Letter Before Action
Discussion
A work Colleague has just returned a car which developed several faults within a few days after purchase. He had also part-exchanged a car.
It was clear that the Dealer was going to make it as difficult as possible to return the car, ie refusing to take it back on a Saturday which meant him having to take a day off work to return it.
When he got there, he was subjected to verbal abuse with a threat of violence.
The Dealer had removed some items from his part-exchange and refused to return them and also said that if he left without them, he was accepting the loss of these items.
If he sends a letter before action, does he claim for the replacement cost, ie new for old? Also, can he claim for the cost of the fuel for the return journey and loss of wages?
I believe that all of the above are legitimate claims, but want to be sure.
Thanks
Tim
It was clear that the Dealer was going to make it as difficult as possible to return the car, ie refusing to take it back on a Saturday which meant him having to take a day off work to return it.
When he got there, he was subjected to verbal abuse with a threat of violence.
The Dealer had removed some items from his part-exchange and refused to return them and also said that if he left without them, he was accepting the loss of these items.
If he sends a letter before action, does he claim for the replacement cost, ie new for old? Also, can he claim for the cost of the fuel for the return journey and loss of wages?
I believe that all of the above are legitimate claims, but want to be sure.
Thanks
Tim
Don't mix the two 'contracts'
1. Your mate sold his car to the dealer. The revenue was applied to contact 2!
2. Your mate bought a car - he was credited the sale price of his car to the dealer. This car has been returned.
Your mate can expect the car repaired so it is useable or the payment refunded. The p/x'd car is not his anymore!
1. Your mate sold his car to the dealer. The revenue was applied to contact 2!
2. Your mate bought a car - he was credited the sale price of his car to the dealer. This car has been returned.
Your mate can expect the car repaired so it is useable or the payment refunded. The p/x'd car is not his anymore!
IANAL, but...
Travel, time off etc. are a consequential loss and are not reclaimable.
Components removed from the Part ex. are fair game, on a like for like basis.
I don't agree that there are necessarily two contracts here. There was very possibly one deal to purchase a car with the consideration given being part cash, part trade in.
Travel, time off etc. are a consequential loss and are not reclaimable.
Components removed from the Part ex. are fair game, on a like for like basis.
I don't agree that there are necessarily two contracts here. There was very possibly one deal to purchase a car with the consideration given being part cash, part trade in.
PurpleMoonlight said:
What bit's are missing?
Roof bars, locking wheel key. Perhaps he could also claim for the engine oil that seems to have been drained from the car too! The Dealer had said that the turbo on his part-ex was broken, maybe he was trying to "help it along" on the journey home.
The turbo was fine, but he's lucky that he checked the oil level!
Tim
There wasn't a realistic alternative. He just wanted to be in the position that he was in prior to the purchase.
The Dealer was getting more and more aggressive and he just wanted to get his car back and head for home. (3 hours drive)
As I said before, had the Dealer been more reasonable, he would have just put it down to experience.
Having admitted that he had the missing items and wasn't going to give them back has just got my friend's back up and rightly so.
Tim
The Dealer was getting more and more aggressive and he just wanted to get his car back and head for home. (3 hours drive)
As I said before, had the Dealer been more reasonable, he would have just put it down to experience.
Having admitted that he had the missing items and wasn't going to give them back has just got my friend's back up and rightly so.
Tim
Understood. Trouble is he isn't now in the same position as he was so yes I'd say he should include the cost of doing this in his claim.
The dealer is obliged to either refund the original agreed price of the part exchange or return it in the same condition:
(11)To the extent that the consumer transferred anything else under the contract, the consumer is entitled to receive back the same amount of what the consumer transferred, unless subsection (12) applies.
(12)To the extent that the consumer transferred under the contract something for which the same amount of the same thing cannot be substituted, the consumer is entitled to receive back in its original state whatever the consumer transferred.
Regarding the fuel costs I'd say no:
(8)Whether or not the consumer has a duty to return the rejected goods, the trader must bear any reasonable costs of returning them, other than any costs incurred by the consumer in returning the goods in person to the place where the consumer took physical possession of them.
The trader is actually obliged to collect the vehicle in the event of a rejection, but as this didn't happen then the above applies.
Source:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/conten...
The dealer is obliged to either refund the original agreed price of the part exchange or return it in the same condition:
(11)To the extent that the consumer transferred anything else under the contract, the consumer is entitled to receive back the same amount of what the consumer transferred, unless subsection (12) applies.
(12)To the extent that the consumer transferred under the contract something for which the same amount of the same thing cannot be substituted, the consumer is entitled to receive back in its original state whatever the consumer transferred.
Regarding the fuel costs I'd say no:
(8)Whether or not the consumer has a duty to return the rejected goods, the trader must bear any reasonable costs of returning them, other than any costs incurred by the consumer in returning the goods in person to the place where the consumer took physical possession of them.
The trader is actually obliged to collect the vehicle in the event of a rejection, but as this didn't happen then the above applies.
Source:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/conten...
Thanks for the speedy reply. I believe that he was aware that the Dealer should collect the car, but trying to make him do it would be another thing entirely.
As you will have read from my previous posts, he wasn't the most amiable of people! I did warn him before he bought it that it would be difficult if things went wrong, due to the distance involved, but the Dealer convinced him that it would all be ok.
Tim
As you will have read from my previous posts, he wasn't the most amiable of people! I did warn him before he bought it that it would be difficult if things went wrong, due to the distance involved, but the Dealer convinced him that it would all be ok.
Tim
catman said:
Thanks for the speedy reply. I believe that he was aware that the Dealer should collect the car, but trying to make him do it would be another thing entirely.
As you will have read from my previous posts, he wasn't the most amiable of people! I did warn him before he bought it that it would be difficult if things went wrong, due to the distance involved, but the Dealer convinced him that it would all be ok.
Tim
I guessed that would be the case. Hope he gets the situation resolved to his satisfaction. As you will have read from my previous posts, he wasn't the most amiable of people! I did warn him before he bought it that it would be difficult if things went wrong, due to the distance involved, but the Dealer convinced him that it would all be ok.
Tim
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff