Legal advice please – cancelling a new car dispute

She’s morally entitled to mislead her customers?

No, that’s where i started to turn. But she’s entitled to ask for money in recompense for being messed about both in the agreement and subsequently. The customer is legally entitled to tell her to sLING her hook (just thought of that) but morally, I’m also not so comfortable with. It’s a bit like people who know the speed rules, exceed them, get caught and then try to get off on technicalities.

But if morals come too far into business dealings; morally, how do we sit with someone charging £500+VAT more for a car than they know some other dealer charges. Is that morally ripping off the buyer because they haven’t done enough research?

What I am still amazed by, is someone who is skint, would consider pissing £440 a month against the wall on a Skoda.

That’s the maddest thing on this whole thread.

who’s mentioned being skint? I’ve been unemployed and will be self employed on a £4k a month contract as of November… as previously pointed out on numerous occasions.

What I am still amazed by, is someone who is not skint, would consider pissing £440 a month against the wall on a Skoda on behalf of someone who is skint. That’s the maddest thing on this whole thread.

Fixed for you.

^^ I would guess that most folk who drive around in fancy cars can’t afford them. Judging by national average earnings compared to the price of fancy cars.

Put it on credit and then forget it and go back to the store springs to mind

No, that’s where i started to turn. But she’s entitled to ask for money in recompense for being messed about both in the agreement and subsequently. The customer is legally entitled to tell her to sLING her hook (just thought of that) but morally, I’m also not so comfortable with. It’s a bit like people who know the speed rules, exceed them, get caught and then try to get off on technicalities.

But if morals come too far into business dealings; morally, how do we sit with someone charging £500+VAT more for a car than they know some other dealer charges. Is that morally ripping off the buyer because they haven’t done enough research?

Her fee is £199, that what she makes for providing the lease….

Before the cooling off period the order was cancelled, yet the order could only be placed before the finance docs were sent and unseen. She claims her exit costs are the £500 + VAT fee, yet it’s also clear in the comms that the car wont’ be ordered until the finance docs are returned.

£600 sound fair enough for sending an A4 piece of paper out and ringing her local Skoda dealer??

Not to me or the proposer.

She thought her illegal contract would protect her in this instance and is probably why she operates in this way cos she can bully £600 out of people for doing FA

who’s mentioned being skint?

You did. A few months ago. So if you were skint then, you must be pretty skint now.

Bought tickets to see The Specials for a now ex GF. I’m not into them but i’m now also unemployed and looking to get a good return on them.

Best place to sell them and make a bit over face value??

I’m not profiteering, just skint.

will be self employed on a £4k a month contract as of November…

I thought you said you were going back into employment because your partner had pulled out?

will be self employed on a £4k a month contract as of November…
I thought you said you were going back into employment because your partner had pulled out?

Going back into employment is an option, but she’s not pulling out, she’s delaying it again and it’s making me consider my options. Within the next three weeks i’ll either be back in employment or self employed on a contract.

You did. A few months ago. So if you were skint then, you must be pretty skint now.

He could have just been posting that for a friend. 😆

Best place to sell them and make a bit over face value??

Wonder what the T&Cs were when he bought the tickets.

will be self employed on a £4k a month contract as of November…

Wouldn’t that breach IR35?

will be self employed on a £4k a month contract as of November…

So £3k a month take home.

15% of you net to RENT a car???? Before you pay for insurance or put fuel in it?????

£600 sound fair enough for sending an A4 piece of paper out and ringing her local Skoda dealer??

No. Begs the question why you agreed to it by signing the paperwork then?

I’m not arguing whether it’s a fair cost, or even legally pursuable, just that you agreed to it and now are refusing to pay what you agreed to. Which is as we have seen legally permissable (although Ling may yet take you to court to test) but -> IMHO <- morally iffy.

[As, for the avoidance of doubt, is Ling claiming it is allowable by her claims of TS / previous cases]

Within the next three weeks i’ll either be back in employment or self employed on a contract.

Ah, so might be ‘self employed on a £4k a month contract’ , not will be.

No further questions.

Wouldn’t that breach IR35?
[/quote]

I can think of all sorts of contracts which wouldn’t.

He didn’t – he agreed that some unspecified charges “may” apply – that vagueness is another reason the resident lawyers agree it’s unenforceable. I suspect if she’d asked for her real costs on this we might not all be here (even if that would still have been legally and morally dodgy of her).

[As, for the avoidance of doubt, is Ling claiming it is allowable by her claims of TS / previous cases]

ling’s moral failing’s pre-empt those of the OP – he should never have been asked to sign a form with those terms on it, so to look at it from a legal perspective, any moral obligations he has are null and void.

bump

Legalities and moralities aside, I’d question the business acumen then of agreeing in writing to unspecified charges in the event of cancelling. Especially from someone with >20 years in sales.

As to whether Ling’s morals are already in question at the point that she asks people to agree that if they mess her about they pay. I don’t see that as immoral, and we’ve ascertained it’s not specifically ILLEGAL (which to all intents then makes it in most eyes immoral), just that it’s not legally enforceable.

