Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

[manofprinciple]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

1. On XXXXX 2014, the Claimant visited the premises occupied by the Defendant at XXX. The claimant had permission to enter the premises and as such was a visitor of the Defendant.
2. After the Claimant had entered the premises he purchased the engine oil suggested by the defendant’s staff and an engine oil top up service offered by the defendant. After receiving the engine oil top up and being informed it was complete the claimant left the premises. Approximately 2-3 miles from the defendant’s address, the claimant’s vehicle began appearing with smoke from the exhaust and engine. The claimant stopped the vehicle at roadside safely and conducted an inspection of the engine oil dipstick, this showed the engine oil to be topped up 3 times over the maximum mark.
3. The claimant's car damage was caused by defendant's negligence and/or breach of statutory duty under the Supply of Goods & Services Act 1982.



PARTICULARS OF NEGLIGENCE AND/OR BREACH OF STATUTORY DUTY
4. The defendant was negligent/in breach of the Supply of Goods Act 1982:
(a) Did not conduct the work to a reasonable standard with a reasonable duty of care.
(b) Did not check that the service offered was to a satisfactory quality
(c) Failed to give any or adequate warning to the Claimant of staff lacking knowledge and training to conduct work to a reasonable standard with a reasonable standard of duty of care
5. As a result of the Defendant's negligence/breach of statutory duty, the Claimant suffered financial loss, illness and damage.

[manofprinciple]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

this is all I have written so far..i think its probably complete rubbish..would i be scrutinised if my MCOL is not immediately after halfords response? because they responded the same day and said what I posted..just I think it needs time and is important its right..and am really unsure as ive never written one before..

[des8]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

You have a little while in which to file a claim ................. 6 years (so don't panic!)

[manofprinciple]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

Okay think i'm done..but am a litte over the character limit for online..I guess i can go into more detail later right?

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
1. The claimant visited one of the defendants stores in XXXX to purchase engine oil and to use their oil top up service. Receipt reference number 1 refers.
2. The work in topping up the oil was carried out negligently and consequently substantial damage was caused to the claimant's car.
3. The claimant's car damage was caused by defendant's negligence and/or breach of statutory duty under the Supply of Goods & Services Act 1982.
4. The claimant seeks reimbursement of all costs incurred including the pre-evaluation value of the car due to the repair quotes exceeding the original value with associated costs of alternative transport and inconvenience.
PARTICULARS OF NEGLIGENCE AND/OR BREACH OF STATUTORY DUTY
4. The defendant was negligent/in breach of the Supply of Goods Act 1982:
a. Did not conduct the work to a reasonable standard with a reasonable duty of care.
b. Did not check that the service offered was to a satisfactory quality
c. Failed to give any or adequate warning to the Claimant of staff lacking knowledge and training to conduct reasonable duty of care,
6. Repair Costs - Nissan Dealership- £XXXX.Kwik Fit have quoted £XXXX. Car Pre-Valuation dated November 2014 quotes £XXXX car value.

7. Alternative Transport Cost- £XXX

8. The claimant has spent at least XXXX hours trying to deal with repairs, loss of income, delays in travel, organizing alternative transport, telephone calls and postage costs - £XXXX

9. Total - £XXXXX

10. Interest Pursuant to section 69 County Courts act 1984

[des8]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

I would simplify your PoC, perhaps as below, although others might have contrary advice!

If this is your first foray into the world of courts and claims I would suggest you read the following two documents to get an idea of what happens:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-conte..._in_Person.pdf
http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media/2...online_use.pdf

The claimant seeks the sum of £******* in respect of damage caused to the defendant's vehicle and consequential losses.
On 00/00/2014 the claimant purchased engine oil from the defendant for use in the offered "top up service" of the claimant.
The oil was then passed to the defendant's employee (name?), who then put it into the claimant's engine.
The claimant's employee failed to measure the quantity of oil needed and overfilled the engine.
This negligent act has caused extensive damage to the vehicle necessitating repairs estimated to cost £*********
The negligent act was in breach of The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982
The Claimant will rely on receipt issued by the Defendant, transcripts of conversations with the defendant's employee(s), Photographs, Reports from Auto centre, /breakdown recovery & nissan (insert correct names) and third party witness statement (your wife?)
Interest claim

Regarding the use of the recordings or transcript, it is a grey area and will depend on the individual judge if they are admitted
.

[manofprinciple]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

I would simplify your PoC, perhaps as below, although others might have contrary advice!

If this is your first foray into the world of courts and claims I would suggest you read the following two documents to get an idea of what happens:
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-conte..._in_Person.pdf
http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media/2...online_use.pdf

The claimant seeks the sum of £******* in respect of damage caused to the defendant's vehicle and consequential losses.
On 00/00/2014 the claimant purchased engine oil from the defendant for use in the offered "top up service" of the claimant.
The oil was then passed to the defendant's employee (name?), who then put it into the claimant's engine.
The claimant's employee failed to measure the quantity of oil needed and overfilled the engine.
This negligent act has caused extensive damage to the vehicle necessitating repairs estimated to cost £*********
The negligent act was in breach of The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982
The Claimant will rely on receipt issued by the Defendant, transcripts of conversations with the defendant's employee(s), Photographs, Reports from Auto centre, /breakdown recovery & nissan (insert correct names) and third party witness statement (your wife?)
Interest claim

Regarding the use of the recordings or transcript, it is a grey area and will depend on the individual judge if they are admitted
.

