The Defendant has filed a Defence. Their defence is stating that they have repeatedly offered to repair the vehicle (actually only twice!) but I have not allowed them the opportunity to do so. They are also arguing that they fixed the original oil leak, and that the oil leaks it now has are not connected. Do you think they'll get anywhere with this defence? I now have to complete the directions questionnaire, and could really do with some guidance! Do I need to agree to be referred to the small claims mediation service? You also mentioned previously that when it came to completing the directions questionnaire, it may be worth requesting an order that the Defendant can only continue to defend the claim if they pay the money into court by way of a security. I can't find anywhere on the DQ that mentions any proposed orders. Also it says I need to serve a copy on all parties. Do I just post a copy to the Defendant at the same time as returning it to the Court?

It was issued on 18th July

I issued the claim and the Notice of Issue states that the Defendant has until 6th August to respond. Might be a stupid question, but does that mean I can apply for judgment today, or today is their last day to respond and I can apply tomorrow?

I've just had another look and it's not a receipt, it's a vehicle order form. I was given this on 22nd December after I had paid a deposit. I only have a card machine receipt to show the rest of the money that was paid when collecting the vehicle. The directors' address can be seen on Companies House. How would you know if the directors would become personally liable?

The purchase receipt had the ltd company details in small print at the bottom. Other than that, every letter I have received has made no mention of the ltd company.

Thanks so much for all your advice. I have issued the claim this evening, and will let you know how it goes. I have also registered on Companies House and am now following the company. Fingers crossed the company doesn't fold!

I have received a response from them today. They are still trying to argue that at the time the oil leak was last worked on, no further oil leaks were found by the garage. They have also advised that due to their financial situation, they regret that they are not in a position to purchase the vehicle back. They go on to say that the rent renewal on their premises is due for extending, and because of high overheads and lack of car sales, they have decided not to carry on trading! Because they are fair people (their words!), they would like to offer to take the vehicle back to the garage for them to readdress any further oil leaks that the vehicle may have, at their expense. This seems somewhat contradictory to me. If their financial situation is as bad as they make out, how can they afford to pay the garage to fix three separate oil leaks? BMW quoted almost £2,000 for this, although I appreciate that they do charge a lot more than most garages. I'm not sure what to do now. I don't think they are being entirely honest. When I spoke to them before, I was told they couldn't remember who I was, as they had sold something like 22 cars in the past week. Any thoughts?

No response as yet. Royal Mail tracking online shows the letter was signed for on 4th July. I also sent it by email on 3rd July. Do I issue the proceedings on 18th July? I am just preparing them now. Would you mind taking a quick look and telling me if you think they are OK? I managed to find one lot of oil on my credit card statement for £10.40, so I have added this to the total amount claimed.

I'm just after some advice for my husband. He took out finance on a vehicle with Yes Car Credit back in 2004. He was only 20 at the time and was told that he wouldn't be accepted for the finance if he didn't choose to have the PPI cover. As such he took the cover! We had forgotten all about the car finance, until we received a letter from Direct Auto Finance a few months ago advising how they will be handling data and that letter provided the agreement number. My husband wrote to Direct Auto Finance on 3rd May 2019 advising that he believes he was mis-sold PPI when purchasing the vehicle, as he was led to believe that his application for credit would be rejected if he did not take out the insurance. He advised that if his complaint was upheld, he would require a full refund of all premiums paid to the policy, plus any additional interest charged because of the PPI. He also advised that he would be claiming statutory compensation in view of the fact that he has been deprived of the use of the money. Direct Auto Finance replied on 15th May 2019 advising that they could not begin their investigations, as the signature on my husband's letter did not match the signature they had on file. He therefore provided a copy of his driving licence and passport, they wrote back on 28th May 2019 advising that they will now undertake a detailed investigation and respond within 8 weeks. They advised in this letter that a questionnaire designed by the Financial Ombudsman Service could be downloaded, and they requested that my husband complete this and return it to them. They go on to advise that if they do not hear within 28 days, they will make a fair assessment of the complaint based upon the information they have. We did look at the questionnaire online, but we could not answer a lot of the questions, so we didn't complete and return it to them. They also advised in their letter that a commission complaint would be opened and addressed under separate cover. We have now received two further letters from them dated 4th July. The first states that as the questionnaire has not been returned, they have made an assessment based upon the generic claims made in our letter and the documentation they hold on file. Based upon this they reject any suggestion that the sale of the policy in question was in any way mis-sold. They advise that the PPI policy was optional, my husband was eligible for PPI and the policy was suitable, that he understood the policy was optional and they dealt with him fairly and professionally. They advise that this is their final response in relation to the complaint. They have said that if we remain dissatisfied we can refer the complaint to the FOS free of charge within 6 months. However, this complaint falls outside the jurisdiction of the FOS. The second letter is in relation to the commission. It simply states that the finance agreement ended on 9th October 2006, and so reliance cannot be placed on the unfair relationship provisions under the Consumer Credit Act (s140a). Does anyone have any advice regarding this? Is my husband entitled to reclaim the PPI on the car finance, as this was such a long time ago? Direct Auto Finance have provided a copy of the credit agreement and it shows that he paid £927.40 in PPI, £350 for mechnical breakdown insurance cash premium, and £300 gap insurance premium. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

