Legal advice please – cancelling a new car dispute

I wasn’t pushed out, I was bought out because the company I worked for was s small family firm and I landed them the biggest project of their history which meant they didn’t want any sales representation for a good year or two so they bought me out, which paid my debts off…..

Funny thing then that they are advertising for Sales Managers right now (given that they don’t want any sales representation for year or two)

Another version of the truth?

There’s a minimum of three confirmed weapons grade bell-ends on this thread.

Stop teasing. Who is the third? Is it me?

within a well documented cooling off period but Ling’s seem to be above the law….

So well documented it’s taken 20 pages, 3 solicitors, a poopy nutter and a few hangers on to ‘establish’ enough of an excuse for the OP to perhaps wriggle off yet another hook…

Yep so clear he had to come looking for advice and information…

Wise-after-the-fact

So well documented

You are ling and I claim my £500 plus VAT.

Talk about taking things out of context

Talk about taking things out of context

Well that’s really the definition of a cut and paste quote so well done you 🙂

Glad to be of service sar.

rickmeister – Member
Untergang clip From the Gateshead Bunker
I can’t post it here..

This was amazing! Thank you!

Also, anyone watched that live feed of Ling’s office for any amount of time? I’m pretty sure I saw a dog or a cat wearing a swastika and also Hitler at some stage. Don’t mind a bit of quirkiness but not really sure how they fit in.

So well documented it’s taken 20 pages, 3 solicitors, a poopy nutter and a few hangers on to ‘establish’ enough of an excuse for the OP to perhaps wriggle off yet another hook…

This could be true, I sure as hell don’t know. But ling isn’t the person supplying the car, just an agent facilitating the deal. Her participation send consumer rights ect,ect into a very grey area. I’d bet if she brought a case against the OP it wouldn’t be as open and closed as some think it would be.

There’s a minimum of three confirmed weapons grade bell-ends on this thread.

Apparently there’s a rota, I’ve got three weeks of bellendery and a week of trolling to do in feb.

Well,I’ve never leased a car,I’m not a lawyer,and I haven’t flounced for ages.Quite honestly,I’ve no idea why I’m posting this.

Difficult to side with one person.

Perhaps as it’s a bit murky in terms of who said what, as grown adults they could reach an agreement out of court.

For example agree to pay the reasonable costs over a few months thereby minimising financial burden to the OP. Both agree to disagree and reach a settlement both accept.

Otherwise I can see it just carrying on mud slinging all the way to court.

Lings and Jarrows of outrageous fortune

redstripe, well played sir, well played.

Hope this gets sorted quickly and we don’t have a Gateshead Revisited situation…

Please
Now
Make
It
Stop

Brilliant stuff,scotroutes has it on page one I think…morally ,legally.

Slightly disappointed that there has been no reference to Chuck Berry’s My ding a LING!

I’m still finding it quite easy. Mick might be a shady character who gets himself into hot water all the time and runs away from his responsibilities, but that’s all completely irrelevant. Because he signed up to a distance selling deal involving credit and has cancelled within the 14 day cooling off period. All those wanting to character assassinate Mick might not like it that businesses end up out of pocket when consumers make use of their rights, but that’s the law and it is the law for genuine consumer protection reasons. Of course it’s actually Simon who’s signed up to the deal and now cancelled it, but that and all the shenanigans about who is paying for the lease and who was going to drive the car is also irrelevant (not least because we haven’t even got near anything being any different from normal).

Meanwhile ling is trying to claim that this “agency charge” which has no basis in law is outside the consumer protection laws, which is how she can still charge it. Apparently based on Simon signing a contract which supposedly signs away rights he can’t sign away and an unspecified and vague charge he’s signing himself up for. All because she apparently runs a business model which doesn’t take proper account of consumer law. Or does she, given than she says in LINGO that the car won’t be ordered until finance is in place? There’s only one person on this thread quite definitively lying…

Whatever you might think about the morality (I’m not personally seeing a big problem with cancelling a contract with a cooling off period within the cooling off period) it’s quite clear what the law says about all this.

