Browns car company - Essex : faulty used car -court claim issued

[toystorydog]

Dear, seeking advice here

 

I have purchased (via bank transfer) a vehicle from subject dealer https://www.brownscarcompanyltd.co.uk/  back in August this year via online and noticed following symptoms below within 3 days after delivery.

1. Battery low charge warning as soon as 1st day of delivery.

2. Noticed louder than usual engine noise/rattle/rumble during acceleration. Rough idle and higher than usual fuel consumption indicated to me some drive-train issues.

3. Diesel/exhaust smells in cabin.

4. Engine warning light.

 

I brought to a garage on 4th day and conducted a diagnostic and got below faults. Some faults I believe were significant at least in terms of repair cost as well as safety like the tyres and brakes. Driving belt/timing chain issue will lead to engine destruction as I don't want to operation it any further to find out. These conditions were not disclosed on advertisement prior sale. The vehicle in question is about 9 years old with just over 100k miles.

- Front left tyre damage
- Front left alloy bend
- Drive belt tension and belt need replacement
- Rear brake sensor not connecting & bypassed
- Timing chain noise
- DPF almost blocked need replacement
- Oil leak in multiple area
- Missing panel cover
- Weak battery (diagnosed with only 44% Amp)

 

I have sent diagnostic results with photos back to dealership by email and notify rejection of vehicle and request of refund at the same day.

 

Dealer request second opinion so I brought to 2nd independent garage and obtained another diagnostic report that also showed similar findings.

 

After reports were sent to dealer they claims it is still drive-able therefore it fits for purpose and request that I go after with warranty company, and MOT was passed before delivery and refused refund.

 

Afterward I got the AA involved as the dealer is advertised as AA dealer and request "Alternative Dispute Resolution" but dealer did not responded for about a month. During this time some formal letters were sent to dealer about faulty goods rejection and followed with the letter before court claim.

 

Dealer had not responded until Oct 1st to look at the issues, and agreed to refund arrangement on 10th Oct and later collection of vehicle.

 

Cars collected on 18th Oct.

After car collection they claimed the battery is low but usable, they cannot see engine lights on dashboard, did not hear noise, nor smells and other faults were MOT passed.

 

I have walked them thru how to reproduce the noise and pointed out on one of their test drive video as they sent back to me as prove.

 

Dealer never provided any independent garage diagnostic but only their subjective feedback denied the faults and symptoms described, lastly they suggested the engine light and fault codes may be cause by low battery but provided no proof nor evidence and offered replacement of battery.

 

I would like to know where I stand & what actions I should follow.

Thankyou in advance.

 

[toystorydog]

Sorry for missing information, the vehicle cost £8900 and the repair was estimated about £2500 just for the listed faults. I suspect there might discover more once in-depth work is being perform. The car is at the dealership now, they asked if I accept the battery replacement as good will and then pickup the car.

 

Now I know more about the payment situations, I didn't look careful enough before. 

[toystorydog]

I have experience from other cars that a failing battery causing random temporary error too

 

but at day # 3 after taken delivery and combined with other symptoms, like drivetrain rattling noise,  I am not sure I feel safe to continue operate the vehicle and investigate further, replacement parts to find other faults.

[toystorydog]

@Bankfodder, Yes, that is correct.  Dealership claims they are confident that nothing is wrong except the battery, they are going to replace for me and ask to be collected if I accept.

[toystorydog]

Dear BankFodder,

Thankyou for your opinion, I do not have confidence with the car nor the dealership that's why I have insisted on rejection and refund of the vehicle and get them to collect the vehicle.

 

Do you think the next course of action would be claim thru court?

 

My concerning points are what the court would think if the vehicle has MOT done just before delivery to me.

 

Does that means it is in satisfactory quality and affect my claim.

 

 

[toystorydog]

Dear BankFodder,

 

Thankyou for the suggestion,

 

I shall put it in the next reply to dealer and keep it polite and to the point.

 

I was surprised that the dealer have not already done so given the severity on

some of faults identified within days after delivery. That's why I came here asking for advise if there maybe anything that I missed and the dealer will use to defend their position.

 

As the dealer had denied most of the reported faults except for battery is low, I am afraid they would continue holding this position and refuse refund until I ran out of patience.