I think this thread may have scope to give rise to a thread popularity measure.

where 1 Ling = 1000 posts / day, or an interval of 90 seconds between posts

Clearly 1 Ling is quite large, and the average thread would experience a few tens of milliLings over the course of its initial days, before dropping off to an unmeasurably low microLing.

bump

Wut? Worried this thread was about to die? 🙂

I’m trying to get it to exceed 1 Ling.

cranberry – Member
Will the marriage between Ling and Mick be blessed with children Micklings, or will Mick withdraw at the last moment ?

No. It’s Ling and Poopscoop getting married. We covered the kids a few pages back:

scotroutes – Member
I’m especially tickled by the notion that their children could be referred to as pooplings
Or ling-cum-poops?

we’ve ascertained it’s not specifically ILLEGAL

I’m not sure we have. Writing misleading contracts is illegal, as it is illegal, as I’ve understood it, to apply penalties in the case of retraction under consumer protection laws; she could claim for out of pocket expenses but if she makes 200 quid a car it’s difficult to see how she’s 500 quid + VAT out of pocket at this stage.

Will the marriage between Ling and Mick be blessed with children Micklings

Nope. They’d be Reay-Lings.

….but i’m sure nobody wants to cause a fence.

I think it’s more a case of taking a fence for some

GeordieMick earlier;

Mmm… Reads thread…Wanders off to add new names to the stw list….

I have a point about the morals of mick signing a contract but then reneging on it.
1) Lets assume that the cancellation fee clause is invalid.
2) Lets pretend that Mick thought it might be invalid.

I wonder about the moral issue with thinking:

I will sign this, because my intention is to buy the car. However they will never be able to enforce that clause, no matter it does not concern me as I am going forward. I’ll fight that battle when I come to it.

Eg lots of companies try it on, and you cant do business with them if you don’t sign, sometimes its ok to go ahead with unenforceable clauses knowing you can challenge them alter. In my line this is common.

I’m trying to get it to exceed 1 Ling.

1 Ling has a cash value of £500+VAT?

See if you ever wanted the perfect case study for the current precarious financial state of most households in the UK, Geordie Mick’s set up would be perfect 😯

@geordiemick00 – As you’ve offered no quantum I’ll assume you/the other fella now want to pay £0 despite recognising cancellation charges if you/the other fella cancelled, which you/the other fella did, presumably because you’re now ‘deeply concerned’ on behalf of others in your position. By all means argue Ling’s practices/contracts may be erroneous but also recognise you/the other fella knew there might be charges to pay and you were looking for ‘reasons’ to support you not doing so. I suppose I’m just saying the moral high ground applies both ways.

BoardinBob – Member 
See if you ever wanted the perfect case study for the current precarious financial state of most households in the UK, Geordie Mick’s set up would be perfect

Indeed, I have no idea why people commit to this crazy level of spending.

The point is, such charges are in contravention of consumer protection law. You might argue that ling is morally entitled to recover her costs (though when she starts asking for £600 for a car which hasn’t even left the factory yet I think she’s lost any moral high ground there), but when such recovery is specifically not allowed under consumer law then that comes into conflict with the morality of abiding by such laws.

As pointed out by orangespyderman (I also hinted at this earlier) there is certainly a possibility that there is something illegal with having such terms on the contract form. IANAL, but it’s certainly not cut and dried that it’s not illegal for a trader to do that. I’m quite enjoying the irony here of ling throwing around accusations of fraud earlier in the thread. Though the vagueness of the language used on the form is also quite interesting – I do wonder whether this is an attempt to circumvent laws against misleading contracts.

Brant’s IR35 post a couple of pages back opens up another front in the saga.

OP refers to his ‘future business partner’, becoming self-employed and gives the impression it will be a long-term contract.
He may be careless in describing status and arrangements but if what he has written is accurate I would be surprised if he was outside of IR35.

Are there any tax inspectors in??

ling abandoned the moral high ground when she wrote a contract which attempts to avoid her obligations under consumer law. I’m not sure why you think Mick should be paying anything legally or morally when he cancelled a contract in the 14 day cooling off period when you’re specifically allowed to do that without penalty – whatever the morally dubious wording on the contract might say.

Jesus Christ.

No. It’s Ling and Poopscoop getting married. We covered the kids a few pages back:

It’ll be Mick and Ling in the end, Ling so aching for marriage and the financial benefits it brings, that under her veil she doesn’t notice that Micks stepped aside and she is marrying the best man.

I will sign this, because my intention is to buy the car. However they will never be able to enforce that clause, no matter it does not concern me as I am going forward. I’ll fight that battle when I come to it.

If so cross out the clause, or if the firm won’t accept that sign, but tell them you’ll be contesting it because you feel it’s unenforcable. I’ve crossed out clauses before, it always makes me chuckle when the other party doesn’t care – makes me wonder why they put it in.

There’s no need to make promise you aren’t going to keep.

Thaaaaasand.

1 Ling achieved 🙂

1000ish