Wasting the time of leasing companies again? You monster

Not really, just selecting who will get an order for a car.

Obviously once I’m back in work, been paid for 12 months and have the permission of the STW righteous

The OP has shown pretty remarkable resolve in all this, being amazingly calm under such personal attacks both from Ling and particularly from one other member on here who had his post removed.

Point of note, I think the only removed posts have been double posts. Certainly that’s all I’ve removed and there’s been a couple of them.

As Hans Rosling said, “Too much Word, not enough Excel”.

That is fantastic, thanks for that.

^^Indeed.

The post is still there. Sorry for language in the quote below but it was a post andy refers to as “poor emotional self regulation” when others post similar. Seems daft to edit the sweary out of it now as the original is indeed still there.

Initially he didn’t remember even posting it and I thought it had been deleted, hence our mix up.

Andyrm

Just been thinking how much this thread has riled me – can’t decide if it’s the sheer audacity and lack of ethics on the OP’s part misusing the letter of the law, or the thought that he’s the kind of shady prick who gives those of us who do a good, ethical, ‘client first’ job of sales a bad name through his professional and personal conduct.

Again, sorry for confusion cougar.

What I find amusing is the whole ethics and morals argument being levelled at the OP and not at Ling. How is it immoral to cancel something within the legally allowed timeframe? How is it not immoral to write, what would appear to be, a highly dubious document? Never mind that website. I’m seriously contemplating getting myself a lawyer to see if I can sue for eye and / or mind rape.

[/quote]Just been thinking how much this thread has riled me – can’t decide if it’s the sheer audacity and lack of ethics on the OP’s part misusing the letter of the law, or the thought that he’s the kind of shady prick who gives those of us who do a good, ethical, ‘client first’ job of sales a bad name through his professional and personal conduct.

Too much Word, not enough Excel 😉

This post was brought to you by the ‘come on forty pages’ commission

Too much Word I can understand, I’m struggling to think of a problem where “let’s have more Excel” is a valid response though.

What I find amusing is the whole ethics and morals argument being levelled at the OP and not at Ling.

Seems to me both of their ethical/moral failings are now agreed by everyone in the thread. If focus has been more on GeordieMike in later posts is because he still busy digging his hole, while Ling put her shovel back in the shed and went home.

How is it immoral to cancel something within the legally allowed timeframe?

Where does backing out of an agreed sale fit of the moral scale? If one end of the scale is Genocide and the other is guffing in a lift I’m going to put it *far* closer to the guffing in a lift end. (Hogging the middle lane is towards the genocide end.)

Too much Word I can understand, I’m struggling to think of a problem where “let’s have more Excel” is a valid response though.

I take the word ‘Excel’ in this context to be a metaphor for ‘facts’. (When Hans Roslin said it he will have been referring to numbers on population.)

Yeah, I sort of guessed what it must have meant. Thing is, Rosling is surely famous primarily for his presentation of facts rather than the facts themselves. An excel graph is a strong indicator of a crap presentation IME, though I’m sure a skilled user could do a good job.

Just to refresh my mind on this thread, I re-read the first post…..

It’s gone from looking for a ‘get out’ from a contract where the OP clearly knew there was a penalty clause, and signed a document to say that he agreed with it (legality issues aside), due to a change in fortune/circumstances/etc, to the OP taking a firm stand atop the moral high ground, and mansplaining to anyone who will listen about her horrendous business tactics.

Did lol!

Exactly…

Now I feel scammed

I wanted to play Scalextric on Lings site, but I can’t really play, only select the cars and the background…

Play Scalextric with Ling

🙁

😀

Where does backing out of an agreed sale fit of the moral scale? If one end of the scale is Genocide and the other is guffing in a lift I’m going to put it *far* closer to the guffing in a lift end. (Hogging the middle lane is towards the genocide end.)

It doesn’t even register on the moral scale, it’s business. Orders get cancelled all day everyday in a multitude of industries. It happens in my line of work all the time. Part and parcel of dealing with the public and other companies.

