Could anyone give information on what happens at a set aside hearing i am the judgement creditor lip ccj against active ltd thanks

Hi all. Hoping for some advise on next steps with a faulty TV that is 1 and a half years old. I want Co-op to repair it free of charge under the SOGA but they're not having any of it. I'll lay out the timeline as follows. Toshiba TV was bought by mother in law from a Co-op store in person in Oct 2014. She paid £208 for it (reduced by by about £50 as she had just finished working for a different Co-op store and had a discount card). She paid using her Barclaycard. In approx Jan this year it went faulty. Won't switch on. The power button on it alternates between red and green, but the screen remains blank. Read some online advice, tried keeping it unplugged, then plugging in and keeping finger on power button, etc. But no joy. Completely dead (apart from flashing power button). Mother in law speaks calls Toshiba, who tell her that she is over the 12 month warranty so tough, she will have to pay for any repair. She goes out and buys a new TV. Then i suggest that i take up the fight (as i'm a bit more clued up and don't like companies not taking accountability). Have been busy for a few months but have started contacting Co-op a few weeks ago to see what i can do (i guess i'm sort of hoping she'll give me the TV if i get it repaired, as she's gone out and bought a new one! But if not, i'm just happy to have helped her). I email Co-op Customer relations mid-March advising them that i am raising complaint that the TV is faulty and that i am wanting them to repair it free of charge under the Sale of Goods act as i believe it is not of satisfactory quality and not lasted a reasonable length of time. I attached a scan of the receipt as proof of purchase. I was expecting a reply along the lines of 'as it is over 6 months then prove it was inherent that the point of purchase', in which case i would have to go and get an independent technical assessment of the fault. First reply was the standard 'we're busy, we might take a while' email. 13 days later (i.e. late March) i get a reply acknowledging the complaint and advising me that they are forwarding it to their electric shop. The next day another email apologising as they now realise that it was bought from a store and not their electrical shop (i.e. not online). 30th March: Reply saying that will not repair it. and that i will need to contact Toshiba. I reply immediately stating that i am wanting it repaired under SOGA, and that i am pursuing them accordingly for this. Any warranty is in addition to my statutory rights (and the 1 year warranty has run out anyway). I reiterate that i want them to fulfil their obligations under SOGA, and if they are unable or unwilling to then to either take the complaint higher or refer me to any ADR scheme that they are a part of. 31st March: Email reply that they have spoken to one of their Team Leaders and are now referring it to their Group Risk and Insurance Division for advice. Yesterday: Reply received that they will not be repairing it, and again referring me to Toshiba. Some quotes from this email (as i can't believe how wide of the mark they are): "I have now discussed your complaint with our legal department. They advise me that the Co-operative Group is responsible for electrical products sold in our stores for twelve months after purchase until the initial twelve-month manufacturer's guarantee expires. After the initial twelve months, if an electrical product purchased from one of our stores develops a fault, the purchaser needs to contact the manufacturer of the product to arrange a repair. As the TV you purchased from our store is now out of its initial twelve-month guarantee, the responsibility for its repair is now with Toshiba, the manufacturer and remains with them for the six years following the expiration of the initial twelve-month manufacturer's guarantee." So, i have yet to ring Toshiba myself. But that would be a pointless exercise i would imagine as it is out of warranty and they have legal obligation to do anything for me. I have yet to approach any independent technician to assess the fault and provide a report, as i was waiting for Co-op to either prompt me for this or accept the fault as stated. Do i attempt to pursue the complaint with Co-op? Or ask for a deadlock letter? Or is there a Retail Ombudsman i should approach? Any help appreciated. (apologies for the long post, but always best to get all details and leave out any ambiguarity).

