Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Campervan dispute...

  • Share
  • Thread Tools
  • Display
  1. #1
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Campervan dispute...

    Good morning

    I'd really appreciate some advice/help and I apologise for the long post.

    On the 25th October I purchased a 2005 Campervan from a reputable dealership. Before I took delivery of the vehicle the dealership agreed to make right the advisories on the MOT and confirmed that everything would be corrected and I would have "nothing" to worry about.

    The van underwent some work and a fresh MOT was produced.

    I took delivery and everything seemed in order. Apart from a few cosmetic issues but that wasn't a big deal for me. Anyway, a couple of weeks later I had a rear camera installed by a professional company. Whilst the technician was completing his work he made me aware of a fluid leak coming from the engine.

    I immediately messaged the dealer and asked for their advice on what to do. I didn't get a reply, although later on they said they did reply (I will give them the benefit of the doubt). A few days later I called the dealer and they suggested I take it to an RAC approved dealer. As it's a large vehicle I was struggling to find a garage that would take the van. Eventually I did find one and asked the Dealer if they were happy for me to use them. I didn't receive a reply and at this point I was beginning to be concerned as my 30 day short term right to reject the vehicle was nearly up. So, on the 27th day I formally rejected the vehicle. At which point the dealership agreed to get the van inspected at the RAC Garage.

    The garage found the below faults with the van:

    Please see below a list of faults or possible faults with the vehicle that will need attention or further investigation.


    • Ashtray broken.
    • N/S/F arm rest missing.
    • N/S/F door check strap split on A-post.
    • Top induction boost pipe damaged, (rubbing on rad panel).
    • PAS fluid dirty.
    • Gearbox oil leak (diff seals and sump plug).
    • N/S CV gaiter has hole.
    • N/S/F tyre tread perished.
    • O/S/F strut leaking.
    • O/S/F chassis, subframe and wing area heavily corroded.
    • Spare tyre worn low.
    • Brake compensator valve lever seized.
    • O/S/R spring mount/chassis corroded through.
    • Spare wheel carrier rusted through cross member.
    • O/S/R outrigger/inner sill rusted through.
    • O/S/F inner wing /brake pipe mount insecure and corroded.
    • Engine oil leak from front crank area.
    • Possible fuel pump leak (wet).
    • Fuel tank seams corroded (wet), but could be the gear oil blowing down the vehicle.
    • Wiring loose and insecure rad fan area.
    • Wiring running through the chassis and cross member through bare holes.
    • Wiper arms worn.
    • Heavy fumes from the exhaust.
    • Rear brake pads shims corroded away.


    Obviously some of these faults are more important than others, some of the faults would be deemed as an MOT failure.
    I immediately followed up with an email to the dealership confirming that I wanted a refund as per my rejection letter.

    They have now got their legal team involved and have stated that:

    We understand that you allege there are a number of faults with the Vehicle. You believe that you are entitled to reject the Vehicle under the CRA. We can advise that you have no grounds upon which to reject the Vehicle at this stage. We note that you did not comply with the short term right to reject in that you failed to provide any evidence to our Client as per s19(14) CRA 2015. The short term right to reject ceases at the end of 30 days.
    From my understanding the short term right to reject is active at the point the consumer makes the company aware of their intention to reject the goods and the 30 days is paused while a fault is investigated and repaired. This is to stop a dealer taking 31 days to investigate a fault and then decline to refund or repair because it’s outside the legal window. I submitted the rejection letter well within the 30 day period and I am within my rights to reject the vehicle based on the independent assessment from the RAC approved garage and the garage that the dealer instructed.

    The dealer took back the van and had their own inspection on the van, although not using an RAC approved garage. It was the same garage that put the MOT on the van just before I purchased it.

    The dealers assessment confirmed that there were three faults at point of inspection. This is in line with some of the faults found by the garage I used.