Other than the comedy (which has been great) I fail to see any reason how this thread got so big. If actual, legally applicable fees are being dodged then it would register on my moral-o-meter. Christ, have some of you never tried selling on eBay, Gumtree or Pinkbike? Reading some of the more serious posts on this thread I’m guessing it would cause some to cry.

Yours truly morally bankrupt lift guffer (middle lane hogging should carry the penalty of instant car crushing) 🙂

I read this whole thread last night, can someone explain why Poopscoop is such a

shady prick

Poopscoop – Member
Not sure if posted before but like or loath Ling, WELL worth a read.

A guys experience of Ling and legality.

Just a little taster of the thread above:

Now, use stunts to promote yourself as much as you want but don’t complain when someone wishes to test if your promises are even vaguely genuine.

Hell, at least be friendly in your reply, certainly not resort to name calling within your first few words.

Hey, just saying.

Oh Poopscoop, I had a flurry of web visits to my DeLorean advert, so I thought I’d better see what you are one-sidedly ranting about, NOW?

I thought you asked me to bow-out, but you just keep posting and posting about me.

If anyone wants to read the full conversation between the ASA and me, it is here:

Click the picture. Read the full exchange. Get the full picture, instead of your half-effort.

You really are a wittering willy, pooperscooper.

– Ling

Absolutely it’s business…….but if there were penalty clauses involved, once again, legality issues aside, if you agreed with them, and signed documents to that effect, would you expect to comply with those clauses?
And if your personal circumstances changed, through no fault of your own, would you expect the person to not apply those penalty causes? Isn’t that ‘business’ too?
Would you then attempt to make an excuse about some other part of the contract, to avoid paying what you had agreed to? ‘Business’ again?
I’m not saying what Ling has done is right either, but if you muck up before finding a loophole by accident that you weren’t aware of, don’t go big gun deflection on the other party.
It just seems to me that if Ling had turned down the OP’s order for the luxury (!) skoda for any reason, there might have been a different thread on here, with a different title…….

‘legal advice please……turned down for lease car with no reason?’

Know what I mean?

Well this thread has certainly shown all sides of STW. The way it provides people with incredibly useful advice. The way some people feel the need to be nasty to other forum members. As entertaining as it might be, I’m not really sure of the relevance of the way the OP chooses to spend his money – some might suggest he’s rather careless with it and gets himself into situations, but it’s his own life and he seems to manage. He also seems to have quite adequately answered criticisms of other dealings he’s been involved with which some seem to think makes him a bit “shady”. For reference to those who don’t seem able to work this out, being nasty is still being nasty even if you think the person deserves it – it’s quite possible to criticise without being nasty if you have to criticise – so I stand by my earlier comment on this.

Because I’m with funkmasterp here – it’s just normal use of a standard cancellation terms as part of a consumer contract. Sure ling might not like it and she might want to send Mick Simon a bill for “costs”, but she is way, way more dodgy morally and legally here – not only is she ignoring the consumer law (I think we’ve also established she’s actually breaking the law by not making customers aware of their rights), she’s trying to bill them despite that. Not only that but she’s wanting to bill customers sums which go way beyond any losses she’s made – it still seems unlikely that she’s incurred any external costs at all here, making the invoice she threatened to send a penalty. If you want to know who’s morally dubious you need to look in her direction.

I’ve been searching for an analogy here – are there people on here who’ve never returned something to CRC or Wiggle? Is it morally dubious to return things to CRC or Wiggle when you’ve just changed your mind, despite them offering free returns for 12 months?

No, I’m not Simon, nor do I know Mick or Simon, just felt something needed to be said when some people still feel determined to put the boot in.

geordiemick, for what it’s worth, I don’t think what you’ve done is anything to lose sleep over, and it wouldn’t put me off buying from or selling to you on here. Your mistake was biting when the inevitable wind ups started, and then to keep on biting. I also get why you started off with an abridged version of the situation then felt compelled to clarify points when ling went off on one, but it was also inevitable that that would form the basis of more piss taking/winding up. At least I assume the majority of it was piss taking rather than serious?

Summary please… last time I read the thread it was 2 pages!!

