for damage done to the car.

bengalknights

If it was a lease vehicle they would most likely let you off as usually the mileage under is worth 7p a mile (VAG lease standard that is)

laticsforlife

bengalknights wrote: »

If it was a lease vehicle they would most likely let you off as usually the mileage under is worth 7p a mile (VAG lease standard that is)

See, I like your answer far more than the other post! :beer:

I know they probably don't HAVE to do such an adjustment, but clearly I'm not just going to pay them £150 without a fight.

EmmyLou30

If you're trading the car in for another then it will be worth more than the guaranteed value you agreed at the start of the PCP due to the lower mileage I would imagine? The garage can tell you what it'd be worth part ex and then you'll know its value. But as it's only a few thousand miles I wouldn't have thought you're talking £1000 difference or anything....argue the £150 and call it quits I would say. £150 doesn't sound too bad for 2 damaged alloys and a damaged bumper.

DoaM

6,800 miles at 7p per mile is £476.

AdrianC

So a poor repair to one wheel, two kerbed wheels and bumper damage? £150 sounds a bit of a bargain to me.

Read your contract, but since you contracted for up to 36k in four years, you are most likely simply within the terms of it, same as the difference between immaculate and just meeting the fair wear and tear standard. Going over the mileage would attract a charge in the same way as damage above fair wear and tear does, because you are outside the terms of the contract.

You can't say "Well, I know I'm outside it here, but I was inside it there, so you should let me off that breach."

arcon5

That's a first of heard of trying to convert unused miles to currency. The mileage is a limit. It's the roof for which they will provide to car at the agreed price.

Cannot see them entertaining this at all!!

wgl2014

One can only ask!

(And probably be told to jog on)

laticsforlife

AdrianC wrote: »

So a poor repair to one wheel, two kerbed wheels and bumper damage? £150 sounds a bit of a bargain to me.

Read your contract, but since you contracted for up to 36k in four years, you are most likely simply within the terms of it, same as the difference between immaculate and just meeting the fair wear and tear standard. Going over the mileage would attract a charge in the same way as damage above fair wear and tear does, because you are outside the terms of the contract.

You can't say "Well, I know I'm outside it here, but I was inside it there, so you should let me off that breach."

Not really a poor repair, I could barely see the mark he alluded to. The repair was excellent as they all had several large scuffs, and afterwards there were none.

And the bumper damage hasn't even broken the surface - after polishing/t-cutting using product again barely noticeable, but I admit it's not 100% perfect. Honestly if selling privately I'd be saying it is nothing, £53 is all it's worth as a discount.

The other wheel, fair-do's, it really pi55ed me off as it'd been repaired too and I damaged it again in the dark on a rainy night coming out of a car park with limited visibility of the kerb just 2 days before inspection, having driven so carefully since they'd been repaired over Xmas.

I've been reading about the opposite position of excess mileage and supposedly the finance Company not being able to legally enforce this so long as the car is in 'good condition', and thought that well this ought to apply in reverse, the car IS in good condition, and even taking the £150 off it's value, it's still worth more than what I owed because of the low mileage, so I should not owe anything extra.

So if they can't enforce high mileage adjustments on value, then it follows they can't enforce damage with low mileage.

I will have to see what they try to charge me.

AdrianC

laticsforlife wrote: »

Not really a poor repair, I could barely see the mark he alluded to. The repair was excellent as they all had several large scuffs, and afterwards there were none.

And the bumper damage hasn't even broken the surface - after polishing/t-cutting using product again barely noticeable, but I admit it's not 100% perfect. Honestly if selling privately I'd be saying it is nothing, £53 is all it's worth as a discount.

The fair wear and tear guidelines are published and available as an industry-standard document. If you don't agree with them, buy your car instead of leaseing/PCPing it.

I've been reading about the opposite position of excess mileage and supposedly the finance Company not being able to legally enforce this so long as the car is in 'good condition', and thought that well this ought to apply in reverse, the car IS in good condition, and even taking the £150 off it's value, it's still worth more than what I owed because of the low mileage, so I should not owe anything extra.

So if they can't enforce high mileage adjustments on value, then it follows they can't enforce damage with low mileage.

No, it really doesn't.

VTing (if that's what you've done - have you paid at least 50% of the full finance, including the balloon?) is a clearly defined procedure. Condition is explicitly taken into account as part of it. Mileage may or may not be, opinions vary, and there's not been any definitive legal precedent set yet.

Just pause and think about it for a moment. If condition was not taken into account, you would just need to VT the (remains of the) car if you wrote it off and the insurance either didn't pay out or left you in negative equity without a gap policy. Clearly ridiculous.