Diesel Scrappage Scheme

UnkownUser2024

jimjames said:

UnkownUser2024 said:

Phoenix72 said:

Can't help myself but the trade in was not valued at £7k - a fixed discount was offered to scrap a car, regardless of value. The only condition seems to be that you owned the old car for 6 months?

To me, that is no different to any discount negotiated and such discounts do not form part of the amount payable in the credit agreement.

VWFS seem confident, you seem equally sure (although you occasionally say I'm not sure). Is there not a danger any costs could spiral if you appeal and lose again?

A discount is still by virtue a deposit and for that reason I believe that the legislation should have been abide by and the case needs revisiting. I'm already in this deep, it makes no odds now if further costs are added when there is a chance that with the right representation and in front of the right judge I could overturn the decision 

If you look at another purchase type it may help clarify. Buying a house requires a deposit. If you negotiate a £5k reduction in the sale price then it doesn't mean you now have a £5k deposit, it just means the price is lower.

The point you are missing is a house deposit does not require a part exchange of goods to form a deposit. 

I traded my car in return for a reduction in the value of the new car, that constitutes a deposit by definition no matter how you try and sugar coat it.

I am in the middle of applying for the transcript of the judgment, once I receive that I'll post up a version with redacted details in order for you to take a look and see exactly what the Judge has said

ontheroad1970

UnkownUser2024 said:

jimjames said:

UnkownUser2024 said:

Phoenix72 said:

Can't help myself but the trade in was not valued at £7k - a fixed discount was offered to scrap a car, regardless of value. The only condition seems to be that you owned the old car for 6 months?

To me, that is no different to any discount negotiated and such discounts do not form part of the amount payable in the credit agreement.

VWFS seem confident, you seem equally sure (although you occasionally say I'm not sure). Is there not a danger any costs could spiral if you appeal and lose again?

A discount is still by virtue a deposit and for that reason I believe that the legislation should have been abide by and the case needs revisiting. I'm already in this deep, it makes no odds now if further costs are added when there is a chance that with the right representation and in front of the right judge I could overturn the decision 

If you look at another purchase type it may help clarify. Buying a house requires a deposit. If you negotiate a £5k reduction in the sale price then it doesn't mean you now have a £5k deposit, it just means the price is lower.

The point you are missing is a house deposit does not require a part exchange of goods to form a deposit. 

I traded my car in return for a reduction in the value of the new car, that constitutes a deposit by definition no matter how you try and sugar coat it.

I am in the middle of applying for the transcript of the judgment, once I receive that I'll post up a version with redacted details in order for you to take a look and see exactly what the Judge has said

Neither does a car purchase  require a part exchange.  A house purchase could quite reasonably be done as a part exchange if agreeable to both parties and any lender having security.  In fact big house builders do indeed do part exchanges.

Okell

UnkownUser2024 said:

@UnknownUser2024 -  how far do you want to pursue this?  Is it something you really have to do or is it just a point of principle - correcting an injustice done to you by VWFS?

As others have said you really need paid for professional legal advice.  If you can't afford it you probably can't afford to continue pursuing this.

If you do really want to continue you could try posting on Legal Beagles here: 
  Several of the members there are current or retired lawyers.

The other place you could perhaps try is Consumer Action Group:  either here or here

Hi, I have been receiving advice from legal beagles since the set aside of the CCJ, and was advised by a retired vehicle finance lawyer on there to pursue this and file a counter claim

For this reason I want to pursue it as the lawyers on there are adamant that I have a valid case and have been served an injustice. 

I will check out the financial legal issues group and consumer action group, thank you for posting these 

OK.

Would you be happy to share a link to your thread(s) on Legal Beagles?  I'm curious to understand how they approached this.

Is there any particular reason you've now come to MSE?  Are you still engaging with Legal Beagles?


By all means try Consumer Action Group but I suspect Legal Beagles will be the more reliable source.  Your query is perhaps too niche for CAG but see what they say.

UnkownUser2024 said:

... At this point Judgment is to the Claimant for 11k plus 5k legal costs. So if an appeal costs me a few more thousand at this point it doesn't make much of a difference as long as I have a good chance of over turning the decision

So "double or quits"?  