    • Corrosion of the O/S/R spring mount/chassis
    • Spare Wheel Carrier rusted
    • O/S/R outrigger/inner sill rusted.



    They claim that the above corrosion was not present at the time of sale and in fact the corrosion was caused by a hammer. They are also saying that the MOT is proof that the above issues were not present at the point of sale.

    I know this is a long post and I do apologise but I am totally lost at what to do next. I'm guessing I will have to use the money claim online service but at £410 this is very expensive.

    Any advice or guidance would be great appreciated.

    Thank you in advance.

    Regards

    Iain

  2. #2
    Kati's Avatar

    LB Team Member



    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    11,715
    Mentions
    1208 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    tagging @R0b @des8

    to LB @IainJames :wave
    Debt is like any other trap, easy enough to get into, but hard enough to get out of.

    It doesn't matter where your journey begins, so long as you begin it...

    recte agens confido

    ~~~~~

    Any advice I provide is given without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

    I can be emailed if you need my help loading pictures/documents to your thread. My email address is [email protected]
    But please include a link to your thread so I know who you are.

    Specialist advice can be sought via our sister site JustBeagle

  3. #3
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    thank you for the warm welcome Kati.

  4. #4
    des8's Avatar

    VIP Member



    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    8,184
    Mentions
    480 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Hi and welcome.

    Corrosion caused by a hammer !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    They themselves have confirmed faults sufficient to support your right to reject as goods not of satisfactory quality and should refund the purchase price within two weeks.

    You are correct in that you rejected within the thirty day period.

    The court costs will be added to your claim, and so paid (eventually) by the trader

  5. #5
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Quote Originally Posted by des8 View Post
    Hi and welcome.

    Corrosion caused by a hammer !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    They themselves have confirmed faults sufficient to support your right to reject as goods not of satisfactory quality and should refund the purchase price within two weeks.

    You are correct in that you rejected within the thirty day period.

    The court costs will be added to your claim, and so paid (eventually) by the trader
    thank you @des8

    There Legal team are adamant that the MOT they provided clears them of any issues with van.


    They have said

    "Further in relation to the rear brake pads allegedly being corroded, we
    note that these are a serviceable item. We note that there were no advisory items
    on the Vehicles MOT in relation to the brake pads allegedly being corroded, our
    Client will seek to rely upon this to discharge the burden that the brakes were
    of satisfactory quality at point of sale"

    How on earth can brake pads corrode in less than 30days.


  6. #6
    des8's Avatar

    VIP Member



    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    8,184
    Mentions
    480 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    That list you produced was pretty comprehensive and I don't see how an MOT does anything other than say the vehicle passed on a certain date.
    It doesn't cover the points raised in CRA 2015.

    The vehicle has to be of "satisfactory Quality" i.e. what a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory taking into account description & price.
    Quality relates to (a) fitness for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are usually supplied;
    (b)
    appearance and finish;

    (c)
    freedom from minor defects;

    (d)
    safety;

    (e)
    durability.

  7. #7
    ostell's Avatar

    VIP Member



    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,628
    Mentions
    199 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Who issued the MOT, the dealer themselves?

  8. #8
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    thanks @des8

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ostell View Post
    Who issued the MOT, the dealer themselves?
    It wasn't the dealer that did the MOT but the garage they use for all their vehicles.

  9. #9
    ostell's Avatar

    VIP Member



    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,628
    Mentions
    199 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Quote Originally Posted by IainJames View Post
    It wasn't the dealer that did the MOT but the garage they use for all their vehicles.
    So they could be slightly biased and not want to lose business.

  10. #10
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    and today I get this....
    "We understand from your email that you allege your letter of rejection was based on the fuel leak. We would aver that in relation to the fuel leak of which you alleged, the independent third party garage which our Client elected to complete the inspection on the Vehicle could not find any such leak. The independent third party garage left the Vehicle running for an hour whilst on an inspection ramp and concluded that they could not locate any fuel leak.

