Advice needed - major faults with new car on HP- who should I hold accountable as I'm paying but 'carless'??

[sud]

Hi,

 

I hope someone out there will be able to help me

- I am currently having problems with a local car dealership who are insisting I return my temporary car and take my original car back.

 

 

However I consider it is unsafe to drive, following three major issues in a 5mth period.

 

 

The engine blew up in Apr 14,

then the car had complete brake and steering failure in Aug 14 while I was driving it which was terrifying.

I have tried speaking & writing to the dealership, HP finance company and manufacturer

however they are all passing the buck and its difficult to work out who is accountable.

 

Effectively I feel the product supplied is under parr - not of reasonable quality & I now feel unsafe in it.

 

 

A day after the full brake failure, I received a call from the dealership saying the car was tested and ready.

Later it turned out that none of the work had been done on the car and the car was still unsafe/unfixed when I was told that.

I voiced serious concerns about this communication and said that following that and issues with the car,

I no longer had faith in either the dealership or the vehicle make.

 

On this basis, I advised all parties in August that I was unwilling to accept the vehicle back

however they fixed it anyway and tried to make me take it back

- to date no reasonable offer has been made.

 

 

I have received a number of letters stating they want the temporary car returned

and mentioning police action, lack of insurance, my car getting vandalised at their premises.

The dealership have phoned me on my work number numerous times a day last week,

despite me asking them not to phone that number they continued to do so.

 

I have continued to make my mthly HP payments on time every mth and have not breached any of the terms of my agreement.

I wrote to the dealership, finance company and manufacturer recently and pointed out I was still paying for a car

and therefore it seemed reasonable I keep that until I was made a reasonable offer of an alternative or compensation.

As I was paying it seemed reasonable whilst negotiations were made.

 

Throughout this, the dealership have continued to make approaches to dump 'my' car back with me and take away the temporary car

- I believe this is now verging on intimidation as they're hoping I'll give up and just walk away.

 

 

However I cannot now go to another brand as they have my deposit and I also haven't had the car I've been paying for during most of this year.

The last response was that an independent garage (of same manufacturer brand therefore not in effect an independent)

had inspected it and said the brakes were fine.

Due to issues encompassed, I feel no more reassured about the car, brand or dealership.

 

Just to clarify I am 18mth into a 3y HP agreement Mar13-Mar16 but as a result of the lack of faith

I now have in the vehicle and dealership, I have requested they release me from the finance agreement

and repay a proportion of the money I have paid so that I am not left at a disadvantage as a result of poor product supplied.

 

I paid £1000 up front & 19mths x £283 p.m.

I have stumped up quite a phone bill, taken a number of hrs/ days off work,

had an under parr product since engine replaced Apr 14

(noisy, extras missing, poorer acceleration, poorer fuel consumption,

was also advised replacement was hybrid of two brands as they couldn't source one

- this has now been denied by the manufacturer.)

As I've not had 'my car' at all for 4mth of this year I'm thinking I would like to seek compensation along these lines-

 

Goodwill return of deposit £1000 for all the issues I've had to put up with + 1/2 the mthly payments (Apr-Oct 14)

£994 because I haven't had the car I contracted to.

 

Do you consider this is a reasonable request and if so, who should I hold accountable?

I am prepared to take this to small claims if necessary and was thinking

I may write a letter of intended action if someone can point me to who that should be against.

 

thank you for any advice you may be able to offer.

 

 

They've told me I'm no longer insured in the temp car so it's now sitting outside my house

and I'm without any car at all despite fact I'm paying them £283 p/mth....

[heliosuk]

It would really help if gave the make, age and type of car along with exactly when you brought it. Some people describe a used car as a new car as it is new to them so you need to clarify that first.

[sud]

Hi heliosuk,

 

it's a 2013 plate Peugeot 208 1.2 Active, I got it on an HP agreement in March 13 through Peugeot Finance on a 3y 'All you pay is Fuel' basis. Since April 2014, I haven't had the car in it's original state/spec, since August 14, I've had a courtesy car advertising Perry's Portsmouth. I've now got the courtesy car outside my house but they told me it's not insured for me to drive from today yet I do not have a car and can't drive anyone else's 3rd party if I'm no longer insured...

[rebel11]

Hi sud

 

It is outrageous that this matter has not been resolved by the finance company. They should not be asking you to write to the manufacturer or any other party. The Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973.

 

Send them the following amended template (remove top line). Send it Recored Delivery, give them a deadline. Also tell them all communication are to be carried out in writing. Tell them if they call you at work you will file a claim for harrassment.

 

Claiming a refund for a faulty car bought on HP - Legal Servi

 

Let us know how you get on.

 

You could take the matter to the FOS depending on the outcome of your communications with the finance company,

 

further information:-

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/79/79-car-finance.htm

[heliosuk]

As usual one of the site team has jumped in feet first without reading the OP's post properly but has given some useful guidance as to where you stand.

