Recently, we had a case where the claim against our client was only notified 5 years and 8 months after the sale of the vehicle.
As the customer issued proceedings within the six-year limitation period, Lawgistics were contacted to assist.
The customer had bought a new vehicle from our client. After the purchase, the customer did not return to our client again.
After 5 years, 8 months, and 41,000 miles, there was a problem with the vehicle, and it ultimately required a new engine costing £4,600.
The customer believed there was an inherent issue with the original engine and the car should not have failed at 41,000 miles, or indeed just under 6 years from sale, so she brought a claim.
We assisted by drafting a defence and taking all appropriate steps to prepare our client for a court hearing.
Although the customer had not returned the car to our client at any point since purchase, they had maintained the service schedule at independent garages.
As part of the interrogation of the claim, and with the customer’s permission, we were able to apply directly to Ford for copies of all service documents and the paperwork considered by Ford as the original request for a new engine had been made to Ford.
Once we had this paperwork, it soon became clear the reason Ford had declined a replacement engine was that although services had been carried out, there was a suggestion the wrong kind of oil had been used in the services, thus rendering the service history incomplete, and therefore not covered by Ford.
At this stage, the customer tried to pursue a claim from our member.
Leading experts in print, promotional clothing, staff uniforms, branded merchandise and PPE. Involution is your brand partner for promotional marketing and workwear, a one-stop-shop for your branded marketing needs for any business size and industry.
The claim went to a final hearing where our member was represented by a legal representative. Once all the facts were set out before the judge, the court decided the Claimant had not proved her claim that our member had sold a vehicle with an inherent fault, but that the failure to prove the services were carried out correctly meant that her claim must be dismissed.
After 6 months, the burden of proof to show there was a fault with a vehicle at the point of sale is transferred to the customer. The customer simply could not prove their claim and it was dismissed.
