- Status
the hooded claw
Well-Known Member
Jesus Christ Keith remind me NEVER to sell you owt.
If yer ever did sell me owt Tony ... I wouldn't be the mess Jay is in ..coz knowin you it'd be straight as a dye anyhow!!!
oil dripper
Well-Known Member
cant wait to see these piccys
Well to top it off the brakes have completly failed!!!! He is speaking to his lawyer today (I would imagine incase I try to sue him for negligence) which I may have dropped into one of my emails to him. His website clearly states that all his vehicles have an independant inspection carried out. I have highlighted this to him.
Attachments
j the range
New Member
hi jay how long ago did that pass a mot? there is no way that should have a test on it. is he going to give you your money back?
Agree with that J. Whomsoever the tester was he won't be a tester much longer, even if it was six months ago. Brake pipes simply do not get in that state in that time span. It is also obvious that the CV joint has been in that state for a very long time.
Few other thing came to light after a conversation with the Trader.
MOT was done the week before he (the trader) brought it, from auction I might add. I did ask him where he got it from and the reply was the previous owner up north.
He has since addmitted it was from British Car Auctions online. Begs the question as to why did the previous owner auction it???
I have reported the MOT station in Carluke to VOSA and they will be investigating that matter.
The Trader who will remain nameless at this moment until I get my money back said it was driven from Carluke down to London and the driver reported no issues.
Upon further inspections of the paper work, the MOT was carried out at approx 69,350miles and I brought the car having covered 69,450, now I wasnt great at geography but Carluke is some 380miles from Finchley north London where I got the car from.
The Trader said he had put a few miles on the car but only round town. so the car must have been transported on a lorry to him. I am saving this bit of info for the time being.
Also he changed the alloys to those of a newer range rover, he said they were nicer looking wheels that he had in his garage and made the car more saleable, this maybe the case. Or were the wheels it turned up on buckled / damaged and changing them would stop the buyer looking for further damage.
MOT was done the week before he (the trader) brought it, from auction I might add. I did ask him where he got it from and the reply was the previous owner up north.
He has since addmitted it was from British Car Auctions online. Begs the question as to why did the previous owner auction it???
I have reported the MOT station in Carluke to VOSA and they will be investigating that matter.
The Trader who will remain nameless at this moment until I get my money back said it was driven from Carluke down to London and the driver reported no issues.
Upon further inspections of the paper work, the MOT was carried out at approx 69,350miles and I brought the car having covered 69,450, now I wasnt great at geography but Carluke is some 380miles from Finchley north London where I got the car from.
The Trader said he had put a few miles on the car but only round town. so the car must have been transported on a lorry to him. I am saving this bit of info for the time being.
Also he changed the alloys to those of a newer range rover, he said they were nicer looking wheels that he had in his garage and made the car more saleable, this maybe the case. Or were the wheels it turned up on buckled / damaged and changing them would stop the buyer looking for further damage.
Last edited:
biggeeeee
Retired - Living the dream
Do you have the details of the MOT station in Carluke?
Hope you did not pay money for this heap of crap. I would be upset if i had swopped it for a penny bubbly.
the hooded claw
Well-Known Member
Well Firstly Jay I have to say ......"DON'T BLAME YOURSELF" ....(I know its hard not to but)...Never the less you bought this "Thing" in good faith Everybody has an unwritten set of rules that they live their lives by....Unfortunatly its Huiman nature that you "place" these rules on other people (What YOU wouldn't dream of doing you EXPECT others not to do also)
Most of the time "Others" reach your rules & in some cases go way beyond what you yourself would, it is unfortunate that a small minority do not even come close to what you ( & most other decent people ) would consider "decent"
I am quite sure that the members on here that have replied to your posting (fanatic, Wammers, J, Datatek, myself & ALL the other members) are right behind you on this & will do everything we possibly can to help you out.
Just don't go doin owt daft & goin round & planting one on him (Which I must admit would MOST CERTAINLY be MY first reaction) Also don't go wanderin round the house or sittin in yer favourite armchair thinkin "I'm a loon, Good GOD what have I done"
EVERYBODY gets Shafted at sometime I know J & Wammers have & I most certainly have NOW is the time to sit calmly down & work though your plan of attack (legally)
You WILL come out of this,Your money will be returned & the Anguish your feelin now will fade.
CHIN UP Jay, we're all behind you on this one mate.
