Missold car finance, lying and bullying by car dealership

Nearlyold

After reading through all the posts I'm still baffled. How/why did the OP arrange finance with Zuto on a car that didn't exist at the time or was it just a pre approval whereby Zumo said they were likely to be accepted and why go to Zuto anyway when their minimum APR is probably at least twice what would  be available from the manufacturers own finance. (We've a new EV on order and the APR is 0%)

With regard the stop gap car purchased using dealer finance what did the OP think they had arranged and how does that differ from what they had arranged or is it the case that believe they were bullied and had no idea of what they arranged or why.

MattMattMattUK

You have posted multiple times, yet it seems that no one on here understands what the legal basis is for any claim you think you have, that is not because they are idiots, but because you have failed to explain in any coherent, rational way. Your primary issue seems to be that you signed a contract without understanding what you were signing and now seem to believe that you have rights that do not exist, or do not function in the way you think they do.

You have written your "formal letter" yet it contains grammatical and spelling errors and is even less clear at explaining your issue than it is on here. You put "lol" and "You clearly don't understand how things work" type statements in your posts as if they are an absolute explanation when all they do is make your posts more incoherent. You seem to believe in a fictional group of "authorities" who are going to give you what you want, the issues with that are that they do not exist and even if they did you seem unable to coherently explain what you do want.

Your OP and subsequent posts do not raise a consumer rights issue, they could be summarised as "I signed a contract I do not understand, I believe I have rights that I do not, I cannot coherently explain either my original issue or the legal basis I want to move forward on, but, I DON'T LIKE IT! If you do not agree with me you are an idiot! Lol".

Ehi

Nearlyold said:

After reading through all the posts I'm still baffled. How/why did the OP arrange finance with Zuto on a car that didn't exist at the time or was it just a pre approval whereby Zumo said they were likely to be accepted and why go to Zuto anyway when their minimum APR is probably at least twice what would  be available from the manufacturers own finance. (We've a new EV on order and the APR is 0%)

With regard the stop gap car purchased using dealer finance what did the OP think they had arranged and how does that differ from what they had arranged or is it the case that believe they were bullied and had no idea of what they arranged or why.

There is so much misunderstanding here, I am tired or repeating myself. As its a tangent far and away what I have been saying. So I think its time to call it a day, politely and respectfully


I got the zuto finance, because as I said and (I repeat) I have never owned a brand new car and had used zuto finance in the past before, so got another fresh quote online and was speaking to a remote dealer,(about getting a brand new car, which this remote dealer as advertizing, but did not have in stock)

These dishonest dealerships, never said they did not have the car in stock, rather would lie, that I must pre-order and wait. It was long after my complaint with HQ finance office, I found out, ( NOT JUST THEY DONT HAVE IN STOCK) That there was nothing arriving in the near future. So all along, it was nothing but a gimmick

Then I then visited my local dealer. (With my quote from Zuto) as I repeat. I have never bought a brand new car before. I believe thats simple to understand ? Did I know my car in question ? did not exist ? absolutely not, until I was told by the dealer. As the parent company had been mass advertising it online and on youtube they had released a new SUV

So all along, I believed I was going to get this car, the parent company (and a number of branch dealerships, had been mass advertizing)

@MattMattMattUK
 that is not because they are idiots, but because you have failed to explain in any coherent, rational way. Your primary issue seems to be that you signed a contract without understanding what you were signing and now seem to believe that you have rights that do not exist

How strange, I have tried to be polite and respectful, where does cursing come into play here ? I told you I was advised, if I was to sign a 3year contract. Theoretically, I am paying for depreciation and they would happily accept a trade in, as long as I stay with them, I dont believe this is difficult to understand ?

So I gladly accepted

EVEN IF I AM WRONG

I did mention that I never asked for a 2nd hand car, it was the dealership that offered me and I initially declined. They further adviced, they could offer me cheaper finance, but would need a test car ( To see if the finance company would accept me). Hence the NEW AGREEMENT ( I repeat, which I earlier did not ask for)

Nothing was explained to me ( which breaches the FCA law) rather, after I was accepted, they emailed me with their corporate email. I also added, I declined this, then it was said, REMEMBER ITS A TEMPORARY AGREEMENT. Hence I changed my mind and gladly accepted. 

This is not difficult to underand as ( I repeat read @Olinda99 comment)

Olinda99 said:

whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, the OP clearly has been into a dealership and come away with completely the wrong impression about what they have agreed to. 

this should not happen and it particular it should not happen when finance is involved

they went into the dealer with the objective of ordering a new car under finance and came away with a second-hand car under a different finance agreement but with the impression that this was some kind of temporary purchase whilst the car on order was being manufactured

they then discover that not only is there no new car on order but they are stuck with this second hand one

Ehi

One last point. 

If these dishonest dealerships, had told me from the start, .... "We dont have this car in stock" neither is the car in production and the parent company was not mass advertising here in the UK etc etc

There was no way, they or anyone would have convinced me to buy a 2nd hand car from them. Especially a small  6 year old hatchback 1.6L engine. which costs £19,000 (After its fully paid with interest)

Its the same principle used in dating websites, someone advertising a promising date ( Which clealry does not exist) with the intention to lure an unsuspecting individual into a KICK THE CAN FUTHER DOWN THE ROAD. 

