So its immaterial that the finance company would likely have trusted the seller in good faith to supply an item "fit for purpose"? Although being in the same building and the fact both are not responding to calls or letters makes you wonder how tied together they really are in reality. So an LBA to both should hopefully provoke some kind of response one would hope! When it comes to court, will I still open one case but with 2 people and hence 2 sets of documents??

so the letter before action needs to be addressed to the finance company and copied to the garage. from what i understand, i am suing the finance company under section 75, specifically 75a of the consumer credit act 1974 because i have "been unable to obtain redress from the supplier". Had another look at the finance agreement tonight. doesnt mention "hire purchase" anywhere. I presume thats just an industry term rather than legal?? Says " fixed sum loan agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974" then says the finance is secured by means of "bill of sale" against the vehicle.

I know its technically probably breaking some law but when DVLA started to become unreliable, I reported my licence lost and got another one. I "found" the lost one and now keep it in a safe place. Its unlikely id loose both.

I shall keep it as brief and simple as possible. I purchased a shogun 4x4 in sep2013 on HP with a £1000 deposit from a large "family" garage. Came with the usual worthless warranty. The car has turned out to be a bit of a lemon!! Initially when i looked at the car it all seemed good. General condition good for age and a low mileage for the year (83k and 2003 plate). Now being mechanically minded and knowing the weakness of the engine in this car (no fuel filter so the injectors or hp pump clog up...- due to rubbish uk fuel). I keenly inspected the service history. All appeared well and indeed the previous owner had spend a grand on the engine to make sure it ran fine. So the deal was done and not being local, i arranged to pick it up the following week after a new MoT and usual "dealer inspection and service". During the following week the dealer contacted me to say it had developed a engine fault and the light had come on so it went to the local Mitsubishi dealer to be fixed. Fair enough, it was fixed down to an injector fault and a new Mot was done the day before i collected with no advisories. all seems fine. Collected the car and drove 50 miles home. Next morning i find a pool of brake fluid under the rear. Can't see any obvious place it was leaking from, the level was just ok in the resevior so i drive carefully to my local garage to get it looked at. I've used this garage for years so the manager is happy to chuck it on the ramp for a look see. Both steel brake lines on the rear brakes are heavily corroded and burst leaving an aerosol of brake fluid mist on applying the brakes!! Obviously They must have just recently burst perhaps on journey home but clearly they have been excessively corroded for some time. Yet a clean bill of health on MoT a few days earlier..... My alarm bells are starting to ring. Having spent thousands at this garage the manager offered to fix the lines for free. I explained i had a warranty which he confirmed was worthless and said its not worth the hassle and as its a quiet day he would just get it done. So the lines are replaced and the car rocks on. In hindsight it might have been worth reporting the defect to the dealer so its on file. The next problem occurs! Engine light comes on. Fault clears itself and there is no trace on the ECU of the problem. Being a bit paranoid I take a closer look at the engine, see how dirty the oil is and decide to have a precautionary service including oil change, fuel filter, engine flush and moving over to super unleaded. Roll on 8 weeks to early december and just over 1500 miles and the engine blows up!! Rod through the side of the block! RAC recovered it to my local garage who confirmed the obvious. After contacting the original dealer and the warranty company, after a bit of wrangling it is agreed that the Dealer will take the car back to look at repair options. Interestingly the conversation with the (junior) customer services person, she agreed with me verbally that in the first 6 months the fault (that led to failure) was deemed to exist at time of sale unless evidence proved otherwise and said they would probably have to "put things right". Now obviously thats not binding but it did initially seem they might be prepared to play ball and offer some decent customer service as you might expect. With the xmas break no work was done on the car and the dealers service manager said he would look at it and try and source new engine in new year. Fair enough, not ideal but i know what the trade is like and the engine in the car is very rare in the UK and hence expensive and hard to find. Early january had a few conversations with the service manager and customer services over what the plan was and also to complain about the other issues i have had. Also during the initial breakdown the fuel filler was found to have rotted through and was leaking fuel.- another nail in the coffin. At this point things stalled with no sign of an repair, and none of my concerns being addressed about the car over the phone. Following the advice of a friend in the motortrade, he advised me to reject it now while i still have a chance of getting any money back. I did it formally by letter to both the finance company and the dealer. (they both have the same registered address as its an "in house" finance department). In essence i wanted my £1k deposit back, the finance settled and any money owing to me from the £800 of repayments after early termination coming back to me. with the termination rules on the agreement and my interest rate i should have a fair chunk of that £800 back if i should pay any penalty at all. Both replied fairly quickly. The finance company said they have noted the complaint and initially to deal with the dealer and they will keep a close eye on the complaint. - that was pretty much what i expected of them. The dealer replied saying the service manager was away for 2 weeks and he would address my concerns on his return. This was signed by the customer services manager. IMO she should have been dealing with it herself and it seemed like a stalling tactic. Predictably enough no contact came. I tried phoning but ended up in hold then hung up on hell so havent bothered with phoning as they arent prepared to talk it seems. As taxi costs have been racking up, i have been forced to buy a cheap car to get around and spend considerable money doing it up to keep it reliable - money i shouldnt have to have spent as i should have had a car anyway! I allowed them 6 weeks to reply and wrote to them again basically restating what i wanted as well as disapointment at thier lack of contact. This was sent to the finance company to keep them in the loop as I am required to do due to thier joint liability. That was the middle of April. All letters were sent recorded and i have delivery proofs stored away safely if needed in court later. That brings me to now. At this stage i feel i have little option but court. My intention is to send the final "letter before action" then if they fail to resolve the situation then court it is. At this stage is it only the finance company i should be taking to court?? As far as i can see they are the same people (although probably not legally). In essence i want my money back and the finance cleared and i will happily walk away. Having read on here and other places there appears no definitive answer weather i should go after the dealer now then finance later or just the finance company?? At the end of the day I dont care who i go after if it gets me my money back!! Although with the lack of contact so far, I am skeptical if its worth it for what would at most be £1800 back to me (albeit the claim is £5800 plus costs when you take into account £5k vehicle sale price)> The negative side of me thinks they would just ignore any claim against them knowing id have to fork out a fortune in costs to get any money off them. Any advice would be grateful.