Though the only person I definitively wouldn’t do business with is andyrm – I don’t like nasty people.

Though the only person I definitively wouldn’t do business with is andyrm – I don’t like nasty people.

Anyone who knows me either here or in real life knows you couldn’t be wider off the mark. Not sure where you get the “nasty” bit from. Unforgiving of unethical and immoral behaviour by a serial shyster? Yes. Happy to call it out and back up with a shyster’s own evidence of previous shady behaviour? Yes. Nasty? Absolutely not.

Quite simply, if someone doesn’t want to be exposed as shady, don’t do shady things time and time again.

I agree with aracer, except the

Though the only person I definitively wouldn’t do business with is andyrm – I don’t like nasty people

bit, I still wouldn’t buy off Ling either.

Quite simply, if someone doesn’t want to be exposed as shady, don’t do shady things time and time again

Please stand up

thejesmonddingo – Member
Well,I’ve never leased a car,I’m not a lawyer,and I haven’t flounced for ages.Quite honestly,I’ve no idea why I’m posting this

Surely you are ideally located to pop along to the small claims court and report back to us. Don’t forget your sketchbook and crayons.

IANAL but it seems that companies E.G. insurers, can charge an admin fee or make a deduction for services or costs incurred during the 14 day cooling off period.

Note the use of the word ‘seems’. For all you non lawyers on year who are also self proclaimed legal experts

senor j – Member
Brilliant stuff,scotroutes has it on page one I think…morally ,legally

Aye, but think of the fun we’d have missed if everyone else had just agreed.

FWIW nothing in the subsequent 22 pages has changed my mind.

Nah, I think we’ve established it’s a bit more complicated than what was written on the order form.

Even if Ling was in the right, I wouldn’t side with her.

She voted for Brexit.

So morally she’s wrong already.

Jonnyboi I explained that point a few pages back.

Can only make a deduction for services actually provided NOT admin or costs. There is an important difference between them. It protects the consumer whilst making sure they don’t just get stuff for free.

Just caught up. Amazing thread.

The LGBTQ Oman post had me in tears. Comedy gold.

Larry_Lamb – Member
Even if Ling was in the right, I wouldn’t side with her.

She voted for Brexit.

So morally she’s wrong already.Ah – but what if the OP voted for Brexit too???

Morning all, think it’s time for a recap on this because you’re all baying for blood and after 774 posts i think the situation is clear. The last two days have been stressful AF and it’s time to move on from this, but last night the moral judgement got to me a lot and I think now the legal position is clear and i’ve had to time to read the shitty comments about me and SC – the proposer of the finance it’s time to timeline the facts for all to see.

When I posted this I didn’t want the expected judgement of holier than thou types so I typed that ‘I’ had ordered the car… so yes I obviously lied, but for good reason, I really CBA to wade through judgmental comments to be honest and to be fair my financial arrangements with SC are of nobodies business. So, yes that’s a lie but that is the only lie in the last 774 comments.

At the time of discussions with Ling I was due to start a contract on Nov 1st, making the car affordable. As I’ve been out of work for a while the proposer offered to finance the car. I contacted Ling’s by phone and discussed my intentions with them, their employee L**Y went off and got the position and I was told as long as SC’s on the insurance as a named driver then all OK. I could be the main driver which suits the insurance requirements. Nothing out of the ordinary at all and i’d had quotes that were on the basis.

So as advised I then did as instructed and started to make enquiries as to what cars where available either in stock or for quick delivery. I was offered a few Focus’, then settled on a Golf GTE. When the news came back of lengthy lead time I was offered a list of cars that were off a stock list and the Skoda that was eventually ordered was on that list and it was due in first week in November.

At this point the negotiations between myself only and the company was then stopped and SC the proposer was added to LINGO and as shown in previous pages, Ling herself was aware of this. We sat on the paperwork for a few days before we were chased to see if we still want the car as it was available for sale and may not hang round for long… but it cannot be kept on hold without the finance in place … The proposer SC then filled in the details on their website and he was told that someone would call him to make a proposal on the phone…

For two days this didn’t happen and he messaged Ling asking if it didn’t happen soon then we’d look elsewhere as it was blatantly obvious that Ling’s role in this was to merely arrange a phone call to a dealer. Then suddenly the finance is approved without aforementioned phone call he was promised.