I can't honestly remember. I will double check my bank statements and if I can find it, I will add it to the claim.

Ok, I will add that. The only expense I have incurred is two lots of oil I have had to buy, but I haven't kept receipts and it was only a minimal expense anyway.

I have just drafted a letter to go to them today. Does this look OK to you? BY EMAIL & RECORDED DELIVERY LETTER BEFORE ACTION Thank you for your letter dated 1st July 2019. I note that you refer to the oil leak being repaired under your warranty. I should make it clear that I am not relying on the warranty here, but am relying on your statutory obligations under the Consumer Rights Act. As advised in my letter of 3rd June 2019, as I was advised on two separate occasions by you that the oil leak had been fixed, when it has clearly not, I believe the vehicle is not as described. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 makes it an implied term of the contract I have with the Low Mileage Centre that goods be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. As you are in breach of contract and I have owned the car for less than 6 years, and a previous attempt at repair has also failed, I am within my statutory rights to ask for a refund of up to 100% of the original cost paid. As such I am prepared to allow a further 14 days for you to contact me and arrange collection of the vehicle and provide a refund for the same. If I do not receive a satisfactory response from you within 14 days of the date of this letter, I intend to issue proceedings without further notice. I look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you again. I have received a further letter from them today. They left it until the last day to respond to my previous letter as well! They have said the following: Further to your letter of 18th June regarding the above vehicle, we have viewed the link provided by BMW, and read the brief report on the vehicle. It is quite clear from the above report, that the oil leaks reported on the vehicle are not in any way connected to the work we have had carried out on the vehicle. We had the vacuum pump oil seal replaced, and that is not an issue on the report. Engines can develop all kinds of oil leaks during the life of the vehicle, and we consider that we have satisfactorily dealt with the oil leak that was apparent when you brought the vehicle back to us for repair, under our warranty. We cannot be responsible for every issue on a vehicle after our warranty has expired, and therefore cannot offer you a refund for the vehicle, as we have met all of our obligations. Does this change my chances of success at all if I proceed to court? I'm not sure if it's relevant, but I don't believe the oil leak falls under the warranty, as I was told prior to sale that the oil leak had been resolved. If I had known it had not been resolved, I wouldn't have purchased the vehicle. The only thing that worries me here is that they replaced the vacuum pump oil seal on 19th March. I didn't get back to them until after BMW inspected the vehicle on 29th May (still within 6 months of sale). The reason for this is that there is no oil dipstick on the car, the levels are just shown on the dash. Unfortunately it won't show the oil level until you have been driving the car for around 10 minutes, and as most of my journeys are less than this, I'm usually unable to get an oil reading. Do you think this would be an issue at all?

Thanks for all your help - it's very much appreciated! I have checked the FCA website and from what I can see, everything looks OK there. The address for the directors says online that it was purchased last in 1996, some years before the company was established, so I imagine it is owned by the directors personally. I have checked on Trust Online and they have one unsatisfied judgment from 5th September 2016 in the sum of £2,504. Nothing else has come up on there. Does this just mean that the claimant in that case hasn't enforced the judgment? I assume they wouldn't be trading any longer otherwise? Their premises is a bit run down, but no worse than other second hand car dealers that I've been to!

Thanks for looking into it. I paid by debit card unfortunately. I have just pulled out the paperwork and on the receipt it says at the bottom 30 Agincourt Ltd T/A Low Mileage Centre. Company No. 6840157. I have looked them up on Companies House and they are active on there and been incorporated since March 2009. I assume if I issue proceedings it would be against 30 Agincourt Ltd? It is a proper premises and looks like they have been there for some time, but they only have room for about 6 cars inside, so a lot of their cars are parked out on the road.