|
Efbe
4,927 posts
36 months
|
Steffan said: Efbe said: Notshortnottall said: Perhaps, but I'll sleep more soundly knowing I've tried. I'm not prepared to let it go easily. Even if the car has to be returned, I'd be happier knowing there's a judgement against this f  ker. I'd just like to make his life a bit more miserable. Doing nothing will only encourage it further. i have only read through this thread very quickly. you mention that court is expensive, surely you can just go through the small claims court: https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcomewill cost you £80, its unbeleivably easy to do, takes half an hour and there is very good guidance out there for it. I took a claim against Three(Network provider) through this, and won in the end, despite being told by many people I wouldn't stand a chance. There are cheaper ways of effecting judgement as you suggest. But against Three you would immediately have a queue of bailiffs ready to collect the money because Three cannot run away. No PLC can. To be cost effective, litigation requires a reasonable assessment of the probability of ever getting recompense from that route. From the start. The "trader", or under the counter pond life who sold the car, will in all probability, be living in a rented house and own nothing. There is no effective action that can ensure payment. Every penny spent could be spent in getting the car at least drivable in safety, in this case. My understanding is that the buyer is not wealthy. Litigation, without return, is the province of the wealthy IMO. I would spend the money on the car. True But it's his only chance to get any money back. IMO it's only £80, and would be worth the chance. I do understand though that £80 may not sound like loose change to some  Also if he is a trader he will have other vehicles tat bailiffs could take.
|
|
|
Jaroon
315 posts
30 months
|
Or sell it as some on here seem to think it's the find of the century. Now if you could only make it one wheel drive, who knows what it might fetch.
|
|
|
Notshortnottall
Original Poster
388 posts
54 months
|
Steffan said: There are cheaper ways of effecting judgement as you suggest. But against Three you would immediately have a queue of bailiffs ready to collect the money because Three cannot run away. No PLC can.
To be cost effective, litigation requires a reasonable assessment of the probability of ever getting recompense from that route. From the start.
The "trader", or under the counter pond life who sold the car, will in all probability, be living in a rented house and own nothing. There is no effective action that can ensure payment. Every penny spent could be spent in getting the car at least drivable in safety, in this case.
My understanding is that the buyer is not wealthy. Litigation, without return, is the province of the wealthy IMO. I would spend the money on the car. Thanks for all the replies - everyone who has had an input has assisted in shaping my action so far. For clarity: 1. My sister / potential BiL need the car as transport for her own business which she has recently started. As a consequence, a degree of towing will be required, and therefore a 2 wheel drive car throws up several potential issues. This was the principle point when deciding to purchase a 4x4. I dare say that further down the line they could afford to pursue this of their own accord, however at present they cannot. 2. Do nto worry about the financial aspect. I can afford to pursue this on their behalf, I cannot let this a hole off the hook.......... 3. As above, even if we do not end up recovering the monies paid, I am minded to pursue this to the fullest to make this b ds life miserable in the hope that he will knock it on the head, or at least to cause major disruption to his shady sideline. I'm working in central London at the moment but will get a few pics when I get home to see the state of the bodge.
|
|
|
iwantagta
113 posts
15 months
|
thinfourth2 said: Jaroon said: thinfourth2 said: Jaroon said: Yes you're right we should reward these ingenius shysters by letting them get away with whatever because it is, after all, effort to persue them and maybe protect the next punter.