Hi there, New to this forum but it all looks helpful. Im sure this question has been posed here before but im just seeking clarity on my legal position. Bought an £800 sony vaio laptop from Currys (for my sins) in Oct 2013. It was the most expensive windows laptop in the shop, sold to me after I explained I use it for work and it gets lots of use so needs to be a machine which will stand up to it rather than a cheap laptop that will struggle to keep pace... It has been repaired once by Currys already in Summer 2014 (software failure, they reinstalled windows for me and thats about all). Last week, after 2 years 3 months, it has died completely. I have returned it to Currys for them to asses, but I am expecting it could be a motherboard failure and as such pretty much a write off and time to buy a new one. I have a friend who works for Currys repair centre, and he has advised me that Currys are obliged to repair or replace under the Sales of goods act regardless of warranty, something he described as retails best kept secret. Having raised this point with Currys the lady was quite firm in her denial ("in thrity years of working here ive never heard of a free repair to a 2 year old machine" ...etc). She claimed that wear and tear on the key board and case showing it has been used a lot as opposed to someone using it once a week to check facebook has to be considered when assessing what is reasable to expect in terms of the life of a laptop. While I take the point that number of hours use affects overall years of use, I feel that 2 years 3 months is not a reasonable time for a laptop to fail to the point of replacement, especially not for an £800 machine sold on the basis of its durability. I feel the amount of use is irrelevent given the short time frame, as to support that argument is to say that the laptop was not suitable for business use or capable of being used for anything other than light domestic home use, contrary to advice given at point of sale and contrary to the price tag. Having read some other threads here I am under the impression I may be entitled to some compensation if not a full repair/replacement, on the basis that the sales of goods act states it must "reasonably not be expected to have failed" which I think is the case. The issue of "fault being present from manfacture" can only be prooved by virtue of the fact it has failed, and would only fail after time not necessarily when first purchased. If an indpendent report was needed I can arrange it, I certainly havent spilled anything or dropped it, or otherwise caused reason for it to be faulty and the nature of it being inside the laptop means its hard to really break a motherboard any other way. I would appreicate advice on how to approach the issue given Currys known stubborn attitude to these problems and a better understanding of my legal rights. If needs be I will buy a new laptop (elsewhere), but I do feel I am being robbed of at least a couple of years use of a machine and therefore should be compensated towards the cost of a new one. Many thanks in advance Jon

Hi there I will try and keep a complicated story simple! I saw a car I was interested in the price was 21k. The car was 9 months old and had done less than 3,000 miles I took a reduced part exchange price for my car under pressure from the pushy salesman to get the deal done - (I would never have taken this price normally)this entailed rolling over 5k of negative equity into the new hire purchase agreement 3 months later a warning light comes on Take it to the garage and there is unrecorded accident damage - after much time and stress and reports my claim to have the car rejected is upheld by the finance company The independent report confirmed the car was not fit for purpose not safe to drive and a fire risk - you can imagine how scary it is that I have been driving around in this car with my family including two young children In any event I come to my question - the finance company has asked me to repay the negative equity I have argued that the agreement between them and I does not make reference to any negative equity - it defines the goods as the car and the cash price for the goods is the total amount including the negative equity - given the circumstances I think they should write it off - I would be grateful for any input - thanks in advance

I'm afraid I'm terribly confused by the situation I'm in and can't seem to find a straight answer anywhere. I'll start with a brief outline with dates as close as possible to accurate.. Nov 2013 - I purchase a massage chair from Sasaki (credit card deposit, rest on finance) Feb 2014 - chair is delivered Feb 2014 - I contact Sasaki stating chair unsuitable. Doesn't fit my build. They were given full info before purchase Mar 2014 - Sasaki agree to look into replacing, will 'get back to me' May 2014 - I start section 75 with Hitachi Finance as nothing heard from Sasaki Jun 2014 - Sasaki agree to replace and upgrade when a new model is available Aug 2014 - new model available, delivery delayed by my illness Jan 2015 - new chair is delivered Mar 2015 - new chair fails mechanically after 6 weeks What I want.. A refund, no more messing What I'm getting Sasaki say one thing when a call is made on my behalf (not getting anything etc) Hitachi say something else (Sasaki awaiting an engineer to visit me) I've made it clear I want a refund, Hitachi say that's their decision and they may decide I'm not entitled. Sasaki are sending an engineer to report on what the problem is, but according to Hitachi this person is going to be able to negotiate as well as maintain/repair the chair, but back to Sasaki and the engineer has no power to negotiate whatsoever. The initial chair was replaced as being not fit for purpose (I was, basically, too big for it at 6ft 2). The second chair has failed in three areas mechanically. The foot/leg rest will neither raise nor extend and the recliner will no longer bring the chair upright (the foot rest instead of being on the floor is actually 14 inches off the floor, making the chair unusable). Can anyone clear up as to exactly what I'm entitled to, what I can push for and what is supposed to be happening. I was under the impression that as the replacement had not made right the issue (ie the second chair is broken) that I could ask for a full refund and that was that. I know I might be wrong though. Can I just say to Hitachi that I want a refund and that's it?