 

Now that they already have the vehicle, collected for 4 weeks, I am not sure what they aim to achieve.

Edited November 14, 2022 by dx100uk
block of text spaced

[toystorydog]

Thankyou dx100uk for the editing,

 

Sorry for not spacing with paragraph. I'll remember do so from now on.

[toystorydog]

I also wanted to ask that since this transaction is a distance purchase over online & telephone. I should have the rights on 14 days cool off period.

 

I wonder if the court look at both law applicable to the case or I should stick with just Consumer Act 2015.

 

Thankyou in advance

[toystorydog]

Thx,

 

I only asked since Citizen Advise rep inform me I should not cross 2 different laws. Thx for your advice

[toystorydog]

Lovely, appreciate the speedy supplement of information. I am more comfortable to put together into my claim if I must go thru the claim court.

[toystorydog]

Dear both,

 

I've got a respond from dealer claims they have optioned-out the distance sale regulation because it is not their day-to-day business. I wonder if that is possible.

 

I couldn't find anything option out, or exclusion due to non day-to-day business from the consumer contract text. Any ideas what might that be?

 

Thx in advance

[toystorydog]

Dear BankFodder,

 

My thought as well, seems illogical but wondering maybe some loophole existed somewhere. I was wondering if that was from previous regulation that allow this or not.

- Car was collected by dealer after 2 months and stayed with dealer since. Stopped using soon after garage inspections and a few short trips with the claim related trip eg. postoffice.

 

- Vehicle diagnosed faults with photo evidence sent back with rejection and request of refund at day #4 after delivered to me. 2 Independent garage diagnostic reports sent within the following week. (2 garages selection meet dealer's requirement instruction and informed them.)

 

- Total losses includes the vehicle purchase price, transportation fee, 2 diagnostic reports fee plus motor insurance and road tax ~ £9400

 

Thx for your time

Edited November 17, 2022 by toystorydog

[toystorydog]

Dear BankFodder,

 

Sorry, let me try again:

- purchase price ~ £8900

- transportation fee ~ £200

- 2 diagnostic reports fee ~£70

- motor insurance and road tax ~ £230

Total ~ £9400

 

I have sent a list of faults identified by garage to dealer by email, together with photos and garages reports were sent to dealer within a week. Is this sufficient?

 

thx for reading

[toystorydog]

Here you go.

 

Thankyou for your time.

PDF Report evidence .pdf

[toystorydog]

Yes, as photo shows the wire is just hanging there without connecting to anything. It was bypassed in the system from getting error code. 1st mechanics commented it is just a matter or time that would grind whatever moving parts it touch and broke off anytime.

 

note: The dealer responded on this fault is that it has passed MOT test hence it is safe & roadworthy. Doubt

Edited November 17, 2022 by toystorydog

[toystorydog]

The MOT was done just 3 days before delivered to me. The MOT garage is 0.3miles from the dealer's address.

 

The car was collected back to dealer 4 weeks ago, so I'll correct that part a bit.

 

Thankyou

 

[toystorydog]

Appreciate your effort

 

A very standardize "Letter before court claim" was sent per CAB advise about 7 weeks ago. I have mentioned in early this week's email that this friday is their confirmation deadline. Would this change looks bad?

[toystorydog]

Because after the last letter of claim, then the dealer resumed communication and agreed on refund agreement, price and car collection. The following 4 weeks was communication for faults verification, like how to reproduce symptoms which is just back and forth arguing and disagreeing with their subjective opinions and dealer have not produce any credible support and evidence.

 

Early this week I sent an email saying since no progress or agreement can be reach then we shall resolve in court with the deadline of this friday. After that they start suggesting alternative resolution but avoided mediation or ADR.

 

At this point I am pretty convince they will continue to drag on without real commitment. So I am thinking I should proceed with court procedure after this week to follow up as said.

[toystorydog]

 

Please see the draft below. Thankyou in advance

----------------------------------------

To Browns Car Company

Vehicle registration number XXXXXX
 

As you know, you sold me the above vehicle on 12 Aug 22 (this is the invoice date or should it be final payment date?) and delivered on 18 Aug 22. You insisted that I pay by bank transfer.