Still it must be great to inhabit your easy going world, short changed in shop "meh it's only money" held up at cash point "don't spend it all in one shop now" bummed by mister big "I was constipated anyway, that's sorted me right out, cheers" Is it beyond your level of understanding to accept the concept that most 4x4s never actually go offroad and is it really really hard to understand that maybe a 2wd freelander is better then a 4wd freelander 99% of the time What the OP might discover if it stops doing the "i'm going to see you in court" act is his sister might have a more suitable car for her needs then a standard freelander But no i'm some kind of total idiot for questioning this You make a valid point. The last one. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that, in your opinion, the car is now so much better perhaps the OPs BIL should offer to pay a bit extra for this lovely bonus. The point is the dealer knowly ripped him off and this should not be tolerated because it's effort to confront. Well if you are so keen to see justice done then you pay the court fees I on the other hand have merely suggested that if money is tight then they might be better off then they think Luckily having checked the paperwork all the 2 wheel drive conversion was completed by Land Rover themselves thus protecting the re-sale value. Unfortunately due to it sounding like she has a moral compass, she is now in the position whereby after her usage the vehicle will only be useful for breaking. Lets face facts here, when someone comes round to view it and she pipes up that at some point someone has f ked around with its drive train she is unlikely to get a buyer. Unless of course they are lucky enough to find someone who thinks "Well on the plus side i'll get better fuel economy". I have upmost respect for what Notshortnottall is doing. He is doing what I hope more and more people do. Making these t ts at least get put under a modicum of pressure through the courts, regardless of the likely outcome (which by the sounds of it he knows is more in hope than expectation). This can only be good for the rest of us. Thanks for what you are doing Notshortnottall, hopefully you are successful and can get this scumbag out of the market. Good luck.
|
|
|
GBTurbo
212 posts
41 months
|
|
|
GBTurbo
212 posts
41 months
|
I think the point being missed by some is that the car that's been sold is not the one they wanted. Regardless of it it was 100 wheel drive or 1 wheel drive. They wanted a 4 wheel drive.
By not doing anything the trader or whatever he is has sold a dodgy car for good money, is that fair?
If more and more people stood up for themselves maybe, just maybe these shady traders would think twice. As I said earlier, best of luck, ignore the haters and string this prick up
|
|
|
TheLordJohn
1,884 posts
16 months
|
GBTurbo said: . As I said earlier, best of luck, ignore the haters and string this prick up Finally!
|
|
|
thinfourth2
23,950 posts
74 months
|
GBTurbo said: I think the point being missed by some is that the car that's been sold is not the one they wanted. Regardless of it it was 100 wheel drive or 1 wheel drive. They wanted a 4 wheel drive. No this point isn't being missed If you think everyone buys a 4x4 because they want a 4x4 transmission then you are some what deluded Even landrover know this as they sell a 2wd freelander GBTurbo said: By not doing anything the trader or whatever he is has sold a dodgy car for good money, is that fair?
If more and more people stood up for themselves maybe, just maybe these shady traders would think twice. As I said earlier, best of luck, ignore the haters and string this prick up No doubt you class me as a hater If the OP wishes to cause as much hassle as possible for a dodgy back street trader then great good luck to him If the OP thinks he will come out financially on top then he is going to be disappointed
|
|
|
StottyZr
4,183 posts
33 months
|
thinfourth2 said: If the OP thinks he will come out financially on top then he is going to be disappointed I doubt the OP thinks he's going to win financially. He is hopefully going to piss of a dodgy dealer quite a lot. I'm all for this
|
|
|
TheLordJohn
1,884 posts
16 months
|
thinfourth2 said: If the OP thinks he will come out financially on top then he is going to be disappointed We've covered that one already 
|
|
|
jimmy the hat
192 posts
17 months
|
thinfourth2 said: Even landrover know this as they sell a 2wd freelander Yes but theirs is purpose built and sold as a 2wd rather than a butchered 4x4 misrepresented as a 4x4. The bold bit's important. thinfourth2 said: If the OP wishes to cause as much hassle as possible for a dodgy back street trader then great good luck to him. I think they do, quite why it bothers you so much is interesting in itself though. Guilty conscience? Cheers, Jim
|
|
|
Smanks
2,930 posts
57 months
|
thinfourth2 said: Same s t over and over again Crikey, what is difficult to understand? The car was described as 4wd. It is in fact 2wd. Even though the car is not going to be used entirely for greenlaning, they are not happy and would like to know what they can do, which admittedly sounds potentially fruitless. Not difficult is it?
