Financed car, issues once again.

macman

Mikej92 said:

macman said:

But a distance purchase does not prevent you from checking the documentation before contracting to buy. All you had to do was request a copy of the V5C, which would have shown that there were several previous owners. Ditto the MOT and service history.
No idea if the HPI was erroneous, or faked, which is why I'd report the anomaly to HPI.

It’s been mis sold regardless, I asked the dealer umpteen times if it was definitely one owner, and had the service history it was advertised with.

No one disputes that, and you were advised as such near the start of this thread. But an actual physical check would have saved you all the subsequent hassle, and even more so since you were unwilling to view the car in person. 

Mikej92

macman said:

Mikej92 said:

macman said:

But a distance purchase does not prevent you from checking the documentation before contracting to buy. All you had to do was request a copy of the V5C, which would have shown that there were several previous owners. Ditto the MOT and service history.
No idea if the HPI was erroneous, or faked, which is why I'd report the anomaly to HPI.

It’s been mis sold regardless, I asked the dealer umpteen times if it was definitely one owner, and had the service history it was advertised with.

No one disputes that, and you were advised as such near the start of this thread. But an actual physical check would have saved you all the subsequent hassle, and even more so since you were unwilling to view the car in person. 

Think this has been lost in translation, I wasn’t ‘unwilling’ to view in person, as previously stated, I had a 1 week old baby at the time of purchase.

there was no chance of me taking the three of us on a train for a nigh on 200 mile journey, nor leaving the pair of them at home with my partner unable to drive. 

The dealership offered the delivery based on those above statements, so it was the easier option.

Grumpy_chap

Mikej92 said:

Think this has been lost in translation, I wasn’t ‘unwilling’ to view in person, as previously stated, I had a 1 week old baby at the time of purchase.

there was no chance of me taking the three of us on a train for a nigh on 200 mile journey, nor leaving the pair of them at home with my partner unable to drive. 

The dealership offered the delivery based on those above statements, so it was the easier option.

Perhaps the timing of the car purchase was unfortunate.
OR, if a new car was necessary to accommodate the additional family member and all their stuff, a car purchased from a local supplier.

There must be a very disgruntled Mrs Mikej92, given this is the second time this happened in 2 years plus the DMP in the mean-time.  I guess that means the finance must be at a challenging rate.  Is it still the aim to get a mortgage in the next few years?

Mikej92

Grumpy_chap said:

Mikej92 said:

Think this has been lost in translation, I wasn’t ‘unwilling’ to view in person, as previously stated, I had a 1 week old baby at the time of purchase.

there was no chance of me taking the three of us on a train for a nigh on 200 mile journey, nor leaving the pair of them at home with my partner unable to drive. 

The dealership offered the delivery based on those above statements, so it was the easier option.

Perhaps the timing of the car purchase was unfortunate.
OR, if a new car was necessary to accommodate the additional family member and all their stuff, a car purchased from a local supplier.

There must be a very disgruntled Mrs Mikej92, given this is the second time this happened in 2 years plus the DMP in the mean-time.  I guess that means the finance must be at a challenging rate.  Is it still the aim to get a mortgage in the next few years?

Debt has been cleared, rate is fairly decent considering my history.

Baby came early, I had already committed to the car, and planned to pick it up, but Mini mikej92 was keen to get out lol.

Mikej92

Grumpy_chap said:

Mikej92 said:

Think this has been lost in translation, I wasn’t ‘unwilling’ to view in person, as previously stated, I had a 1 week old baby at the time of purchase.

there was no chance of me taking the three of us on a train for a nigh on 200 mile journey, nor leaving the pair of them at home with my partner unable to drive. 

The dealership offered the delivery based on those above statements, so it was the easier option.

Perhaps the timing of the car purchase was unfortunate.
OR, if a new car was necessary to accommodate the additional family member and all their stuff, a car purchased from a local supplier.

There must be a very disgruntled Mrs Mikej92, given this is the second time this happened in 2 years plus the DMP in the mean-time.  I guess that means the finance must be at a challenging rate.  Is it still the aim to get a mortgage in the next few years?

Also now have a mortgage, probably should of updated that post for some motivation for other people.

Mikej92

So it gets even better.

The dealership have got back in touch with the finance company and told them that I will not have a warranty on the 29th, meaning I’m stuck with no repairs being able to be done, so they’re trying to pull a fast one, as apparently there is a disclaimer stating I only have 3 months from the date of purchase.

which i have also been to, is a load of faff.

born_again

Mikej92 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

There is a bit of Groundhog Day to this and the advice is the same as previously - when buying a car, particularly a rarer derivative of a mass-market model, if the selection is so few that you need to purchase from a Dealer far away, then the best approach is to take the time to travel to see that car and be sure that the car meets all the expectations and claims that have been made before parting with large amounts of capital.

In this case, it seems as though the Dealer is not going to be helpful.
What response have you received from your approaches to the finance company?

Unfortunately it wasn’t an option to be able to travel, my partner gave birth during the week of me purchasing the car (3 weeks early) so that definitely wasn’t an option at the time.

The finance company have asked for all the info, so I’ve supplied everything, they have also said they don’t think I have grounds to reject based on the owner discrepancy along with the other issues currently, which again, I feel is a bit slack considering they are the ones that own the car.

I have spoken to citizens advice and the motor ombudsman who have both said I have rooted grounds when it comes to rejection purely based off the owner discrepancy.

they have also said I need not bring up the other faults and issues, as the misrepresentation of the car it’s self is grounds enough to reject.

so I have also sent that back to the finance company, it’s a waiting game now I guess.

You need to be mentioning S75 CCA to them. As they are jointly liable.

Mikej92

born_again said:

Mikej92 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

There is a bit of Groundhog Day to this and the advice is the same as previously - when buying a car, particularly a rarer derivative of a mass-market model, if the selection is so few that you need to purchase from a Dealer far away, then the best approach is to take the time to travel to see that car and be sure that the car meets all the expectations and claims that have been made before parting with large amounts of capital.

In this case, it seems as though the Dealer is not going to be helpful.
What response have you received from your approaches to the finance company?

Unfortunately it wasn’t an option to be able to travel, my partner gave birth during the week of me purchasing the car (3 weeks early) so that definitely wasn’t an option at the time.

The finance company have asked for all the info, so I’ve supplied everything, they have also said they don’t think I have grounds to reject based on the owner discrepancy along with the other issues currently, which again, I feel is a bit slack considering they are the ones that own the car.

I have spoken to citizens advice and the motor ombudsman who have both said I have rooted grounds when it comes to rejection purely based off the owner discrepancy.

they have also said I need not bring up the other faults and issues, as the misrepresentation of the car it’s self is grounds enough to reject.

so I have also sent that back to the finance company, it’s a waiting game now I guess.

You need to be mentioning S75 CCA to them. As they are jointly liable.

Yes, have also been told about a ‘tri partite?’ Agreement.

I think that’s the correct terminology.

Herzlos

The warranty should apply from when you notified them of the problem, not when they look at it.

But it sounds like this dealership is just going to be a nightmare so I'd be pushing the finance company to let you reject it.

Mikej92

Herzlos said:

The warranty should apply from when you notified them of the problem, not when they look at it.

But it sounds like this dealership is just going to be a nightmare so I'd be pushing the finance company to let you reject it.

There is no “warranty”, apparently, they legally only have to give me 3 months, which I know is drivvle, as the motor organisation and all of consumers rights says 6 months.

they didn’t discuss one with me, so I think they’re trying to pull a fast one.

which won’t stand, as the finance are now on my side after sending them a multitude of proof regarding the miss selling of the vehicle from the start.