The order form was sent to him through Lingo, he signed it, putting my address on for delivery and that was it. He was told that finance docs would be sent in the post and he’d have to send them back with driving license as ID. He then pops off on holiday

A week later my potential employment situation is looking like it could change and given the finance is in his name I thought the safest thing would be to cancel, or postpone until I’ve started and the situation is stable. I also had offers of interview so my options have changed, so it was agreed we’d cancel and revisit in a month or so. The car was cancelled and Ling was told it would be re-visited shortly… which is when this kicked off.

Did I jump the gun in getting a car ordered too soon?? in hindsight, obviously..Should’ve waited until my contract started.

Is that illegal? No.

Is someone getting a contract hire car in their name and allowing someone else to drive it illegal? No

it could be my BIL, LING’s BIL or the babysitter, it matters not as long as the proposer is under the understanding that they are liable for the payments and the vehicle is insured adequately.

Does my current employment status have any bearing on this?? No. The proposer has liability for the car and entered his own verified details into the system and was entirely comfortable with the arrangement. Yet Ling is being defamatory in stating he has lied on his finance app. This alone has made his apoplectic.

Was Ling’s made aware of this arrangement? Yes, although it’s not on LINGO because we only went onto LINGO when we started to look at cars available which was after the verbal go ahead was given.

At the point Ling could blatantly see two men, with separate email addresses, a proposers address and delivery address 165 miles apart were part of the deal then she could’ve asked for clarification… which she didn’t. There was no misleading here, the comms were fairly open and transparent. Photo on previous thread clearly depicts her aware of this and agreeing to had SC to the comms for him to order the vehicle.

Ling claims we should have notified the finance company of the arrangement…. we’ve misled them. OK, how can we advise them if the paperwork from the finance company is only sent after the car is ordered and the proposer is committed???

When filling in the finance application on Ling’s website it doesn’t ask such question. There are also serious concerns about how the data got from Ling’s to the dealer who seemed to have approved a finance application without contacting the proposer. Serious data breach there Ling….

So you have to commit to signing a vehicle order with substantial cancellation costs that are not displayed before you get to see the T’s & C’s of the finance deal. So you have to agree to lease a vehicle before you even get to the see what you’re signing for….

Despite the fact the order form has the exact car details, Ling can’t tell you how much these costs are knowing fine well where the car is coming from? Don’t you know your arrangements with your own suppliers Ling?

Are their any descripitve terms and conditions on the vehicle order form?? NO. Ling’s posted the actual order form on here, read it for yourself. *you may be charged some money* isn’t acceptable in UK consumer law

Is the car bespoke?? Absolutely not. The car was clearly stated by Lingscars as being on a stock list (evidenced in previous pages) but had options selected. I had a choice of a few more of the same car without options but all were due at the same time.

Comms prove this car was in the system with this spec, it wasn’t specified by me or SC to the spec, we were offered it and took it as it basically had the nicest spec available. It’s got ISOFIX front seat FFS, why would I spec that when my daughter is 5’9″ and 16 year old….

They’re blatantly cars put into the system by Skoda hoping they’ll be sold before they’re built. All manufacturers do this, so this car is far from bespoke and as such falls under the consumer contracts regulations 2013 meaning there is a 14 day cooling off period, that has now been extended to 12 months and 14 days because the contract is in breach of the above regulation.

So, the proposer was asked to sign for a vehicle that’s not bespoke, using an order form that’s designed for a bespoke vehicle and as such states no rights to cancellation and no specific cancellation costs, knowing fine well where that car is supplied from and how much *if anything at all* that supplier will charge to cancel.

But let’s be realistic here, the car was never ordered in the first place because as per earlier comms it was stated the car won’t be ordered until finance is in place. Finance isn’t in place because the proposer hasn’t signed it and returned it.

What have we learned here??