Keith
Most of the time "Others" reach your rules & in some cases go way beyond what you yourself would, it is unfortunate that a small minority do not even come close to what you ( & most other decent people ) would consider "decent"
I am quite sure that the members on here that have replied to your posting (fanatic, Wammers, J, Datatek, myself & ALL the other members) are right behind you on this & will do everything we possibly can to help you out.
Just don't go doin owt daft & goin round & planting one on him (Which I must admit would MOST CERTAINLY be MY first reaction) Also don't go wanderin round the house or sittin in yer favourite armchair thinkin "I'm a loon, Good GOD what have I done"
EVERYBODY gets Shafted at sometime I know J & Wammers have & I most certainly have NOW is the time to sit calmly down & work though your plan of attack (legally)
You WILL come out of this,Your money will be returned & the Anguish your feelin now will fade.
CHIN UP Jay, we're all behind you on this one mate.
Keith
Thanks Keith, he is playing the game from his end saying he is going to his lawyer, this is his latest email to me: I have previously mentioned neglegence as selling a car in the state this one is in, with what is now failed brakes / suspension etc is negligent.
James,
I have spoken to my solicitor today, who informs me that we cannot have
a meeting until late afternoon this Friday, November 19th, 2010.
I am unable to answer any emails until I have met with him, and will get
back to you within the time period specified by you.
You mention negligence, the accusation of which is not to be taken likely.
So that there are no misunderstandings, I would be quite willing to go to
court, notwithstanding the cost, in order to defend my good name.
I shall be in contact with you in due course.
B A
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My reply:
B,
I am not accusing you of anything, what I said was if an inspection was indeed carried out as your web site states you have done to your vehicles then this damage would have been highlighted. Then you knowingly sold a car with damage.
Or you in fact did not have an inspection carried out, and therefore your website is mis leading.
Which of the above is the case?
This is something you can answer without needing to speak with a lawyer.
I still fail to see why you need a lawyer. At this moment in time I want things to be made easy.
I get my money back as the car is not fit for purpose in which it was sold, you collect the car and either have it repaired and sell it on or cut your losses and send to auction.
We both walk away from this situation then back where we were before we meet.
Why do things need to be made so complicated.
Regards
James
James,
I have spoken to my solicitor today, who informs me that we cannot have
a meeting until late afternoon this Friday, November 19th, 2010.
I am unable to answer any emails until I have met with him, and will get
back to you within the time period specified by you.
You mention negligence, the accusation of which is not to be taken likely.
So that there are no misunderstandings, I would be quite willing to go to
court, notwithstanding the cost, in order to defend my good name.
I shall be in contact with you in due course.
B A
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My reply:
B,
I am not accusing you of anything, what I said was if an inspection was indeed carried out as your web site states you have done to your vehicles then this damage would have been highlighted. Then you knowingly sold a car with damage.
Or you in fact did not have an inspection carried out, and therefore your website is mis leading.
Which of the above is the case?
This is something you can answer without needing to speak with a lawyer.
I still fail to see why you need a lawyer. At this moment in time I want things to be made easy.
I get my money back as the car is not fit for purpose in which it was sold, you collect the car and either have it repaired and sell it on or cut your losses and send to auction.
We both walk away from this situation then back where we were before we meet.
Why do things need to be made so complicated.
Regards
James
Last edited:
the hooded claw
Well-Known Member
THAT^^^^ Statement immediatly tells me that HE KNEW/KNOWS hes at fault & cannot defend HIMSELF therefore he needs a "Lawyer" to help him cut his losses & come out of this with a "relativly" intacked reputation.
From reading your e-mail (Posted here) he "appears" to be trying to frighten you into rollin over & playing dead .........DON'T FALL FOR IT Jay ...
Also Remember to take someone with you when you meet (Then he cannot deny anything he said to you. (In the past when I have "Crossed swords" with guys like this I had one of them small tape recorders in me pocket) I suppose these days you could use a mobile phone to record the conversation ......
DON't go in ALONE Jay ... make sure you have an "independant" witness (NOT a family member) ...A Work collegue, a Neighbour, ANYONE who has no Financial interest in the deal.
Keith
I hardly think he would have a leg to stand on in court, that is a bluff. Best way he can protect his good name is to give you your money back plus any expense incured by you, then have the car crushed. What year is the vehicle?
the hooded claw
Well-Known Member
100% aggree Tony ....It IS a BLUFF .... If this don't work out fer Jay ..perhaps You. Me & J should tek a train ride down to Finchley ...
- Status