Same principle, different techniques. 
Same principle, same objectives ---- Financial reward

Its outright dishonest and not in line with FCA guidelines.

Even if I advertise something as a 3rd party on ebay or the likes, the funds will not be releasd unless there is satisfaction. The dealership email to me, clearly says, REMEMBER WHAT WE DISCUSSED, its a temporary agreement... and clearly unequivocal states, soon you will have a brand new car

So I was clearly misinformed, which they are now denying, as their response to the HQ, is I never asked for a brand new car, but came in to buy a 2nd hand car

lies

Grumpy_chap

born_again said:

FOS can only deal with the finance providers. They have no remit over the dealer & what they have done.

Ehi said:

spot on, thats what I am expecting.

If this case is to be considered by the Ombudsman only considering the finance element, it is highly unclear that the OP has any claim that will be successful.

That is not to say there were not mis-understandings and mis-communications, but it is not clear any relate to the actual finance agreement in place.

AIUI, the pre-order for a future model release is usually that the customer pays a fee and that fee allows the customer to order the first edition of the car model before the model is released for general sale, thus ensuring that the customer receives one of the first batch of delivery vehicles.  The pre-order is just that - a place in the queue - if the customer proceeds to place a vehicle order, the pre-order fee is the deposit and if the customer decides not to buy, then the pre-order fee is refunded.
The OP has not confirmed whether the pre-order fee was paid, despite being requested to confirm several times.

No finance can be agreed on a possible future purchase of a pre-order car in a year's time from when the pre-order is placed.  This is simply not something a finance company can do because any number of things can change with the individual's circumstances in that year.

With or without the pre-order, the OP decided to buy a 7yo £17k hatchback.  That was subject to finance.  As far as I can tell, the finance company will have simply received the application via the Dealer for the OP to have finance for the car actually purchased.  There will be no mention in this application of any pre-order or £50k brand new SUV, or anything else that may, or may not, have been discussed at the Dealership.  The finance company will have considered only the information on the application for credit submitted to them, which the OP will have reviewed and signed.  Based upon that information, and nothing further, the finance company will make their decision.  In this case, the finance company made the decision to advance the OP the £17k and the OP proceeded to purchase the 7yo hatchback.

The OP has not made clear where there is fault with the finance on the £17k hatchback.

Should the OP decide to change the hatchback for the brand new SUV, when the OP places the order for the SUV, the OP will be able to trade in the hatchback, or sell the hatchback via other routes if that is more favourable.  Having, or not having, the pre-order makes no difference to this.  The pre-order (or absence of pre-order) may impact the lead time for the SUV, but nothing more.

If there is some other buyer's remorse at having purchased the £17k hatchback, that also does not seem to be any issue with the associated finance.  Remember, the brand new SUV was not available for over a year and the OP's previous car had ceased functioning so the OP had to either make do without a car for a year, or make some alternative arrangement to meet their transport needs in the intervening period.  The hatchback might well not be the OP's preferred choice, but it does seem a valid choice in the circumstances.  Whatever sales techniques the Dealer may have used, the OP was free to purchase any other immediately available car from any other supplier.

There may be a case for the OP with regard to the service plan.  It is not clear that the service plan was linked to the finance.

The OP has shared their draft submission to the Ombudsman.  As mentioned above, that appears to have grammatical errors which may result in the text as written not reflecting what the OP thinks it means.  The OP would be wise to have that full text proof-read prior to sending in to the Ombudsman.

The OP has repeatedly commented that there is only one contributor to understand the position correctly.  Within 7 pages of contributions, if everyone else is not able to understand the OP's position in the same way, that might indicate the lack of clarity in the case as communicated by the OP.

The complaint to the Ombudsman, if this is related to the finance only, really needs to be focused on the issues that are laid at the door of the finance provider.  All of the other noise will not help the case.

I hope that the OP achieves a positive outcome and updates the forum with the details - hopefully more than simply "all resolved and happy now" but something about what outcome was actually achieved and the reasoning given by the Ombudsman.  This way the collective power of the hive mind increases and the forum can better advise the next contributor with a similar case.

redped

Ehi said:

So I think its time to call it a day, politely and respectfully

I think this is the best approach.

Ehi

Dont worry about my spelling errors. I am multi tasking and apologise for them all. I have a spell checker on my word document, so it wont be so in my report.

@Grumpy_chap
 The OP has repeatedly commented that there is only one contributor to understand the position correctly.  Within 7 pages of contributions, if everyone else is not able to understand the OP's position in the same way, that might indicate the lack of clarity in the case as communicated by the OP.

When I was advised to post on here, I did so, simply because

When I went through my divorce, I used to post on www.fnf.org.uk and got so much helpful advise, so when my cousin told me about MSE, I was excited to post on here. But the thing I find absent is, repeated misunderstanding and endless questions and hole picking of the most pettiest of topics

The name of the website depicts and is geared towards the consumer and consumer rights.