    We would aver that in relation to the items of which our Client repaired, the independent third party garage concluded that these faults were not present at point of sale. We note that our Client was not liable for these faults however as a gesture of good will our Client repaired the items.

    For the avoidance of doubt we can advise that you have no grounds upon which to reject the Vehicle, as the independent third party report confirms that there was no leak located with the Vehicle.

    Our position as per our previous correspondence of the 04 December 2017 remains unchanged in that, we have sought instruction from our Client who has advised us that as a gesture of good will they are willing to valet and fuel your Vehicle as well as transporting the Vehicle back to your premises.

    Please ensure that all future correspondence are sent directly to this firm."
    I have two independent sources, the company that fitted the camera and the independent RAC garage that confirmed a leak. I don't understand how the garage they used and their findings overrides the genuinely independent RAC approved garage that both the dealership and I agreed to using.

    Given the other faults found at the inspection the vehicle is clearly not of satisfactory quality.

    This is so frustrating.
    Last edited by Amethyst; 7th December 2017 at 10:59:AM.

  11. #11
    Onestepatatime's Avatar

    Member



    Joined
    May 2017
    Posts
    171
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Have you tried these?
    https://www.themotorombudsman.org/

  12. #12
    des8's Avatar

    VIP Member



    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    8,184
    Mentions
    480 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Before discussing your options can you advise how you purchased the vehicle: cash/ finance/credit or debit card? and the price paid?

  13. #13
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Quote Originally Posted by des8 View Post
    Before discussing your options can you advise how you purchased the vehicle: cash/ finance/credit or debit card? and the price paid?
    I paid by bank transfer, that was a mistake I know now, wish I'd used my credit card.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Onestepatatime View Post
    this looks good. thank you.

  14. #14
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    the price paid was £7500. here's the originally advert..

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IFg...ew?usp=sharing

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by IainJames View Post
    the price paid was £7500. here's the originally advert..

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IFg...ew?usp=sharing
    original not originally. apologies.

  15. #15
    des8's Avatar

    VIP Member



    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    8,184
    Mentions
    480 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Have you checked its MOT history (https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk)

    Lots of points picked up in your checks appear to have been a reason for failure in Sept 2017, but passed in Oct 2017.. funny that!!
    I would be considering a report to DVSA (https://www.gov.uk/contact-dvsa)


    You could just go back to their legal team (a firm of solicitors?) and point out that 20 Sept 2017 the van failed an MOT because of "Offside Front Subframe mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded" which correlates with your independent inspection where it draws attention to: O/S/F chassis, subframe and wing area heavily corroded..
    Remind them it is a criminal offence to sell a vehicle in an unroadworthy condition (sec 75 RTA 1988) and you anticipate they will instruct their client to make a full immediate refund
    of the purchase price and any additional costs you have incurred.
    In the meantime you are preparing a report for submission to DVSA

    To show how ignorant those legal boys are they said:/"We note that there were no advisory items on the Vehicles MOT in relation to the brake pads allegedly being corroded"
    That is not surprising because the fault related to anti squeal shims, which aren't part of the MOT!!

  16. #16
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    @des8 honestly I can't thank you enough for your help. Just to know that I'm not going mad and someone independent can see this for what it is. I bought this campervan for me and my son to enjoy days out. His mum and I recently separated and it was something positive for us in a bad situation.

  17. #17
    IainJames's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    9
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Quote Originally Posted by Onestepatatime View Post

    apparently they are not accredited to the Motor Ombudsman. typical.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ostell View Post
    So they could be slightly biased and not want to lose business.
    That was my point. The garage I used was an RAC approved garage, the dealership agreed to this garage being used.

  18. #18
    Onestepatatime's Avatar

    Member



    Joined
    May 2017
    Posts
    171
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    They offer an RAC warranty so an independent ndependant RAC inspection should carry some weight as to any warranty provided by RAC.
    Given what previous MOT failure has highlighted (good shout Des) then I'd say they'll back down and refund you for a quiet life.

