Car & Solicitor Saga

h8red

Long story:

I bought a second hand car form a garage back in 2003. It was an 01. I never got anyone to check it out for me and that'll never happen again. When the car was going for it's first NCT Nov 2006 I got it checked out in a garage first. The mechanic said "bad news". There was a crack in the chassis hidden under the battery. Let it go for NCT and the tester said "bad news" & it failed miserably.

Went back to the garage I bought it from and at first he stared at me blankly and didn't reckon it was anything to do with him! After another meeting he said he would pay half of what it cost to repair it! So I said no and got a solicitor involved. He got an assessor to look at the car and then the garage wanted to get their assessor to look at it. The solicitor said let the car go to them and they ended up repairing it while they had it.

I wasn't at all happy with that. So the case is supposed to go to arbitration first. The solicitor gets the ball rolling. The garage then comes back and asks what I want to stop it going to arbitration. The solicitor went back to them with a figure which they rejected. END OF STORY.

That's the last thing that happened back in March/April last year. I ring the solicitor regularly and never get past his receptionist. I ask can he ring me back and he never does.

I really want this to be sorted. What can I do? Is there anyone I can contact that has any power over solicitors?

Thanks.

aspi

Contact the Law Society, they will give you information

EKRIUQ

Ok, so you bought a used car in 2003, have full use of the car for 3 years and still have and then you discover a fault in the car that could of been caused by you!!

The garage first offer a repair then they end up repairing the car and your still not happy.

I guessing at this stage your solicitor thinks your an ungrateful person and nothing will please you, and I don't blame them for blanking your calls.

How many times have you contacted your solicitor regarding suing business's I'm guessing this isn't your first time down the compensation route,:rolleyes:

h8red

Namesco wrote: »

Ok, so you bought a used car in 2003, have full use of the car for 3 years and still have and then you discover a fault in the car that could have been caused by you!!

The garage first offer a repair then they end up repairing the car and you're still not happy.

I guessing at this stage your solicitor thinks your an ungrateful person and nothing will please you, and I don't blame them for blanking your calls.

How many times have you contacted your solicitor regarding suing business's I'm guessing this isn't your first time down the compensation route,:rolleyes:

Firstly, I've corrected your grammar. Secondly, you are an asshole. If you don't have anything constructive to add then **** off out of my thread. This IS the first time I've gone down the compensation route. I didn't cause the fault. The whole point is that I was driving a death trap that should never have been sold to me in the state it was.

SuperGrover

You shouldn't have been sold the car in that condition.

On the other hand, it's now repaired.

I'm not sure where compensation comes into this.

Genuinely curious why you should be given money.

h8red

I don't even care about money at this stage I just want the thing concluded. But I just don't know where I stand as regards selling the car as it is involved in this case.

Edit: I DO want to be compensated for the legal costs of course. He basically wasn't going to do anything until I got the solicitor involved who had his own ideas about suing the garage.

SuperGrover

Maybe drop the case.

Then, if the car is now NCT passed and you are sure that the mechanical problem is fully solved, a buyer need not know that this ever happened.

I could be wrong though. Maybe there is more to this than I am seeing?

Ah, legal costs, yes. Worth pursuing for closure.

h8red

The car is pretty much perfect now alright. Still motoring perfectly. Never a problem that way. I could just sell it on to the next guy and he'd never know, but then I'd be as bad as the original bollix.

KTRIC

h8red wrote: »

Firstly, I've corrected your grammar. Secondly, you are an asshole. If you don't have anything constructive to add then **** off out of my thread. This IS the first time I've gone down the compensation route. I didn't cause the fault. The whole point is that I was driving a death trap that should never have been sold to me in the state it was.

Do you really think this is "your" thread and you have the right to abuse people ??

Good luck, I think you'll need it with that attitude.

SuperGrover

I don't think it necessarily bad not to mention it if the problem really is gone.

It's a machine, not a damaged soul.

h8red

KTRIC wrote: »

Do you really think this is "your" thread and you have the right to abuse people ??

Good luck, I think you'll need it with that attitude.

Haha. People make a lot of assumptions around here. First guy assumes I'm mad for compo and I crashed the car meself. I defend myself. The next guy assumes I have a bad attitude.

Gary ITR

h8red wrote: »

Firstly, I've corrected your grammar. Secondly, you are an asshole. If you don't have anything constructive to add then **** off out of my thread. This IS the first time I've gone down the compensation route. I didn't cause the fault. The whole point is that I was driving a death trap that should never have been sold to me in the state it was.

LOL

How do you know that the damage wasn't caused over the 3 years you were driving the car? Have you pics of the damage?

h8red

SuperGrover wrote: »

I don't think it necessarily bad not to mention it if the problem really is gone.

It's a machine, not a damaged soul.

I suppose yeah. But maybe it would damage my soul!! I just wouldn't feel right not telling the next person. Might tell you something about my attitude!

Thanks Supergrover and aspi

h8red

Onkle wrote: »

LOL

How do you know that the damage wasn't caused over the 3 years you were driving the car? Have you pics of the damage?

Ah no. This was a big crumple/crack in the chassis that was caused by quite a big shunt. I've never even been involved in a fender bender. Hope I never will. Don't have any pics unfortunately.

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

h8red wrote: »

Firstly, I've corrected your grammar. Secondly, you are an asshole. If you don't have anything constructive to add then **** off out of my thread. This IS the first time I've gone down the compensation route. I didn't cause the fault. The whole point is that I was driving a death trap that should never have been sold to me in the state it was.

banned for seven days for personal abuse.

EKRIUQ

h8red wrote: »

Firstly, I've corrected your grammar. Secondly, you are an asshole. If you don't have anything constructive to add then **** off out of my thread. This IS the first time I've gone down the compensation route. I didn't cause the fault. The whole point is that I was driving a death trap that should never have been sold to me in the state it was.

h8red wrote: »

The car is pretty much perfect now alright. Still motoring perfectly. Never a problem that way. I could just sell it on to the next guy and he'd never know, but then I'd be as bad as the original bollix.

LOL,

It's obvious why no one wants anything to do with you, your attitude stinks and your problem was solved, you can't even look for advice on an internet forum without being absuive! What was your attitude with the Garage like or your solicitor.

the_syco

h8red wrote: »

Ah no. This was a big crumple/crack in the chassis that was caused by quite a big shunt. I've never even been involved in a fender bender. Hope I never will. Don't have any pics unfortunately.

If you had mentioned this in the OP, and anyhting else wrong with it, the comments may have been somewhat better, but as you give us little information, and lots of abuse, I don't think the people here will help that much.

wyndham

h8red wrote: »

He basically wasn't going to do anything until I got the solicitor involved who had his own ideas about suing the garage.

People instruct solicitors, solicitors don't instruct people.