 

 

In a nutshell, you must give their car back as it could be construed as theft given the time you have had it. There is no legal obligation for the dealership to give you a temporary replacement in the first place so you are on a very sticky wicket now. This would also negate any claim for compensation other than a bunch of flowers saying sorry. Their continuous calls for the return of THEIR property cannot be construed in any manner as harassment. Have you given them an alternative number to contact you on? You also have nowhere to go with this.

 

 

What you can do though is take steps to formally reject the car. By doing so you must stop using the car but then as you haven't got it, that won't be a problem will it.

 

 

If you tried to reject though you could have issues in that the garage has replaced the blown engine under warranty as expected and that the subsequent major failure could be as a result of that work being carried out. You don't describe what has been done to address this issue.

 

 

As Rebel correctly points out though, your issue is with the finance company and it is them you should be pursuing but if the car is examined by an independent engineer and found to be correct then you might have just to accept it back.

 

 

New cars do go wrong though on a lesser scale by far from a few years ago. Seems to me like the dealer has acted responsibly here and done all that is required.

[sud]

thanks for the advice. I appreciate new cars go wrong however this car has had two very major issues in five months. The dealership assured me it was fixed and safe when it hadn't even been looked at and are now insisting I have it back when I have advised them I consider it's not fit for purpose following the number of problems I have had with it.

 

I was advised that the new engine fitted was a hybrid and then was advised it wasn't. It doesn't drive the same as when I bought it yet they are insisting I have it back. I have stated I am not prepared to accept it back now and have asked them to correspond with me in writing as they tell me a different story each time I speak to the dealership. The reason I still have the temp car is because I am still paying the HP and asked them to continue to supply it while my complaint is being looked at. However they have not made any attempt to resolve the situation apart from trying to bully me into taking back a car that I consider has had such issues it is unsafe. Driving a car when you have totally brake and steering failure does that to you.

 

 

 

I will take the suggested advice and direct my complaint at the finance company as recommended, thank you.

Edited November 2, 2014 by sud

[heliosuk]

Be careful trying to use the argument that you have had a total steering and braking failure, I'm pretty sure you have not and in fact willing to bet on it. What you have most probably had is a loss of steering and braking assistance. The chances of what you have described are many billions to one so you need to get your facts right or someone like me will pee all over you if you ever went to court.

 

 

The Peugeot uses an ehpas system for steering. This is a system where the power assistance is given by an electric pump. It only operates when the engine is running and is dependent on a signal from the alternator to the main engine control unit.

 

 

The braking system is assisted by the vacuum created in the manifold when the engine is running and even without is usually required to hold a sufficient vacuum to enable 8 pumps of the pedal.

 

 

So in order for both failures to occur the engine cannot have been running, something you have omitted from your original post. Further, if in the very unlikely event both miraculously happened all you would experience is the loss of assistance , the brakes would still work as would the steering though requiring a bit extra effort. At no point could you argue the car was unsafe. A bit frightening I'd agree with you.

 

 

As regards your replacement being a hybrid....well that is just total codswallop.

 

 

What I am pointing out is that you need to tread very carefully with things like this and your refusal to not to hand back the car which would have been loaned to you as a gesture of goodwill, not an entitlement or admission of liability, will go against you.

 

 

Something just does not stack up here. Perhaps you should alert the dealer to your post so we can here their side of the issue.

 

 

As Rebel points out...pursuit the finance co as they currently own the car.

[Conniff]

I have to agree with the above. The fact you say you had both brakes and steering fail points directly to the engine not running and not failure of either system. Generic terms such as 'the engine blew up' is of no help to anyone either, I'd put money on it not blowing up.

 

You mention many times the 'brand' of the car, that puts doubt in my mind also.

 

The car belongs to the finance company and not you so the problem also belongs to the finance company and not you, you must make any grievances you have to them and they should sort it out. You can, of course, copy any letters to the dealer as well.

 

Keep in mind, the dealer has rights also.

Edited November 3, 2014 by Conniff

[rebel11]

It's 'harrassment'. I'm sure the employer is chuffed at having an employee receive numerous private calls whislt the employer is paying them to work. If they have been asked to stop then that is what they should do. There are other

forms of communication available to the dealer/finance company. Persistent call's at work could be seen as trying to intimidate or embarrass the OP, the reason for the call's is irrelevant.

 

 

As usual one of the site team has jumped in feet first without reading the OP's post properly but has given some useful guidance as to where you stand.

 

 

In a nutshell, you must give their car back as it could be construed as theft given the time you have had it. There is no legal obligation for the dealership to give you a temporary replacement in the first place so you are on a very sticky wicket now. This would also negate any claim for compensation other than a bunch of flowers saying sorry. Their continuous calls for the return of THEIR property cannot be construed in any manner as harassment. Have you given them an alternative number to contact you on? You also have nowhere to go with this.

 

 

What you can do though is take steps to formally reject the car. By doing so you must stop using the car but then as you haven't got it, that won't be a problem will it.