Who is right, who is wrong?? And did OP and ling get it on in the end?? 😉

Gives aracer a big, virtual high five. It’s as plain as day to me and I’ve not slept since Thursday. Stick what you want in your T’s & C’s, but if it’s not legally binding jog on. Seems like something you would add to a contract hoping consumers didn’t pick up on it. 10 out of 10 on my shady-prick-o-meter.

Stedlocks- there is no loophole because it’s not binding. Personally I’d have queried what the hell it was before signing.

As Ling is back and doesn’t seem to mind posting data, mind sharing a breakdown of what your £500 +VAT covers?

40 pages here we come

Thanks you for that ling. No genuinely thank you, I needed a good laugh this morning.

<spoiler alert>

I mistakenly assumed you were posting it to refute the information given earlier, so I kept on reading to the bottom waiting to see the bit where you got the ASA to back down and admit that they were wrong. Did you forget to add that bit to the bottom?

If you think you came across well in that exchange then here’s a link for you: https://www.udemy.com/developing-self-awareness/

For anybody who can’t be bothered to read all that, apparently ling really enjoys dealing with queries to lease a Delorean
https://www.lingscars.com/personal-car-leasing/delorean/dmc-12

I read ling’s link the ASA upheld the complaint against Ling , when the complaint decision was published she demanded that the ASA put a hyperlink to her website in the published decision. The ASA refused to put the Hyperlink in .Ling then complained that the publication of the decision was sawmping her website with enquiries!!

Just about to say exactly the same crankboy

What an absolute numpty

I think its pretty obvious that Ling was just rubbing the ASA’s nose in it isn’t it? How they wasted their time on a joke and how it got her tons of free publicity, while continuing to waste their time and wind them up. Well played if you ask me.

I’ve deliberately refrained from getting stuck into the airy moralising going on here. I was genuinely interested in investigating the OP’s question and I will always help people on here when I can as others on here have helped me in the past. Pass it on boys, pass it on.

Quite aside from the legality (or otherwise) of her actions, this was someone abusing what she perceived as her position of power to bully one of our own. If this forum isn’t, in part, here for us to help each other out then what is the point? The way people have got stuck into the OP has saddened me.

Ling was absolutely taking the (geordie)mick. Maybe if she’d asked for a few quid to cover her admin costs the OP would have paid her and been none the wiser. That would still have been unlawful, but maybe it would have been palatable. As it was she deliberately set out to punish the OP for his change of heart. That is neither appropriate nor lawful behaviour. It is simply not true to say that the OP was aware of the consequences Ling would attempt to impose in revenge for the OP cancelling.

Maybe if she’d asked for a few quid to cover her admin costs the OP would have paid her

Please say you had a straight face when you wrote that… 🙂

‘Maybe’ but very very unlikely based on the content here.

Ha ha, fair point. I’m just saying slapping someone with the threat of a £600 invoice isn’t likely to get you a quiet life!

Quite aside from the legality (or otherwise) of her actions, this was someone abusing what she perceived as her position of power to bully one of our own. If this forum isn’t, in part, here for us to help each other out then what is the point? The way people have got stuck into the OP has saddened me.

While we are digging into the meta…

I agree with the sentiment, and there are members here I would bend over backward for (fnar fnar lolz), but just signing up for STW and occasionally popping in every couple of months should not automatically earn one’s undying support.

Got to get the memes right

Undying support I agree.

But the OP was genuinely worried about a pretty low threat of unfounded legal action. That is designed to be intimidating for people (I am reminded of the payday lender scam a few years back where they invented a fake law firm to send legally threatening letters to clients in arrears). He was entitled to ask STW for help and advice.

Or maybe I’m just offended by Ling telling him he needed better legal advice than he could get on the STW forum 😉

SIX new vehicles £120k
Three Motorbikes £30K
Seven high end push bikes £15k
Over the last 60mths ….Thats £33k PA on depreciating assets / Toys ! !

