Stellantis stop/drive fallout: Speculative claims and what dealers should do next

legal updates

After the Stellantis stop/drive notice, some consumers are trying their luck, even years after purchase. DVSA advice remains to pass and advise, so take legal advice before engaging with threats of court action.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

Dealers are receiving template-style claims from consumers with no actual vehicle issues following the Stellantis stop/drive notice. DVSA guidance still says pass the MOT with a manual advisory, so most of these demands look speculative, but don’t ignore them.

Some months after Stellantis issued a stop/drive notice, dealers are still receiving what we would describe as ‘ambulance-chasing’ claims from consumers who purchased one of the vehicles listed as part of the notice.

To be clear, these are consumers who have had absolutely no issues with their vehicle. Some are trying to claim against vehicles they purchased five years ago and have been happily and safely driving ever since. Whilst, at Lawgistics, we have not received any follow-ups to the letters we have written on behalf of clients in defence of these claims, we are hearing multiple reports of dealers being sent follow-up threats of court action.

The DVSA’s official advice to MOT testers (MOT special notice 03-25) remains to pass any vehicles listed in the notice and to issue a ‘manual advisory’ with the following text: “This vehicle has an outstanding recall. Contact Citroën for information and to arrange a free repair.”

As the DVSA is the government agency with responsibility for ensuring that drivers and vehicles meet stringent safety standards, and is the body responsible for monitoring recalls, we would suggest that these claims are speculative at best. That is not to say there may not be arguments in some cases, which may explain why some dealers are being pursued. Dealers should still take proper legal advice on receipt of a potential claim to avoid exposure to outrageous credit-hire costs.

If you receive one of these letters, speak to our legal team via the Lawgistics telephone helpline or casework service before you respond.

Connected Car FinanceReady to take the connected approach?

We’re here to ensure all used car dealerships deliver a better car finance experience for their customers. With over 4,000 approved dealer partners we ensure you are properly supported and connected with a range of flexible finance options, allowing you to lend and your customers to buy in complete confidence.

Nona BowkisHead of Legal Services / SolicitorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

£6,000 ‘Lost Commission’ Demand? The contract wording that cut it to £750

A supplier chased our member for more than £6,000 after an energy contract fell through. Unclear breach wording on “loss of commission” meant the only enforceable sum was the fixed £750.

Experts vs. “Garage Reports”: The evidence edge that could win your case

Garage reports can help, but only CPR Part 35 expert evidence tends to swing a dispute. Before costs spiral, here’s how and when to use experts to protect your position with consumers, businesses, and finance companies.

“Running Well”: Two words that cost a consumer £3,300

The judge found our member’s repairs were sound and ruled the email undercut the later allegations, dismissing the claim and awarding expenses.

The photo you didn’t take could cost you thousands

Proving a vehicle’s condition at handover is the difference between recovering costs and footing the bill.

They Broke It, You Don’t Pay: Intervening Acts that defend dealer claims

When damage stems from what a customer did after purchase, you may not be on the hook.

Tripartite Finance Agreements: Why dealers don’t have to accept a Hobson’s Choice

Finance houses are pushing ‘tripartite’ agreements that look like a Hobson’s choice for dealers.

To strike or not to strike

Courts are reluctant to strike out a claim or defence, even where there are procedural breaches. Here’s when CPR 3.4(2) genuinely applies, why summary judgment under Part 24 may be a better route, and what judges look for before taking the drastic step.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

Phone
01480 455500
Address

Vinpenta House
High Causeway
Whittlesey
Peterborough
PE7 1AE

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.