My concern would be that you'll just be throwing more money away.

Do you remember the guy who racked up £30k in costs because he was convinced he hadn't been speeding?

Man spends £30,000 fighting £100 speeding fine - BBC News

Good luck if you decide to fight on.

Herzlos

UnkownUser2024 said:

jimjames said:

UnkownUser2024 said:

Phoenix72 said:

Can't help myself but the trade in was not valued at £7k - a fixed discount was offered to scrap a car, regardless of value. The only condition seems to be that you owned the old car for 6 months?

To me, that is no different to any discount negotiated and such discounts do not form part of the amount payable in the credit agreement.

VWFS seem confident, you seem equally sure (although you occasionally say I'm not sure). Is there not a danger any costs could spiral if you appeal and lose again?

A discount is still by virtue a deposit and for that reason I believe that the legislation should have been abide by and the case needs revisiting. I'm already in this deep, it makes no odds now if further costs are added when there is a chance that with the right representation and in front of the right judge I could overturn the decision 

If you look at another purchase type it may help clarify. Buying a house requires a deposit. If you negotiate a £5k reduction in the sale price then it doesn't mean you now have a £5k deposit, it just means the price is lower.

The point you are missing is a house deposit does not require a part exchange of goods to form a deposit. 

I traded my car in return for a reduction in the value of the new car, that constitutes a deposit by definition no matter how you try and sugar coat it.

I am in the middle of applying for the transcript of the judgment, once I receive that I'll post up a version with redacted details in order for you to take a look and see exactly what the Judge has said

A mortgage requires a deposit to be transferred from the buyer to the seller, though it's almost always money.

You scrapped your old car in exchange for a discount, unless the invoice has it as a trade in or deposit. Their lawyers already convinced a judge that it didn't.

You've already lost £5k fighting this on what seems to be a technicality and are likely to lose as much again if there's another round - that they didn't apply for court permission to take the car off you because you'd paid over a 30% deposit threshold - that's not going to automatically wipe out the debt since you still fell behind payments to the point the car was repossessed. If anything it's saved you around round of fees for the repossession paperwork but I'm not sure the outcome would have been different if they took longer to collect the car. It could even have been worse there if you fell further behind and the car was worth even less.

You can maybe argue the value they got at auction for the car was incorrect if it was obviously wrong but that'd be virtually impossible to prove.

WellKnownSid

I recently had my day in Court but as a litigant in person, was cross examined by an all singing all dancing Barrister and of course he persuaded the Judge

This reads like: "I was obviously right, but a nasty person came along, asked me a load of tough questions then - typical - they went on to pull the wool over the eyes of the judge who's clearly got it all wrong".

My questions - what did you expect to happen in Court and what steps are you taking to prevent your complete lack of preparation from happening again?  As others have said, you are heading for a big feature in the Daily Mail in your current mindset.

If you appeal, costs will more than double.  I wonder how many millions might will cost VWFS (and the rest of the industry) if they allow you win at appeal?  I can't see them putting the office junior on it this time, I should imagine they'll put up someone substantially more credible.  As there was no case last time, perhaps they'll just ask you to pay all of their costs up front?

One thing I can say with certainty is that the law in 1974 was never written with a manufacturer dreamt-up marketing-dressed-up-as-a-scrappage-scheme almost 50 years later in mind.  Your reasoning is not as black and white as it first appears.

mr_stripey

How much was the scrapped car worth ? As in, how much might you have got for it in a separate, private sale ?

400ixl

OP, not sure what to say, lots of people have stated an opinion that a discount is not a deposit and you have only repeated your stance that it is.

If you came here looking for support of your view and only willing to listen to those that do, then I am not sure you are going to get anything from this thread.

You appear to have your mind made up that you are right and the court and many others are wrong. Wish you luck with your appeal but fear you are throwing good money after bad.

UnkownUser2024

Okell said:

UnknownUser2024 said:

@UnknownUser2024 -  how far do you want to pursue this?  Is it something you really have to do or is it just a point of principle - correcting an injustice done to you by VWFS?