Ok, I do hope i am not repeating whats been answered before, and a quick search has not thrown up anything. So a pair of Magnum boots, nearly £150 worth. 3 months of wear and the sole has nearly worn through and has split about a third of the way from the front, sideways across the sole. Is this considered just fair wear and tear. All other magnum and other (decent)boots i have had have lasted for donkeys without wearing through. I did two tours in a single pair of magnums but these ones havent lasted 3 months just knocking doors. They are genuine and purchased direct from magnum so its not a knockoff issue. I have no chance of returning them as i have no receipt left and been 6 months since i bunged them in the back of the garage, so this is just a theoretical question now. Thanks GTSTL

I purchased a Henleys watch from an Ebay seller in October 2014, brand new, boxed, and with tags. Within 2 months, the silver coating was rubbung off either side of the winder, around the top and bottom of the case, and around the underneath, showing a copper colour. I contacted the seller who ignored me. I then sent the watch back to the sellers address. I got a reply stating that the seller gives 21 days warranty, and that I should return the watch back to the manufacturer. The seller finished by saying that he returned the watch back to me. Fast forward to this month, when I have asked on 3 occasions for proof of posting and the tracking number. So far, no response. I have never received the watch back. I then threatened to sue in the Small Claims Court. Again no response. A summons is now in force. All of a sudden, the seller replies saying that the Sale of goods Act does not apply to him. I replied saying it does as she is the retailer.. ..In the meantime, I have tried googling the manufacturer of Henleys watches for a contact number/address, but have not found anything Does anyone on CAg have any contact details for Henleys watches please???. Also, am I correct in saying the SoGA does apply to the seller, or is the internet shopping a different law??

Totally let down by whirlpool... their product quality had fallen beyond expected standard. Bought a microwave from ao.com on 15/10/2013. After 2 days it arrived... and FAIL... won't turn on. (no power, fuse ok) After that got a replacement which on 3/12/2014 stopped heating food (probably faulty magnetron... looked up and the part alone is around £100). Now it won't even switch on. I hope that you agree that £245 appliance should last more than a year... so I mentioned them SOGA. also offered to do an independent examination/repair if they agree to reimburse the cost of it (this one they just ignored) this is what I got on 16th dec: I'm writing to confirm our Manufacturer Liaison Team have contacted Whirlpool and they are unable to offer a free of charge repair as the microwave is now out of it's warranty. They can offer you an additional warranty, there are two options for this, you can pay £14.99 for 12 months and this will cover you for any repairs during this time. Alternatively, you can pay a one off charge of £135.00 and the engineer will come out and repair the appliance for you. for that money I can buy new same size panasonic microwave... feels like a ripoff so I refused that ''generous offer''... next day got this email: I am sorry that you were unhappy with my response. I can understand your disappointment at losing the use of a microwave that is just two months outside of the warranty. We have spoken with Whirlpool again but unfortunately, they are still unwilling to provide a repair free of charge. We are also fully aware of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and how that applies to this situation. The Sale of Goods Act is designed to protect the retailer as much as it is designed to protect the consumer. However, on this occasion, as a goodwill gesture, we are willing to contribute towards 50% of the call out charge. If you’re happy to go ahead with this, we will contact Whirlpool and arrange for an engineer to repair the appliance. They will charge you for the callout and the repair, at which point you can send us a copy of the invoice. At this stage, we will refund you for half of the callout cost. Please let me know if you are happy to go down this route so that I can get things started with Whirlpool. ..... to sum up: 50% call out charge... still leaves me to pay for labor and parts back to square one? how to proceed? been busy at work so it took a while to get back to this issue