Within three days after received delivery, I noticed and reported to you certain defects on 22nd Aug 22.
I also gave you notice I was rejecting the vehicle under the 30 day rule in the Consumer Rights Act 2015. In addition, I was also well within the 14 day cooling off period under the distance selling rules.

You in turn have simply offered me to exchange another vehicle and later a new battery – "as a gesture of goodwill".

I confirm once again that I reject the vehicle and my decision stands. It has now been one months since you collected the vehicle and you have not made any move towards reimbursing my money even though you promised me full reimbursement.

I am attaching to this message a copy of various diagnostics which have been carried out the vehicle including photographs. It is very clear that the vehicle is not satisfactory quality.

Furthermore, vehicle is dangerous to the extent that a wheel rim has been damaged, tyre sidewall is in damaged condition and finally there has been a deliberate bypassing of a brake warning system.

 

I think it is very significant that you put the car through its MOT station only three days before it was sold to me. The MOT station in question is extremely close to you. The defects in question – particularly the safety defects must be present at the time the MOT took place.

I intend to bring up the topic of the questionable MOT before the court and I shall be naming the garage concerned. Furthermore, when the judgement is given in my favour – as it surely will be – I shall be providing details of the MOT garage and also your own garage to the authorities.

I would recommend that you notify your MOT station about this.
 

In view of your failure to engage with me properly on this matter, I am giving you notice that I'm proposing to begin an action in the County Court for full reimbursement of all outlays unless you collect the car and reimburse me my money within 14 days.

 

At one point you have attempted to deny any liability simply on the basis that you had excluded yourself on the 14 day cooling off distance selling regulations.

You are not allowed to do this and of course your message to me in respect of this claim will also be shown to the court.

I should warn you that in addition to the reimbursement, I shall be seeking repayment of my court costs and also applying for interest on the sum claimed which currently stands at 8% per annum.

I suggest that you now take the matter seriously and begin immediate action to comply with your contractual obligations.

I'm not prepared to engage in any further discussions about the matter.

Believe me,

Signed

[toystorydog]

Thankyou so much for both of your help and insights to perfect my claim letter.

 

I'll edit with the final details, send it out today together with the evidences and with recorded delivery. I'll start preparing for the claim and particulars immediately.

Edited November 18, 2022 by toystorydog

[toystorydog]

Dear both,

 

Please kindly help review the following drafted particular of claim. I hope to improve its clarity for court review as well as straighten my claims. I aimed to be concise at the key violations & significant events but leave other details to be described at the timeline of events. Please comment where modification will be needed.

 

Draft particular of claim

-----------------------------------------------------

XXXX – Claimant

 

and

 

Browns Car Company – Defendant

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

1. On 12 Aug 2022, claimant have purchased a vehicle Mini Countryman 2.0 SD All4 with registration number XXXXXX from defendant - Browns Car Company via email and telephone. After payment submitted via bank transfer on 16 Aug 2022, the vehicle was delivered to me on 18 Aug 2022.

 

2. Within four days after vehicle delivered, a number of significant faults were diagnosed and reported to defendant with photo evidences. claimant have notified the defendant that the vehicle is not of satisfactory quality followed with rejection of acceptance, requested collection of vehicle and full refund of vehicle purchase price at 22 Aug 2022. Per request by defendant, claimant have provided 2nd diagnostic report from another independent garage on 26 Aug 2022 as 2nd opinion.

 

    2.1. Faults diagnosed & reported:
    - Drive belt tension and belt need replacement
    - Rear brake sensor not connecting & bypassed
    - Timing chain noise
    - DPF almost blocked need replacement
    - Front left tyre damage
    - Front left alloy bend
    - Oil leak in multiple area
    - Missing panel cover
    - Weak battery (diagnosed with only 44% Amp)

 

3. After claimant continue pursuing vehicle refund requests with defendant, they have accepted the refund request on 10 Oct 2022 and arranged collection of vehicle from my address on 18 Oct 2022. But after vehicle was collected, the defendant have refused to process the refund as agreed and claimed the reported vehicle faults cannot be verified.  

 

PARTICULARS OF BREACH

 

4. Defendant have refused to complete vehicle refund request while vehicle have diagnosed with major faults and deemed unsatisfactory quality as well as vehicle purchased online is entitled with 14 days cooling off period.