|
|
|
TheLordJohn
1,884 posts
16 months
|
Smanks said: thinfourth2 said: Same s t over and over again Crikey, what is difficult to understand? The car was described as 4wd. It is in fact 2wd. Even though the car is not going to be used entirely for greenlaning, they are not happy and would like to know what they can do, which admittedly sounds potentially fruitless. Not difficult is it? I think his problem is that he thinks we don't get his point, which we do. But he isn't getting the OP's point, which is that his argument is pointless, in this circumstance. Another buyer, perhaps they might see it the same way as thin... - edit* I also think he doesn't understand that we are arguing the OP's case this way because he wants to go ahead with legal action regardless of financial implications. He's already stated he is not fussed in coughing up the readies for his sister.
|
|
|
Ecurie Ecosse
3,972 posts
88 months
|
Do HMRC and the DVLA know the trader is a trader?
|
|
|
9mm
678 posts
80 months
|
£80 and a few hours of time to p*** of a scumbag over a sustained period of time sounds like good value to me.
|
|
|
pulliptears
621 posts
36 months
|
9mm said: £80 and a few hours of time to p*** of a scumbag over a sustained period of time sounds like good value to me. Its not £80 though. He will need an independent engineers report on the car to prove its the 2wd so add £150 for that. Then dont forget your hearing fee, another £50 or so. Add to that the cost of sending every letter recorded and finally take into account the cost of the bailiff when he wont pay. On top of that the car can't be used now, so consider the costs of taxis, buses or buying another car in the meantime. Its nowhere near as simple as just £80.
|
|
|
Steffan
6,221 posts
98 months
|
pulliptears said: 9mm said: £80 and a few hours of time to p*** of a scumbag over a sustained period of time sounds like good value to me. Its not £80 though. He will need an independent engineers report on the car to prove its the 2wd so add £150 for that. Then dont forget your hearing fee, another £50 or so. Add to that the cost of sending every letter recorded and finally take into account the cost of the bailiff when he wont pay. On top of that the car can't be used now, so consider the costs of taxis, buses or buying another car in the meantime. Its nowhere near as simple as just £80. The costs of unsuccessful litigation are not small. Hence my consistent suggestion to litigate as a last resort. The OP wants to make a point and cause the pond life seller some problems. Entirely his choice and his money, and I wish him well.
|
|
|
9mm
678 posts
80 months
|
pulliptears said: Its not £80 though. He will need an independent engineers report on the car to prove its the 2wd so add £150 for that. Then dont forget your hearing fee, another £50 or so. Add to that the cost of sending every letter recorded and finally take into account the cost of the bailiff when he wont pay.
On top of that the car can't be used now, so consider the costs of taxis, buses or buying another car in the meantime. Its nowhere near as simple as just £80. Call it £400 then. Still a bargain in my book. Anything recovered will be a bonus.
|
|
|
Efbe
4,927 posts
36 months
|
9mm said: pulliptears said: Its not £80 though. He will need an independent engineers report on the car to prove its the 2wd so add £150 for that. Then dont forget your hearing fee, another £50 or so. Add to that the cost of sending every letter recorded and finally take into account the cost of the bailiff when he wont pay.
On top of that the car can't be used now, so consider the costs of taxis, buses or buying another car in the meantime. Its nowhere near as simple as just £80. Call it £400 then. Still a bargain in my book. Anything recovered will be a bonus. no-- call it £80, with a potential for another £50* if it does go to court. You don't need to pay for an independent engineers report. Quite simple take the vehicle to a main dealer/ specialist garage and ask them to give you a quote on fixing it. The quote would contain a description of the problem. *I seem to remember it being less than this
|
|
|
pulliptears
621 posts
36 months
|
Efbe said: no-- call it £80, with a potential for another £50* if it does go to court.
You don't need to pay for an independent engineers report. Quite simple take the vehicle to a main dealer/ specialist garage and ask them to give you a quote on fixing it. The quote would contain a description of the problem.
*I seem to remember it being less than this Breadvan should confirm or deny, but from memory to be admissible in court it needs to be an engineers report, something from a garage or a quote to fix isn't good enough. Your potential for another £50 still isn't adding the potential for further costs when he doesn't pay either. Plus again you are not considering the financial implications of not having the car in the interim as I said before (taxi's, buses, etc) which depending on OP's travel needs could be pittance or pounds. All I'm saying is to say its £80 is a very simplistic look at it.
|
|