Hi everybody, looking for some advice regarding a used vehicle. earlier this year, we had an accident which caused significant damage to our car and it was written off by the insurance company. using the insurance payment we purchased a used car from a dealer. our old vehicle was: 2007, 64000 miles, no previous owners - bought from new. the used car we bought: 2006, 75000 miles, 2 previous owners. MOT the same week as purchased - no advisories. a good clean tidy car that HPI checks found clear. we felt confident enough to purchase the car. before leaving the forecourt after a test drive, we noticed the battery light was on. the dealer had no explanation but said if there was any issues he has no problem replacing the battery should that be needed. the battery light did go out after a few miles, but intermittently would come on over the next 2 weeks, we took it to a garage for a diagnosis and it was actually a bad alternator. we called the dealer and requested he replace the alternator , which he did. unfortunately now, 3 months since purchase, the power steering has failed rendering the car undriveable. the RAC recovered the car and did a report stating the issues and once again I informed the dealer and requested a repair. he said sorry but the vehicle was out of warranty, tough luck sort of thing. ( we didn't actually discuss/sign any warranty info but i assume he is talking about a 3 month warranty - as we are now 3 months a 6 days since purchase ) I called trading standards who said: under SOGA I was within my rights to request the car be repaired. especially within the 6 months. the vehicle was valuable enough to expect it to be reasonably free from defects especially any that render the vehicle useless. regarding repairs , they said he would had a few options, one being he repairs the car at his chosen garage another being we mutually agree a local garage who can repair the car and issue the invoice to him. Just wanted to hear peoples opinions on this issue? The dealer is a good dealer as far as I can see so far. He was helpful with a previous problem and doesn't 'avoid' contact . at least up to now. so I would like to be civil at all costs.. but be firm when exercising my rights. many thanks all.

Hi everyone, I bought a 08 Fiat Bravo from Jamie of Epic Motors Coventry on the 4th Oct 2014. On the 18th Oct 2014, it lost power on the motorway and could only do a maximum of 50mph while making a grinding noise. I managed to pull into a parking lot and called RAC who diagnosed it as a broken turbo. Since I only had roadside assistance and was 120miles from home and it was midnight, I paid £300 to have the car recovered back to my house. I got in touch with the seller on the 19/10/14 to see what he was willing to do. He initially offered to fix the problem free of charge but after speaking to him today (20/10/14) it turns out he thought I was a different customer when we initially spoke. He phoned me up, shouting and swearing and eventually said that I would have to pay to get the problem sorted. At this point, what do I do? He has since sent me a text saying "Just so you no, the warranty was paying for the work on your car, as you have said NO to this being done, I cannot help" At no point have I refused to accept repairs. But after finding out about his background, I do not trust the work that he would do on my car and have suggested getting the work done at a local garage I trust if he is willing to pay for it. How do I go about rejecting the car/getting it repaired and reclaiming from him? Thank you all for your help!