  19. #19
    nochance's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    12
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    How many owners whats the mileage how many miles have you travelled in it,this would be small claims arena if they have instructed grade A brief 200 dollars per hour
    Watch out for any wasted costs orders if you litigate,expert witness in court costs of these are reduced for this arena but prob will not get back.
    Have you got a PDI could you snag them on it,has it been gas checked,does all work in unit/is it safe .cpr 35 report is worlds apart from poor mans report.Mine sjt £1000 buff then second gas safe !300 - 500 if u goin to trade find out wot your exposure.
    I prob the only person on this site is goin through the real deal at the coal face it aint easy no council DIY

  20. #20
    des8's Avatar

    VIP Member



    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    8,184
    Mentions
    480 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Don't worry about wasted costs as this will be allocated to small claims track and you need to act unreasonably to get hit by costs.
    A Pre Delivery Inspection is meaningless.
    Experts reports (as per CPR 35 very unlikely to be needed.

  21. #21
    Phaeton's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    14
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    When you write to DVSA include the RAC report which I'm sure you will, it should not have passed if the brake compensator is seized, does your MOT have a 2nd page showing brake values?

  22. #22
    nochance's Avatar

    Junior Member



    Joined
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    12
    Mentions
    1 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaeton View Post
    When you write to DVSA include the RAC report which I'm sure you will, it should not have passed if the brake compensator is seized, does your MOT have a 2nd page showing brake values?
    That is correct pdi does not mean much about what retailer has sold to consumer but disagree in my court case the factory and retailer did
    not pdi new unit how can they defend claim .
    I agree small claims SJE will not be involved but then what side is
    fair .
    The op should think have they done any wrong if they check case law
    you can not conpare second hand to new /compare products
    and all that jazz courts of appeal banger against rolls royce
    different animals county court prob deputy district lower values
    no big deal.

  23. #23
    des8's Avatar

    VIP Member



    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    8,184
    Mentions
    480 Post(s)

    Default Re: Campervan dispute...

    Quote Originally Posted by nochance View Post
    That is correct pdi does not mean much about what retailer has sold to consumer but disagree in my court case the factory and retailer did
    not pdi new unit how can they defend claim .
    I agree small claims SJE will not be involved but then what side is
    fair .
    The op should think have they done any wrong if they check case law
    you can not conpare second hand to new /compare products
    and all that jazz courts of appeal banger against rolls royce
    different animals county court prob deputy district lower values
    no big deal.
    I'm sorry @nochance but you keep dropping hints about your own problem on other peoples' threads .
    It would be better if you kept to your own thread and not confuse others with irrelevant remarks

Similar Threads

  1. campervan scams
    By newby buyers in forum Welcome Forum
    Replies: 1
    : 8th October 2016, 23:16:PM
  2. How would I dispute this?
    By Helpneeded2016 in forum Received a Court Claim?
    Replies: 0
    : 10th March 2016, 13:56:PM
  3. Will dispute
    By debbietheboro in forum Wills,Probate and Bereavement
    Replies: 4
    : 20th May 2015, 07:56:AM
  4. will dispute
    By blossom12 in forum Wills,Probate and Bereavement
    Replies: 1
    : 5th May 2015, 17:01:PM
  5. CC in dispute.
    By Boltmaker in forum General Legal Issues
    Replies: 0
    : 24th January 2013, 17:08:PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Contact Us



© Celame (UK) Ltd 2017
LegalBeagles® are DPA Registered No. ZA158014
LegalBeagles® is the trading name of CELAME (UK) LIMITED ( 09220332 )
Registered Address: 25 Moorgate, London, England, EC2R 6AY
VAT registration number 206 9740 02
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.3 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Celame (UK) Ltd Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2017 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

To find out more about managing your money and getting free advice, visit the Money Advice Service,an independent service set up to help people manage their money.

TOP