Lings process is back to front. Get the customer to commit to a vehicle before the finance mechanism is in place. Seeing as she only leases vehicles then this is pretty important, unless you can now lease vehicles without finance?? 😕

The order form needs to be specific to the particular deal. A generic order form doesn’t cut it on this occasion. CCR 2013 rights quite clearly apply in this case. The law even states that a product that has options
available from a list of options isn’t bespoke, so that probably makes m most of her leases null and void, unless she’s flogged a few top end Rollers….. which to be fair, won’t be bought through that sort of outfit.

Cancellation costs should be clearly outlined and justified. The customer is ordering a specific car, Ling’s know where that car will be procured from, therefore, knowing the cost of exiting that agreement.

Ling is prepared to be breach data protection act and exposing customer conversations and order forms on a public website that she has since shared on her Facebook page for good measure is breach of data protection act. This also falls under misconduct under the financial conduct authority too, i’m fairly sure she needs an FCA license to trade….

Did I jump the gun and have SC order the car too soon? Not at the time of ordering, but situations change and consumer laws are there for a reason. I’ve learned from this and shitty judgmental comments on the last few pages have certainly got me thinking that’s for sure, but to take you all back to the OP, i was never defamatory about Ling and still think her website is the best. Her processes have gaping big holes in them and i’d be happy to tighten them up for £500 + vat…

SC awaits your invoice…

Complaints to the FCA, IC and trading standards pending.

EIDT: This is MR typing this, if you want to send any legal correspondence my home address is the delivery address on the order form.

Sorry andyrm but you really do come across as a hate filled, nasty character in the latter part of this thread. I truly hope you aren’t this way in real life and it pains me to even use those words in reference to another forum member. Compared to some of your posts though, they are tame.

I don’t say that for the views you’ve posted or the fact you disagree with me, all that is fine and dandy. It’s for the way you’ve expressed them. Particularly in one post you made last night to the op.

You seem to have an almost palpable hate for the guy that is far more of a reflection on yourself than him from what I can see.

At least one post you made last night had no place on this forum or any other in my opinion.

I hold no malice towards anyone that has given me stick in this thread, none whatsoever. That includes Ling. Hell,I have my faults but reading the hate filled bile you posted was actually pretty shocking to read on stw.

Off out to remind myself that most people are pretty nice in real life andy.

Even if Ling was in the right, I wouldn’t side with her.

She voted for Brexit.

So morally she’s wrong already.

To be fair, if i’d known this I wouldn’t have even clicked on her site….

Double reverse flounce – BOOM!!

Has that ever happened before?!

admin fee, no; services provided within the 14 days, yes

Discussion from: http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/legal-advice-please-cancelling-a-new-car-dispute/page/13#post-8804409

Comment from a real lawyer: http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/legal-advice-please-cancelling-a-new-car-dispute/page/13#post-8804428

admin fee would make a mockery of the protection, because that would allow people like ling to levy punitive unspecified charges to discourage people from exercising their rights.

At least that’s what is seems to me 😉

edit: I see the real lawyer has also posted, but I’ll leave this here anyway to show I was paying attention

I thought Jimmy Nail had flounced?

Ah – but what if the OP voted for Brexit too???

Hmmm

So long as he doesn’t ride an e-bike, then he’s won. However I would still give a disgusted look in his direction.

EDIT – ah thank god, he didnt vote Brexit.

Are Mick and Poopscoop telepathically linked?

geordiemick00 – Member
TLDR

. At least you admitted you lied, not a full admission granted. But it’s a start

We do need to move on from the ‘they voted Brexit! They’re automatically evil!’ Just fosters an us and them approach.

Incidentally I do still find comments like this amusing

It's an incredible read! Who on earth takes legal advice from someone who says they're a lawyer on the Internet?

— SiBarber (@SiBarberPhoto) October 26, 2017

I don’t think some people (like ling) realise quite what a useful source of advice STW is – most of the longtimers on here know who has real expertise, though in general when things get serious nobody tries to BS. I’ve certainly employed a real lawyer from here (not one who’s on this thread) following a request for advice.