Good afternoon I am after help in regards to the sale of my French Bulldog puppy bought on 6/8/14. He was advertised as a pick of the litter and in good health.. He is kennel Club registered and the breeder is a Kennel Club assured breeder and I felt I did everything I could to ensure I was purchasing a healthy and happy puppy. I have a copy of his original advert, plus a copy of the contract I signed when I picked him up as proof of the sale The very next day I took him to his new vet for a check over and to get him wormed and registered, only to be told the devastating news that he had a heart murmur. The breeder denied that they knew about this and kept advising he had a clear vet health check ( i now have a copy of this check and there is no mention of his heart . bet states t was checked but if checked it should be on his notes...it isn't!) I instructed my vets to get all his vaccinations & the health check paper work from his old vets, to only be told more devastating news that the breeder knew he was ill at his 2nd vaccination, as it on his notes that he could drop dead at any time – I have a copy of this note as proof that the breeders knew ( she now states her mother took him and kept it from her - however she is the client at the surgery) Due to this non-disclosure my 4 week insurance i had when i picked him up is probably invalid, as his heart will be deemed as a pre condition, which wasn’t advised when he was purchased and insurance taken out on him. I am looking to sue the breeder for all his medical treatment and surgery My claim is made on the grounds that the item purchased (the puppy) was faulty (as confirmed by a heart scan with took place on the 14/8/14 ) and that they are liable for any misrepresentation or breach of contract under section 13 SOGA 1974 I have spoken to trading standards and the kennel club and it is confirmed to me that the breeder is liable if they sell a puppy that is defective. (BUT IS THIS ONLY IF THEY ARE A BUSINESS ?- she has a website and a shop on her premises but she states here kennels aren't a business) This is law under Section 13 of Sale of Goods Act 1979. Even if the breeder carries out all the health screening required for their breed, if they sell a puppy that is defective they are still liable to either refund the purchase price on the return of the puppy, (which due to the fact, he is now a much-loved member of the family, this would be impossible to me, as it would cause me the highest level of emotional distress to return him - however she did offer this, but i said it was not possible) or to pay to have the puppy's defect fixed - which is my intent. I understood it that if the purchaser does not have to return the puppy under SOGA 1979 but is entitled to do so. If they wish to keep the puppy then they can seek reasonable damages i.e. the cost of operations or medication to put it right. Anybody who breeds more than one litter is a breeder/trader (even breeding just one litter does not absolve the breeder from their obligations under consumer legislation) and therefore even if they did everything possible to protect themselves from producing any health defects in their puppies, they will still be liable unless they pointed out the defect prior to purchase. Which they did not, even though it was in writing from their vets. - BREEDER ADVISES SHE IS NOT A BUSINESS JUST A HOBBY BREEDER WILL THIS MATTER? The puppy has undertaken 2x full heart scan and is now getting ready for surgery in September. All of these medical interventions will cost in approx of £6000.00 , as still awaiting estimate for surgery ( £1000= has been spent on heart scans to date) Please can you advise where I stand on trying to get back some of my money please. I have sent a letter to the breeder outlining all of the above , another another letter outlining all costs i wish her to pay, plus now a letter before court. Once his surgery has been complete i will have invoice for all bills and will proceed to court if you feel i have a case but any advice on where I stand legally would be a great help please

We've had an intermittent issue with our Fridge Freezer, which now finally seems to have broken down permanently, it's only 3 1/2 years old so we're claiming, something, back from the retailer. To this end we asked an engineer to come out and provide us with an engineers report, however, I'm really not sure what he's provided is adequate, I haven't much confidence in him to be honest, he initially tried to claim that the invoice for his visit was the report, until I asked for something a bit more substantial. His last offering is attached (I've removed the company header) [ATTACH]51261[/ATTACH] Is this adequate for a SOGA claim?

Hi, I purchased a Zanussi Freezer for £200 in July of 2012 and it has now packed up. I contacted 123Electrical wo I purchased it from and they asked me to organise a engineers report which I have, at the cost of £44. The Zanussi engineer has concluded it will cost more than the purchase price to repair which I communicated back to 123Electrical. I have now recieved a call from Zanussi direct offerring to replace the unit for £150. 123Electrical are stalling saying they need to talk to the manufacturer again. Can someone with more knowledge of SOGA let me know if I am correct in thinking that 123Electrical should be replacing my freezer or giving me a full refund? 18 months doesn't seem very long in the life of a freezer, is there a time limit under which they should act? regards Dan.

Situation.. A mobile phone retailer offers incentive gifts for taking out/renewing contracts with phones. A renewal is arranged by phone and a gift chosen. There is no problem with the phone received as part of an upgrade/contract renewal. However there is a problem with the free gift, a 3DS XL game console, in that there are no English instructions (Spanish, Portuguese and Italian only). Questions.. Is not having an English manual contrary to fit for purpose/satisfactory quality? Is the gift even covered under SOGA/DSR or any similar act? Does this affect the phone contract if it goes further?

Hi there I'm new to this forum and could do with some help. 5 months ago I bought a used 207 from a dealer and at the time no issues with the car where pointed out, I was told that it came with 2 year warranty and a years free mot when the current one runs out which is around now.. I booked it in with the dealer for its free mot and then after dropping the car off I was contacted by the dealer stating that some work needed to be carried out and that it needed new rear disc brakes and pads which don't fall under the warranty I thought fair enough wear and tear, he quoted me a price and asked was it okay for the work to be carried out and I said yes. Now the car failed the mot due to a faulty hand brake and they've fixed it and rebooked it for tomorrow.... Now the problem is since then a friend of mine who used to work for ford has told me that because the car is less than 6 months old it's up to the dealer to fix these faults free of charge as when they originally acquired the vehicle it should have been inspected and noticed any issue with discs and pads and had them replaced and or notified me that they would soon need replacing which they didn't !! I also only do roughly 250 miles a month with the odd long drive weekend away that's a only about 2000 plus miles in 5 months and I'm under the impression discs and pads last anywhere from 25,000 to 50,000 miles The dealership will be contacting me to update me on the car tomorrow and when to collect the car, but I'm unsure how to approach the situation, do I refuse payment or question the work carried out pre sale ????