As others have said you really need paid for professional legal advice.  If you can't afford it you probably can't afford to continue pursuing this.

If you do really want to continue you could try posting on Legal Beagles here: 
  Several of the members there are current or retired lawyers.

The other place you could perhaps try is Consumer Action Group:  either here or here

Hi, I have been receiving advice from legal beagles since the set aside of the CCJ, and was advised by a retired vehicle finance lawyer on there to pursue this and file a counter claim

For this reason I want to pursue it as the lawyers on there are adamant that I have a valid case and have been served an injustice. 

I will check out the financial legal issues group and consumer action group, thank you for posting these 

OK.

Would you be happy to share a link to your thread(s) on Legal Beagles?  I'm curious to understand how they approached this.

Is there any particular reason you've now come to MSE?  Are you still engaging with Legal Beagles?


By all means try Consumer Action Group but I suspect Legal Beagles will be the more reliable source.  Your query is perhaps too niche for CAG but see what they say.

UnknownUser2024 said:

... At this point Judgment is to the Claimant for 11k plus 5k legal costs. So if an appeal costs me a few more thousand at this point it doesn't make much of a difference as long as I have a good chance of over turning the decision

So "double or quits"?  

My concern would be that you'll just be throwing more money away.

Do you remember the guy who racked up £30k in costs because he was convinced he hadn't been speeding?



Good luck if you decide to fight on.

I came to MSE purely because I was engaging with one user on legal beagles who believes I have a strong case, I wanted to see if anybody else in the know felt the same way or whether they felt I'm flogging a dead horse. 

It seems many on here aren't actually as in the know but are more speculating without knowing the full facts. 

In any case, here is the full thread on LB which contains everything dated back to when I first became aware of the CCJ

legalbeagles.info/forums/forum/legal-forums/court-claims-and-issues/received-a-court-claim/1660634-ccj-from-vwfs-car-finance

WellKnownSid

UnkownUser2024 said:

I came to MSE purely because I was engaging with one user on legal beagles who believes I have a strong case, I wanted to see if anybody else in the know felt the same way or whether they felt I'm flogging a dead horse. 

The normal process is that you're supposed to pay lawyers to stop this going all the way to court.  

The process you are following is hoping to capture sufficient confirmation (presumably ignoring all evidence to the contrary) in order to justify going to court for a second time.  

Without appropriate counsel from a professional who has a vested interest in the outcome of your case, you are highly likely to achieve the same result.

As I say, it's probable VWFS will choose representation in court that will be far less pleasant with you the next time around.  They will (likely successfully) make themselves out to be the victim and you the non-paying low-life looking to make a quick buck.  Do make sure you wear a tin hat...

UnkownUser2024

WellKnownSid said:

I recently had my day in Court but as a litigant in person, was cross examined by an all singing all dancing Barrister and of course he persuaded the Judge

This reads like: "I was obviously right, but a nasty person came along, asked me a load of tough questions then - typical - they went on to pull the wool over the eyes of the judge who's clearly got it all wrong".

My questions - what did you expect to happen in Court and what steps are you taking to prevent your complete lack of preparation from happening again?  As others have said, you are heading for a big feature in the Daily Mail in your current mindset.

If you appeal, costs will more than double.  I wonder how many millions might will cost VWFS (and the rest of the industry) if they allow you win at appeal?  I can't see them putting the office junior on it this time, I should imagine they'll put up someone substantially more credible.  As there was no case last time, perhaps they'll just ask you to pay all of their costs up front?

One thing I can say with certainty is that the law in 1974 was never written with a manufacturer dreamt-up marketing-dressed-up-as-a-scrappage-scheme almost 50 years later in mind.  Your reasoning is not as black and white as it first appears.

I fully accept that I had little chance against a Barrister who represents in Court every day. If he hadn't beat me I'd be shocked. My goose was cooked before I went in. 

However it stands that I have a good case and I find your remarks regarding my lack of preparation insulting. You have absolutely no idea how many days I've sat and researched for hours and hours and spent writing defences and Counter claims and witness statements and going over my case again and again so that I know it inside out. If you have nothing constructive to say please save yourself the effort of typing any further comments