 

5. Defendant have provided inaccurate vehicle condition on their advertisement.

 

6. Defendant provided misleading information regarding consumer rights.

 

PARTICULARS OF LOSS

 

7. As a result of the above claimant have suffered losses, which was   calculated from the date claimant was expecting to have the vehicle purchase cost refunded.

 

8. These losses are summarized in the table below.
Vehicle purchase price                               £8899
Transportation fee                                      £200
John’s Garage Diagnostic fee                   £30
BVS Brackley Ltd Diagnostic fee              £40
Road Tax (Sept 2022 ~ Jul 2023)            £201.67
Motor Insurance (23 Aug ~ 18 Oct 22)   £130.59
Jump starter with air compressor           £99
Sub Total:                                                     £9600.26
Daily Interest calculated                            £2.10 per day

 

PRE-ACTION CONDUCT

 

9. The defendant misled claimant with the following :

    9.1. Vehicle’s faults was not disclosed in the advertisement material. Instead the vehicle was described as "This lovely car looks & drives superb” on advertisement. The “new service” stated on advertisement were never provided after several inquiries.

    9.2. Defendant was not transparent and provided inaccurate information regarding Consumer rights under “Consumer Act 2015” & “Consumer Contract Regulation 2013” ; Defendant did not inform claimant about the right to cancel, neither did defendant disclose the return and refund policy after claimant requested it.  

    9.3. The defendant claimed they have optioned out of distance sale regulations due to it is not part of their day-to-day business.

10. The defendant did not verify the vehicle’s faults thoroughly nor professionally after collected. Defendant conducted verification were biased and denied most reported faults based on their subjective feeling without providing any tangible evidence nor independent garage inspection per requested.

11. Defendant refused to engage in mediation and alternative dispute resolution suggested.

    11.1. Over the course of communication the defendant did offered exchange of vehicle, replacement of battery as gesture of goodwill as well as resell of vehicle but claimant have declined all of them due to non-satisfactory.

12. Defendant failed to engage and attempt to settle the matter without recourse to legal proceedings, in spite of the fact claimant laid the claim out in detail in the letter of claim dated 18 Nov 2022.

 

--------------------------------

End Draft

 

Please comment and thank you for your time.

[toystorydog]

Thankyou for your feedback.

 

Yes, English is not my 1st language. I'll rework on the draft with plain english.

[toystorydog]

Dear,

it seems I cannot edit out my previous posted draft.

 

Below is the revision, hope this is more appropriate. Please feel free to comment.

 

-----------Draft------------

XXXX – Claimant

 

and

 

Browns Car Company – Defendant

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

1. On 12 Aug 2022, I purchased the vehicle Mini Countryman 2.0 SD All4 with registration number [removed - HB] from Browns Car Company found through an online platform Motors.co.uk. After contacting the seller by telephone, I inquired about the mechanical condition of the vehicle and confirmed the possibility of refund upon any major issues were to be found. I confirmed the purchase and placed a deposit of £200 via debit card. The remaining balance was made via bank transfer on 16 Aug 2022, and the vehicle was delivered to me on 18 Aug 2022.

 

2. Within four days after the vehicle was delivered, a number of significant faults were diagnosed and reported to the seller with photo evidences. I have notified the seller via email that the vehicle is not of satisfactory quality together with rejection of acceptance, requested collection of vehicle and full refund of vehicle purchase price on 22 Aug 2022.

 

Per request from the seller, I have provided a 2nd diagnostic report from another independent garage on 26 Aug 2022 as 2nd opinion.

    

    2.1. Faults diagnosed & reported:
    - Drive belt tension and belt need replacement
    - Rear brake sensor not connecting & bypassed
    - Timing chain noise
    - DPF almost blocked need replacement
    - Front left tyre damage
    - Front left alloy bend
    - Oil leak in multiple area
    - Missing panel cover
    - Weak battery (diagnosed with only 44% Amp)

 

3. Afterward the seller have stopped responding to my email and letter requests. I pursued the seller about the vehicle refund requests until the seller have finally accepted the refund request on 10 Oct 2022. The seller arranged collection of vehicle from my address on 18 Oct 2022. After the vehicle was collected and conducted their inspection, the seller have refused to process the refund and claimed most the vehicle’s diagnosed faults do not exist, have passed MOT test prior to delivery or not considered as major faults.  