Hi des thanks that link was helpful.
In terms of costs of reimbursement am going to remove a few things so that ive mitigated my losses fairly as due to a lack of knowledge on legal reimbursement and costs i see stuff such as insurance should be not inc etc. Would the judge use it against me that I quoted xx amount in LBA but actually in court claim alot less ?

[des8]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

You claim your losses and damages.
You should mitigate your losses means that you keep your losses to a minimum. You must not act in a way that increases your losses. In that you did not continue to drive your car when you noticed it smoking but called the breakdown service is evidence that you did act to mitigate your losses..
Mitigation does not mean you ignore your losses.
There is no point reducing your claim in the hope of impressing the judge.
The fact that your court claim is less than your letter before action won't matter over much. You can always reduce the amount you are claiming.

[manofprinciple]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

You claim your losses and damages.
You should mitigate your losses means that you keep your losses to a minimum. You must not act in a way that increases your losses. In that you did not continue to drive your car when you noticed it smoking but called the breakdown service is evidence that you did act to mitigate your losses..
Mitigation does not mean you ignore your losses.
There is no point reducing your claim in the hope of impressing the judge.
The fact that your court claim is less than your letter before action won't matter over much. You can always reduce the amount you are claiming.

Hi yeah I understand it better now from the links you posted and also the BOOKS I have read.
I didn't try and over claim costs at all it was just i thought that as the car repair costs exceed the value of the car that i would also lose the insurance I paid for etc etc. But now i understand more thoroughly that it must only be damages that incur because of their error, not damages that are due to unforeseeable circumstances so I could not claim these costs back.
I quoted sumthing like 4-5k above of what i want back, it'll be nowhere near that what am claiming back probably more then 3k mark as the vehicle evaluation is at £2400. I done research and its the same to buy it new etc.
I also realise now that stress etc must be justified with time etc. So I'm going to re think over those costs.

In terms of the particulars then you think I could write a basic particular of 1000 characters online and then when am asked to do the witness statement go into more detail?

[des8]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

Yep.
The wording suggested, which is incomplete, is just over 900 characters
When you receive the defendants defence, you submit your reply.
Hopefully Halfords will eventually see sense and negotiate a reasonable outcome.
That is IMO the most likely outcome, as if it goes to court they will be instructing solicitors etc and incurring costs beyond the amount of your claim. Costs which they will have to bear.
It will just make financial sense for them to negotiate.

[manofprinciple]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

Yep.
The wording suggested, which is incomplete, is just over 900 characters
When you receive the defendants defence, you submit your reply.
Hopefully Halfords will eventually see sense and negotiate a reasonable outcome.
That is IMO the most likely outcome, as if it goes to court they will be instructing solicitors etc and incurring costs beyond the amount of your claim. Costs which they will have to bear.
It will just make financial sense for them to negotiate.

Yes I see. Well my cost will be mitigated as low as possible in the interest of fairness like I said it wont be 4-5k because i have removed alot of costs that are not relevant now due to more knowledge.The stance i see from all my original posts is 'halfords deny liability' and the implication is made to say i topped up my engine oil again after they did the top up..and thats what overfilled it.I know thats not true and I know deep down they do! They say theyre waiting for the legal action so we'll see.

[des8]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

Haha.............. implications ain't proof.
Why would you top up again immediately after having it done?
You just need to show on a balance of probabilities that Halfords were responsible

[manofprinciple]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

Yes I do have evidence of which has come to light through investigation which can prove this. I dont want to give too much away because I know they are watching some threads I made online but hopefully they'll do what you said and ask me to sort it out of court.
Thank you for the help with the particulars I appreciate it! .
They still havent even tried to contact me about my car :s so dont have it back

[des8]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

It doesn't really matter if they do see what you are posting on line, as they will see all your case before it gets to court.
Both sides have to make full disclosure, so you can't ambush them in court.
And if they see you are serious they may (repeat may) cease to make ridiculous comments and actually accept their liabilities.

PS your claim for "lack of use" runs from the time your vehicle was off the road to about 14 days after they settle your claim.

[manofprinciple]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

It doesn't really matter if they do see what you are posting on line, as they will see all your case before it gets to court.
Both sides have to make full disclosure, so you can't ambush them in court.
And if they see you are serious they may (repeat may) cease to make ridiculous comments and actually accept their liabilities.

I won't be trying to ambush them..more worried about them using stuff said online against me in court to try challenge credability...

[des8]

Re: Halfords overfilled engine oil and refuse to repair vehicle fully!

and why shouldn't you discuss the matter on line with friends and advisers? How do you think they could use your enquiries against you?
They will be discussing with third parties as well.