I was hoping to get at least someone quoting the law, or pointing me in a helpful direction. Or simply a question asking, "...did the dealer, explain this or that to you ? ..." " ... did they run this checks or that... ??? ..." or do you know you could do this or do that, or something I am missing out e.g ask yourself if it confirmed to this FCA template, guideliness etc etc

Its just been endless hole picking. So I though I have learnt one or two things, especially how to re-phrase and better present my argument. I repeat its time to give it a rest. 

THank you @Olinda99 and everyone else

redped said:

Ehi said:

So I think its time to call it a day, politely and respectfully

I think this is the best approach.

Yes, thank you and I repeat

Olinda99 said:

whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, the OP clearly has been into a dealership and come away with completely the wrong impression about what they have agreed to. 

this should not happen and it particular it should not happen when finance is involved

they went into the dealer with the objective of ordering a new car under finance and came away with a second-hand car under a different finance agreement but with the impression that this was some kind of temporary purchase whilst the car on order was being manufactured

they then discover that not only is there no new car on order but they are stuck with this second hand one

Hoenir

Ehi said:

Its just been endless hole picking. 

Often the case. As with divorce cases. One party believes that they are totally in the right and as a consequence adopts an attitude of confirmation bias. Whereas the reality is far far greyer. The other party having their own view of events. Ultimately any paperwork , i.e. an audit trail , is more meaningfull than people's slanted recollections of events. When arbitration is neccessary. 

born_again

zuto finance is a bit of a red herring in all this.
Although knowing exactly which type of finance there were proving you would help?
Which brand of car are we looking  at?

Did Zuto provided the finance for the 2nd hand car, which I do not understand how you went from a new car purchase, despite it being a back order, which is not a normal process.
I know of many dealers/marques where the norm is many months delay on new car delivery. They do not offer a 2nd hand car purchase in the mean time, you just have to wait till the car comes in.

Okell

Ehi said:

Dont worry about my spelling errors. I am multi tasking and apologise for them all. I have a spell checker on my word document, so it wont be so in my report...

You won't want to hear this but I don't think running a spell checker over your document will fix it...   

I assume English is not your first language and I'm afraid that it is the way in which you have chosen to present and to express your complaint that is the problem.  It's both confused and confusing.

Sorry.

This thread has run for 7 pages and the majority of contributors - who are quite experienced in making sense of poorly explained and convoluted consumer finance problems - have said that they either don't understand your complaint or that you have no valid complaint agaianst the finance provider.  Whether the last bit is true I don't know - because I don't understand how or why you ended up where you are.

@grumpy_chap has analysed your problem in a way that seems to make sense to me, but you've just said "no, no, no" and that he's got it wrong.  I don't think he's a stupid person so if he - and everybody else - can't understand your problem then it must be because of the way you are explaining it.

FWIW, I tend to agree with @Olinda99's posts - what appears to have happened shouldn't have happened to you.  But I don't know who is at fault.  I can't tell from your explanation of events whether the dealer was at fault or whether you simply failed to understand the transaction that you seem to have freely agreed to.  I'm not sure I understand what you think the finance provider has done wrong.

I will  make one or two comments:

First, when you have finished drafting your complaint to the FOS I suggest you get someone - preferably a native English speaker - who knows nothing at all about this problem to read it.  And then ask them if they understand it...

Second, I see no ethical or professional reasons at all why your solicitor cousin cannot give you some informal advice on this matter.  There might possibly be questions of a potential conflict of interest if he took you on as a paying client, but they wouldn't have to.  Why would they not want to give you the benefit of some of their professional knowledge for free?  You wouldn't sue them if they gave you wrong advice, would you?  Maybe you would.

Are you sure they aren't just of the opinion that your complaint is hopeless but they don't have the heart to tell you?

I would at least definitely ask your cousin to read your draft complaint and ask him what he honestly thought of it.  If he says he won't for ethical or professional reasons I'd be doubtful that he's being straightforward with you...

Third, you said early on that you'd consulted a NWNF firm of solicitors and that they had told you that they could definitely recover 100% of what you've paid in return for a cut.  I'm in agreement with what I think @Aylesbury_Duck said, that if a NWNF firm are willing to take it on then you must have a good case.  They wouldn't give you the time of day if they thought you weren't onto a winner.

So go back and look at what you told them, and make sure that you reflect that in your complaint to the FOS.  If you could convince a NWNF firm that you were right you may have a better chance of persuading the FOS that you have a valid complaint.  (Although I'll admit I'm not sure if the NWNF firm were telling you that you had a surefire case against the finance provider, or against the dealer?)

Or get this NWNF firm to take the case on for you.

Fourth, you've been asked several times if you paid the fee associated with the pre-order but you've evaded answering the question.  Did you pay it?

I'd be fascinated to know how you get this resolved...


[Edit:  If you don't like the advice here try either of these two forums:

Consumer Action Group - either here Vehicle retailers and manufacturers - National Consumer Service (consumeractiongroup.co.uk) or here Bank and Finance Subforums: - National Consumer Service (consumeractiongroup.co.uk)

Legal Beagles - Vehicle Finance and Issues - LegalBeagles Forum ]