 

 

If you tried to reject though you could have issues in that the garage has replaced the blown engine under warranty as expected and that the subsequent major failure could be as a result of that work being carried out. You don't describe what has been done to address this issue.

 

 

As Rebel correctly points out though, your issue is with the finance company and it is them you should be pursuing but if the car is examined by an independent engineer and found to be correct then you might have just to accept it back.

 

 

New cars do go wrong though on a lesser scale by far from a few years ago. Seems to me like the dealer has acted responsibly here and done all that is required.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Rebel, they are trying to get their car back. And I assume the op have the work number as a contact number to start with.

 

Op, Tell them to stop ringing by all means, but if you don't hand the car back, I would expect a knock from the police about a stolen car, as thats what it now is.

[rebel11]

If they want it back, then they have other recourse besides 'Harrassing' the OP at work. In six months they haven't reported it stolen, good luck with that one.

 

Rebel, they are trying to get their car back. And I assume the op have the work number as a contact number to start with.

 

Op, Tell them to stop ringing by all means, but if you don't hand the car back, I would expect a knock from the police about a stolen car, as thats what it now is.

[DragonFly1967]

In six months they haven't reported it stolen, good luck with that one.

 

I have to strongly disagree with that rebel... Sorry.

 

The dealer supplied the courtesy car to the OP that's a given. But at the point at which the dealer asks for the car back, then tells the OP to bring the car back, and is now insisting that the OP brings the car back, the OP is no longer 'authorised' to have the car.

 

At which point, if it's reported to the police, it becomes a stolen vehicle. I suppose that you could argue that there's no intent to permanently deprive (which is the definition of theft) and you could get away with that, but it would still, and quite clearly be TWOC (Taking WithOut Consent).

 

The OP no longer has the consent of the owner. And that's game over.

[rebel11]

Im 100% sure that the OP will argue that he has no intention of permanently depriving the dealer of the loaned car, infact he doesn't want it, it's got poor spec, but he also wants this matter settled as it's been dragging on from April.

 

I have to strongly disagree with that rebel... Sorry.

 

The dealer supplied the courtesy car to the OP that's a given. But at the point at which the dealer asks for the car back, then tells the OP to bring the car back, and is now insisting that the OP brings the car back, the OP is no longer 'authorised' to have the car.

 

At which point, if it's reported to the police, it becomes a stolen vehicle. I suppose that you could argue that there's no intent to permanently deprive (which is the definition of theft) and you could get away with that, but it would still, and quite clearly be TWOC (Taking WithOut Consent).

 

The OP no longer has the consent of the owner. And that's game over.

[DragonFly1967]

Im 100% sure that the OP will argue that he has no intention of permanently depriving the dealer of the loaned car, infact he doesn't want it, it's got poor spec, but he also wants this matter settled as it's been dragging on from April.

 

Indeed, which is why it would be TWOC and not theft But still, it's only a (maximum) level 5 fine (£5000) and 6 months inside, so no drama

[DragonFly1967]

I don't want to see the OP get into trouble anymore than you do I'm sure. I'm just saying that they might be on very thin ice, depending on what the dealer does.

[rebel11]

If you are accused of the theft of a motor vehicle, the Prosecution must prove that:

• You have taken a vehicle belonging to someone else, and
  
• You did not have the consent of the owner to take that vehicle, or
  
• You did not have any other lawful authority to take the vehicle
  

 

 

Indeed, which is why it would be TWOC and not theft But still, it's only a (maximum) level 5 fine (£5000) and 6 months inside, so no drama

[DragonFly1967]

TWOC. Section 12 (1) Theft Act 1968.

 

Taking a mechanically propelled vehicle without the owner’s consent or other lawful authority or driving, or allowing oneself to be carried in or on it, knowing it to have been taken without the owner’s consent and at any time after it had been unlawfully taken and before it was recovered:

 

The dealer has withdrawn consent, therefore the vehicle is being retained by the OP without the consent of the owner, and if driven would (potentially) not have a policy of insurance in place to cover the vehicle. Which would be an entirely different offence with 6 points and a £300 fine.

 

 

Think of this in another way....

 

CAG give you a company car (yeah, I know)... You then decide to leave CAG and 3 months later they ask for the car back. You tell them to jog on. What do you figure is going to happen next?

[rebel11]

The OP isn't driving it, as it has no insurance and serves no purpose, that is unless he wants to look at it.

 

TWOC. Section 12 (1) Theft Act 1968.

 

Taking a mechanically propelled vehicle without the owner’s consent or other lawful authority or driving, or allowing oneself to be carried in or on it, knowing it to have been taken without the owner’s consent and at any time after it had been unlawfully taken and before it was recovered:

 

The dealer has withdrawn consent, therefore the vehicle is being retained by the OP without the consent of the owner, and if driven would (potentially) not have a policy of insurance in place to cover the vehicle. Which would be an entirely different offence with 6 points and a £300 fine.

[heliosuk]

Perhaps this should read that the OP will not drive it.

 

 

Could do with an update on this OP. What's the latest?