Surely in this day and age, DVLA make electronic backups of their databases on a regular basis??? Surely they have a mechanism to access these backups???

My friend runs a small limited company selling vehicles. A former employee has a personal debt that has gone to court. The person he owes the debt to had no personal address for him so used the business address on all correspondence. My friend has found out that a CCJ has been made for the personal debt listed with the employees name and listed below, the company name and address. The employee no longer works for the company and we have no accurate address as it appears he used an old address when working for the company. Is this going to effect the credit reference of the Company? and can anything be done to remove the company name and address from the CCJ?

I cant see how its council tax fraud?? Hes stating he lives in the house when he doesnt. The requirement to pay council tax is merely a consequence of that. Surely the fraud would be committed against the Local Education Authority as he is gaining a percieved benefit through deception. I dont see what council tax has to do with it. I presume the LEA want documentation to prove in which case he may be committing some other offence to the council, but its not fraud.

Does the private estate have a estate management agency/company?? Is build work still ongoing?? If so you get an answer from them as they should know. I think the council has such data of adopted roads.

surely the photographic evidence showing the car on private land will mean you win no problem???? Obviously i hope you have checked to be certain that the land your car is parked on IS private. Theres a few other threads with similar situations in carparks which might have the exact info/wording.

Im still confused why they want wage slips! Is it the DVLA's way of deciding who to screw over???? earn over a certain limit and they will knock you back to provisional to make some more money out of you!!

Did you specifically state that your refusal of the prozac was due to an adverse reaction in the past??? If so, he should have offered an alternative anti-depressant or discussed another form of treatment. Antidepressants are also used in some cases of anxiety and other conditions so it isnt automatically for depression. If thats the case change gp if possible as it is quite frankly absurd to refuse a referral when you have a valid reason to not take the prozac. Of course he may just be using the prozac as an excuse to avoid referral rather than a specific rule. Most GP's are "financially aware" these days when it comes to treatments and they are often encouraged to take the cheaper treatment options.

I dont understand why you are having to send in marriage certificates for a change of address?????? Change of name i can understand.

That is so petty!!! The law when they wrote it wasnt meant to screw people in laybys!!!! People stopped in traffic yes, I can see the point, but in a layby is im sorry rediculous that a copper even bothered to prosecute!!!! Surely the ONLY issue in a layby is environmental and certainly not something to be dealt with by penalty points!! As with the others be sure of the dates for the past offences. From what i understand its 3 years for totting up purposes but still on the license for 4 years. IE in theory you could have 9 points shown on license but 6 points for totting up purposes. You may be lucky if those 3 points came off the license back in december.

the ultimate irony is that the computer systems are supposed to speed things up. You do have to wonder if there are written policys for DWP employees stating things like "lie at every opportunity", "deliberately delay claims" or is the management just so bad or so corrupt???

right, so litter bins are only for rubbish kicking about in the street?? stuff that people shouldnt have dropped in the first place, and how many people pick rubbish off floor and place it in the bin????? WTF lol!! what next, mouthpieces we have to wear so they can charge us for the air we breath!!! LOL