Friend bought a car from a guy who runs a business with a website offering 'Cars for Sale' and his business has a companies house registration showing 'Nature of Business - 45112 - Sale of used cars and light motor vehicles'. He paid for the vehicle by bank transfer into the guy's business bank account and the seller scribbled him a pencil receipt (which my friend also signed), part of which used the phrase "sold for sum private by bank transfer". The car started to go seriously wrong a few months after purchase and my friend phoned him and texted him (the dealer) multiple times asking for help. He was brushed off. Eventually my friend had to have it repaired at his own expense. They were severe engine management faults that caused the vehicle to stall in dangerous situations. He had to sell the vehicle (as he relied on it for work) and took a loss of several thousand on the original purchase price. The repair work cost him an additional £750. Is this a private sale? My hunch is that it was a car dealer sale by a business, in which case presumably the six month rule under the SOGA applies? As he refused to have the car back and my friend was forced to sell it at a loss, does he have a good case to litigate to recover the loss at sale, as well as the repair bill? Many thanks for any helpful pointers!

Back in February 2013 I bought a car from a commercial garage. It was inherently faulty from the start. I attempted with the authority of the garage to get it repaired but new faults kept appearing, so I returned it under SOGA. The garage agreed to a partially refund the £9000 I paid by offering £7500. I had the car for a month and it was in and out of the garage for repair 6 times so I refused their offer. They then got quite nasty with a "take the money or take us to court" attitude so I referred it to my credit card provider under Section 75 of CCA. They told me they thought the garage was being entirely reasonable and rejected my claim. I then took it to the FOS, who upheld my claim and ordered the credit card company to refund me at the beginning of December. They responded after the deadline that the FOS gave them, saying that they were liaising with the merchant. They were given an extension until last Monday to respond, they didn't. Now my complaint has been passed on to be reviewed by an ombudsman. Do I just have to wait for their decision or can I take the merchant and/or the credit card company to court, with the decision of the FOS adjudicator as evidence?

Hello CAGgers, On 23rd of June I purchased a 2001 VW Beetle for my wife from an independent dealer in Cornwall (I live in Essex, so it was some way to go!). The car was paid for using a credit card. Last week I noticed some rust patches had appeared at the corners of the roof. I took the car to a body repair specialist and now have a bill for £463.60 in front of me. Now, obviously I'm not happy with that, but what concerns me more is the advisory notice that the body shop have put on the invoice: "Due to the location and depth of the rust, the repair we have carried out is only superficial and will return most definitely within time. The location and nature of the rust under and within joining panel seals means that areas inaccessible to us will still be corroding underneath. Even a full roof skin removal and replacement will leave corroding pillars which cannot be replaced as these make up the structural integrity of the vehicle. In our opinion given the value, this vehicle and the repairs needed would result in a write off situation. This particular fault is due to the manufacturers design of the roof skin / roof pillar seam. The foam and rubber seals lock the water in the recess rather than expelling it. We would not expect to see this level of corrosion on a vehicle of this age and would therefore not consider it to be general wear and tear." Understandably my wife was very upset on hearing this news - she absolutely adored this car The body shop said that this corrosion had been happening for some time, and that the roof had already been repainted at least twice before. With this information, I rang Citizens Advice to see if they could help me, and they believe I have a case under the SOGA, as the vehicle is not of satisfactory quality and has not lasted a reasonable length of time. They suggested that as the corrosion cannot be attributed to fair wear and tear, then it would be classed as a manufacturing fault, and I could reject the car rather than accepting a repair (as a repair will not remedy the underlying problem). They also said I should give the dealer a call to see what his response would be. I did that this afternoon and he basically said it's not his problem and 'rust happens'. I am about to write a formal letter to the dealer, and was wondering if anyone could point me in the right direction with what to put to make it more, well, official sounding. I know I have to keep it short and sweet, but is there anything specific I should include? Any other help or advice would be very much appreciated. Steve