Unless they were all on the never never
Thats fine if you are earning serious money and have no mtg , lots oof investments , savings , pensions etc
But as you have no money , and are having t get someone else to fund your latest car rental I am going to guess you dont have any of th above

Doesn’t matter morally or ethically if you can be back out legally (or flog the tickets for higher than face value – its all just business after all).

As someone who sells custom-made expensive things, this has been an interesting discussion to watch.

It’s clear the OP was fully aware that a cancellation charge might be levied and was looking for a way to shirk paying it. It just so happens that the charge may be illegal but that doesn’t absolve him from his desire to renege.

Kudos to the stw lawyers though who come out of this deserving nothing but respect.

I am just about to read this whole thread, my book will have to wait, so thanks everyone for contributing. For my own villa rental venture and cancelled bookings i believe i am only allowed to retain costs that i can prove to be reasonable expenses, despite what my t+c s say.

I am sure we can all learn something from the points raised.

Or maybe I’m just offended by Ling telling him he needed better legal advice than he could get on the STW forum

It’s probably this. The legal profession are a particular litigious bunch.

As someone who sells custom-made expensive things, this has been an interesting discussion to watch.

Too true but as a bespoke maker you’re on a better footing for cancellation charges than a car leasing broker ordering cars with standard options.

It’s clear the OP was fully aware that a cancellation charge might be levied and was looking for a way to shirk paying it.

The fact is though the charge is completely illegal so no reason to shirk paying it.

My sister took a (particularly) dodgy car salesman to the small claims court. His argument was that she had signed the T&C’s – the judge rode a bus through his argument explaining that under UCTA (unfair contact terms act) a consumer cannot be contracted out of any consumer legislation whatsoever.

If the T&C’s are not legal then there is no fee to pay whether or not they state otherwise.

Absolutely it’s business…….but if there were penalty clauses involved, once again, legality issues aside, if you agreed with them, and signed documents to that effect, would you expect to comply with those clauses?

A penalty clause should be specific, Lings is ambiguous to say the least. The order form at best is really a statement of intent in the eyes of the law. Her process means you have to sign the form before you get access to the finance documents meaning you’re illlegally committing to an amount that’s not been specified before you get to see the terms of the finance agreement, that’s vary before the horse business.

And if your personal circumstances changed, through no fault of your own, would you expect the person to not apply those penalty causes?

Clearly documented the car won’t be ordered until finance is in place, which it’s not cos the agreement wasn’t signed or returned. At the time we were cancelling a car that hadn’t been ordered and under the impression the ‘penalty’ would be justified by Ling and only if the order was placed at the factory. This was a car from a list of STOCK vehicles.

Would you then attempt to make an excuse about some other part of the contract, to avoid paying what you had agreed to? ‘Business’ again?

Her response was immediately agressive. Threat of court with 100% success rate isn’t the approach to this. We were exploring avenues to proceed with the sale and wanted time to consider them. Her bullish attitude and greed to force a cost on us we knew fine we’ll she hadn’t incurred took me to this site for advice…

I’m not saying what Ling has done is right either, but if you muck up before finding a loophole by accident that you weren’t aware of, don’t go big gun deflection on the other party.

Read the OP. I haven’t bad mouthed Ling, I Lourded her website as the best out there and until the point she’s started to be extremely libellous, shared the shit out of this all over her social media then we would’ve happily paid her real loss which is her £199 doc fee.

She’s (in typical Ling fashion) used any publicity whatsoever to her advantage and took herself off to her safe little bolt hole of Facebook and Twitter and in the process made serious accusations about my mate BIL making a false finance app, despite the fact she knew about the arrangement.

Her conduct has been nothing but provocative and in typical STW fashion the trolls have dragged this into a personality assassination of the OP.

A little tact at the beginning could’ve gone a long way but her ‘money money money’ mantra came to the fore and at that point is when I felt the need to ‘wriggle out of an unfair agreement’

‘legal advice please……turned down for lease car with no reason?’

Nobody was turned down, delivery was arranged for 27 November.

It just so happens that the charge may be illegal but that doesn’t absolve him from his desire to renege.

That makes complete sense, commit to a £10,500 deal on an illegal contract because a piece of paper was signed… cool story bro…