 

PARTICULARS OF BREACH

4. The seller have refused to complete the vehicle refund request even after major faults were reported from 2 independent garage inspections  as well as vehicle purchased online is entitled with 14 days cooling off period.

5. The seller have provided inaccurate vehicle condition on their advertisement.

6. The seller provided misleading information regarding consumer rights. (ie. definition of faults)

PARTICULARS OF LOSS

7. As a result of the above I have suffered losses, which was calculated from the date I was expecting to have the vehicle purchase price to be refunded.

8. These losses are summarized in the table below.

Vehicle purchase price                                   £8899
Transportation fee                                          £200
John’s Garage Diagnostic fee                       £30
BVS Brackley Ltd Diagnostic fee                  £40
Road Tax (Sept 2022 ~ Jul 2023)                £201.67
Motor Insurance (23 Aug ~ 18 Oct 22)       £130.59
Jump starter with air compressor               £99
Sub Total:                                                         £9600.26
Daily Interest calculated                                £2.10 per day

 

PRE-ACTION CONDUCT

 

9. The seller misled me with the following information :

    9.1. The vehicle’s faults was not disclosed in the advertisement material. Instead the vehicle was described as "This lovely car looks & drives superb” on advertisement. The “new service” stated on advertisement were never provided after several inquiries.

    9.2. The seller was not transparent and provided inaccurate information regarding Consumer rights under “Consumer Act 2015” & “Consumer Contract Regulation 2013” ; The seller did not inform me about the right to cancel, neither did the seller disclosed the return and refund policy after I have requested it.  

    9.3. The seller claimed they have optioned out of distance sale regulations due to it is not part of their day-to-day business.

10. The seller did not verify the vehicle’s faults thoroughly nor professionally after collected. The seller’s vehicle verification were biased and denied most reported faults based on their subjective feeling without providing any tangible evidence. The seller also did not provide any independent garage inspection as requested.

11. The seller refused to engage in mediation and alternative dispute resolution that was suggested.

    11.1. Over the course of communication the seller did offered exchange of vehicle, replacement of battery as gesture of goodwill as well as resell of vehicle but I have declined all of them due to non-satisfactory condition.

12. The seller failed to engage and attempt to settle the matter without recourse to legal proceedings, in spite of the fact I have laid the claim out in detail in the letter of claim dated 18 Nov 2022.

[toystorydog]

Thankyou for both advise and comments, they are very helpful and practical. I'll rework on it and post back.

 

The dealer has all the fault details but not the claim amount details like the road tax, insurance, jump starter and interest but only the purchase price. I was afraid If I miss anything I would like to withdraw and resubmit again.

 

 

[toystorydog]

Dear,

 

I have kept the essentials of the claim in the following four points. Please take a look to see if this edit is sufficient and appropriate as a "Particulars of Claim".

 

----Draft-----

1. On August 12, 2022, I purchased the vehicle Mini Countryman 2.0 SD All4 with the registration number WR63ESF from Browns Car Company, found through an online platform called Motors.co.uk. After contacting the seller by telephone, I inquired about the mechanical condition of the vehicle and confirmed the possibility of a refund if any major issues were to be found. I confirmed the purchase and placed a deposit of £200 via debit card. On August 16, 2022, the remaining balance was paid by bank transfer, and the vehicle was delivered to me on August 18, 2022.

 

2. Within four days after the vehicle was delivered, a number of significant faults were diagnosed by an independent garage and reported to the seller with photo evidence. I have notified the seller via email that the vehicle is not of satisfactory quality, together with a short-term right to reject, a request for collection of the vehicle, and a full refund of the vehicle purchase price on August 22, 2022.

 

3. On October 10, 2022, the seller agreed to the refund request, and the vehicle was collected on October 18, 2022. However, the seller refused to process the refund, claiming that the reported faults could not be verified and that they were exempt from distance selling rules.

 

4. As a result of the above, I have suffered losses. These losses were calculated from the date that I was expecting to have the vehicle purchase cost refunded.

 

----End Draft-----

 

Thankyou for your time.