Hi guys, just looking for some SOGA advice. I've been swatting up on this for a while now as the issue has been dragged out massively now! In April '13 I bought a 2.0T Audi A5 from a 'luxury car specialist' it seemed pretty obvious, pretty quickly that she was going through oil pretty quick. I looked it up and found that the 2.0T engines do use some oil, so I just faced facts and kept going. The consumption got 1L per 600 miles! I put the car into Audi to see if there was anything they could do. They conducted an oil consumption test, which the car failed, and threw an estimate of £5.5k at me for replacement pistons & conrods, but under goodwill discounted it to £1750. I contacted Audi UK who told me the discount was as much as they could do, and it was them who advised me to pursue the dealer I purchased it from. I contacted the dealer (Via recorded delivery etc) and outlined my issues, and sent a copy to the finance company. The dealer put it to their warranty company who quickly dismissed it as the car hadn't mechanically failed. The dealer contacted the finance company and told them the news. The finance company contacted me and asked me to gather up as much evidence as I could proving the issues existed. After doing alot of research, I discovered all/nearly all of my SOGA rights. A bit of too'ing and fro'ing went on between me and the finance company and they have now come back with an official no, as i their 'opinion' it is fair wear and tear as I've covered almost 9000 miles since I bought it (7k when I officially begun investigation). I came back at them with my SOGA fact, like reverse burden of proof & presumed inherent fault as I'd brought the issues up 4 months after I'd bought the car. I've now sent them a final notice before court action stating that the 2 remedies for the solution are (1) Pay the £1750 for the repairs. (2) Discount the original sale price of the car by circa £5.5k to reflect the true condition of the car when I bought it. The issue has been going on for almost 2 months now, hence me sending a final notice before court, as they still are in denial that the issue exists. They have offered me £250 as a gesture of goodwill to help with diagnostic costs...which I quickly declined. What I'm wondering is, am I within my rights to get the car repaired and then claim the costs back in SCC? Or do I have to go to court before hand and see what the outcome is. Also is it the finance company who are responsible? My research tells me yes, and they have taken the lead roll in the case. But I want to make sure everything is perfectly in order before I issue court proceedings. Thanks very much for anything you can point out in advance. I can see this forum becoming very useful

Hi, I was wondering if someone could help me. I bought a car three months ago from Toyota, on the day of picking up that car, it broken down and eventually the battery went flat within a month. As a preapproved car they are meant to be fully serviced, have have their preinspection checks and any MOT advisory issues on the MOT to be rectified according to Toyota. Ive asked for the preinspection checks which the garage don't have, and when I went through the servicing documents the car was due for a service the week after I picked up the car, and on the day of receiving the car I found that two of the tyres had advisory items which means I need to get them replaced soon. They've lied to me before when I requested an engine oil change because it was a dirty brown color and they stated that the car was not due for service on an invoice in september which is a month after a service was due. They have only agreed to change the tyres if they see fit which is ridiculous as I paid extra for a preapproved car on the understanding that cars are fully serviced and MOT issues are rectified. I know that they have breached contract in the SOGA and OFT unfair selling regulations. They've said that this is the most they will do for me seeing as I've had the car for three months even though I stopped using the car since the start of october and I've told them this in correspondence. They are refusing to accept any fault, and even though I've highlighted my concerns many times they are not dealing with me seriously. I don't want to have to take this to court as it has wasted enough of my time trying to get through to them. I have also contacted head office who refuse to deal with it as I purchased a preapproved honda from them rather than a toyota. I'd be grateful for any advice, thanks!

Hi, bought a used car (53 plate) for 2K not even 4 weeks ago (MOT till end of Oct 2013). The car was sold stating that everything apart a minor dent in the body was in good working condition. Roughly two weeks after purchase the engine light came on and I got a mechanic to look at it and he said to me the cost of repair (material + labor) is not worth the car. I went to another mechanic the week after and had the car checked again. Today I got the results stating that the repair will be 600 GBP and a MOT test failed with various reasons. The mechanic told me to scrap the car as it is not worth the money anymore to repair all the faults. Should I just scrap it or can I invoke SOGA to get a refund ?

