VOLUNTARY TERMINATION OF CREDIT AGREEMENT

Helemon67

I gave my 63 plate Vauxhall Corsa back to Vauxhall Finance after paying 50% of the credit agreement.  I understood they would inspect the vehicle for reasonable wear and tear. I had never had an accident and serviced the car regularly.  I bought it at 5 years old and had it for a further 2.5 years.  They have since sold the vehicle at auction.
Received an email yesterday to say £1200 worth of damage to the car and they want the money.  Rang and was told on we’ll knock 50% off.  Told them car was not in bad condition and was only worth at £1800 at best.  I’ve since found out the car was sold at auction.
When I told them I wanted to complain I was told if I did complain and it didn’t go in my favour the discount applied would be taken off and full amount owed.
Surely this isn’t right?  Can anyone help?  Will I have to pay these trumped up charges?

AdrianC

Here's the industry standard fair wear and tear guide that the car will have been assessed to...
https://issuu.com/bfwsn67/docs/bvrla_fair_wear_and_tear_standard_-_cb6bf45bb50403?e=2001091/30897824

Yes, you agreed to be bound by that when you took the finance on. And, no, how they dispose of the car does not matter.

I presume any pre-existing damage to the car was documented, and has not been considered afresh for this return?

As for it being "worth £1,800 at best", there is only one non-written-off 2013/14 Corsa listed for that little on Autotrader - and it's a 120k shed that even the vendor describes as "rough". Of the 1,450 cars available currently, just 20 are <£2,500. and another 60 <£3,000.

Helemon67

I got 3 valuations off Motorway.co.uk -
£1855
£1398
£1155
🤷‍♀️

daveyjp

 Tell them where to get off.  The time to inspect is on handover when you are both present and can agree the condition.

Helemon67

Also I asked for an invoice for the work done.  They said the didn’t have one as the car was already sold.  How can they charge for work that wasn’t even done?

Helemon67

daveyjp said:

 Tell them where to get off.  The time to inspect is on handover when you are both present and can agree the condition.

They told me I couldn’t be at the inspection due to Covid 🙄

Car_54

Helemon67 said:

Also I asked for an invoice for the work done.  They said the didn’t have one as the car was already sold.  How can they charge for work that wasn’t even done?

They aren't charging for work. They're charging for the reduction in value due to the damage.

daveyjp

Helemon67 said:

daveyjp said:

 Tell them where to get off.  The time to inspect is on handover when you are both present and can agree the condition.

They told me I couldn’t be at the inspection due to Covid 🙄

That's OK, they devised a system which meant they took the risk of not being able to charge you for damage.

A neighbour had a car picked up about 3 months ago by the local car auction company.  They arrived, inspected the car, neighbour agreed and signed and and the car was taken later that day.

MobileSaver

Helemon67 said:

I understood they would inspect the vehicle for reasonable wear and tear. ... Received an email yesterday to say £1200 worth of damage to the car and they want the money.  Rang and was told on we’ll knock 50% off. 

The law (Section 100 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974) says you must take "reasonable care" of the car and if you did then they cannot charge you a single penny above the 50% previously paid off the credit agreement. They know this which is why they've already offered a 50% discount on the alleged damage; do not be surprised if they eventually offer an even bigger discount "as a goodwill gesture" as even if they can get a few hundred more pounds out of you it is pure profit for them that they are not entitled to.

Do not ring them any more, simply write advising them that you took reasonable care of the car and it was in reasonable condition for its age when they collected it and quote Section 100 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. (All of this of course assumes it hadn't been damaged during your ownership...)

AdrianC

MobileSaver said:

Helemon67 said:

I understood they would inspect the vehicle for reasonable wear and tear. ... Received an email yesterday to say £1200 worth of damage to the car and they want the money.  Rang and was told on we’ll knock 50% off. 

The law (Section 100 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974) says you must take "reasonable care" of the car and if you did then they cannot charge you a single penny above the 50% previously paid off the credit agreement. They know this which is why they've already offered a 50% discount on the alleged damage; do not be surprised if they eventually offer an even bigger discount "as a goodwill gesture" as even if they can get a few hundred more pounds out of you it is pure profit for them that they are not entitled to.

Do not ring them any more, simply write advising them that you took reasonable care of the car and it was in reasonable condition for its age when they collected it and quote Section 100 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. (All of this of course assumes it hadn't been damaged during your ownership...)

"Reasonable care" is codified in the BVRLA fair wear and tear guide I linked to at the start of the thread. The OP agreed to it when they took the finance on...

MobileSaver

AdrianC said:

MobileSaver said:

The law (Section 100 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974) says you must take "reasonable care" of the car and if you did then they cannot charge you a single penny above the 50% previously paid off the credit agreement.

"Reasonable care" is codified in the BVRLA fair wear and tear guide I linked to at the start of the thread. The OP agreed to it when they took the finance on...

For the avoidance of doubt, the BVRLA can be a useful guide but it is just that, a guide, and is not the law. The law simply says "reasonable care" and it would be for a court to decide what was reasonable (as, of course, terms and conditions in a finance agreement cannot override the law of the land.)

Some courts may agree the BVRLA guide is reasonable, other courts may decide the BVRLA guide (which is aimed at commercial enterprises) is more onerous and therefore unreasonable for private non-commercial leasing where, for example, kids and dogs could be quite reasonably thrown in the back of a vehicle every day (and particularly in this instance where the vehicle was already five years old and my understanding is that BVRLA do not take the age of the vehicle into account.)