Good Afternoon CAG, A customer has provided me a Dell Laptop to repair. The fault is most certainly a failing hard drive. Having done the usual diagnostics and attempted recovery it is very likely the drive will need replacing. The laptop has 1 year collect & return warranty on the laptop which expired mid July 2013. The fault was reported around the last week of August. The Laptop was purchased from Tesco Direct in April last year. Do you think I have a claim under the sales of goods act? I am happy to replace the drive in the laptop as is the customer as they need a quick fix. However I don't want to charge my customer unnecessarily if a replacement hard drive can be provided OR claim under SOGA. As the laptop only had 12 months warranty, it's a pretty poor show that it's failed in month 13. Considering I have other laptops here that have been running fine since 2006 without too many problems. Any advice appreciated. Thanks NS

This company has a very strange interpretation of Sale of Goods Act. If the item is 6 months old it only gives partial refunds. So if your item failed after 7 months you only get a 90% refund. Thats not the half of it. They originally tell you to contact the OEM for returns, again shirking responsibility! Its only when I insisted under the SoGA, that they had to take the RMA, that they arranged a courier collection. What happened to me was that I asked for a replacement item as I knew if I would only get 90% back if I put refund on the RMA. But someone at ebuyer changed the status of the RMA to 'refund' even though they had plenty of stock to give a replacement. They deny any wrongdoing and refuse to replace the item saying I asked for a refund. Rather than put the situation right regardless of whose fault it may have been, a decent company would have said OK whatever, who cares who put refund, the situation is that now the customer is asking for a replacement and we will honour that. In the end so many weeks passed of eBuyers stalling on the replacement, that the item then became out of stock - discontinued (funny that!) They say you have to place a new order, but the items have doubled in price since I bought the old one! Again, very convinient! Are there any grounds on which I can sue using small claims? I have lost only about £5 but I want to do it for the principle and to protect other consumers who have lost far more! People need to be aware this is how they manage to offer low prices.

Ok so brought a car exactly 3 months from garage, its a used car and i paid about the market value (certainly no lower) During the 1st 4 weeks i was noticing i was putting about a litre of oil in every week and the heat shield fell off (minor but still) and the air con and blower packed up completely. It was not leaking oil it was burning it. Contacted the garage who agreed to take it back and 'have a look' they did and 'fixed' the car. fast forward to now and the car is suddenly using a litre of oil a week again, basically i think they temporarily hid/fixed the problem rather than a proper fix, I think its burning so much because of the piston rings and all they did was clean the breather pipes out. So i got it, it went wrong, they had it back, fixed it (apparently) and now again its broken again. As said ive had for exactly 3 months, can i still reject under SOGA

hi everyone, I need so help from an expert on the Sale of Goods Act, as I bought a PC from comet in July 2011, it was returned as faulty in October 2011 with a faulty dvd drive, memory and hard drive which they then repaired under warranty it's worked fine ever since and has only had light usage but sadly it wont work at all since July this year. It's a packard bell all in one touch screen pc and the screen fails to work, at barely 2 years old and I think (though cant be sure as I am not an expert) that the graphic card has failed as the screen doesn't come on at all which makes the PC unusable. I didn't purchase an extended guarantee from comet as I've had numerous packard bell pc's over the years and they've all lasted well and have been of general good quality, in other words I've had no complaints about them until now. Comet obviously no longer exist I've emailed packard bell and asked them to undertake a free of charge repair as clearly the device is not fit for purpose as it's reasonable to expect more than two years/(18months approx since last repair) in lifepsan from a computer. Packard bell wont help and have referred me back to the retailer comet who of course no longer exist. I've threatened them with the SOGA in my previous emails and I'm certain though not sure that responsibility for repairs transfers to the manufacturer under the SOGA when a retailer goes out of business or ceases to trade. This is the part I'm not sure about! Does responsibility for the PC transfer to Packard Bell now comet is no longer trading. Also does anyone know what constitutes a fair and reasonable life span for a PC which would satisfy trading standards I've looked on the internet but cant find any consistent (read legally satisfying) references. Many Thanks for any help and advice.