"Border reivers were raiders along the Anglo-Scottish border from the late 13th century to the beginning of the 17th century...they raided the entire Border country without regard to their victims' nationality."
Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 5:11 pm Post subject: small claims court would be last route
Hi,
Sorry to hear of your issue I have a different car issue but pile of poop to deal with none the less.
I would agree that your direct route for redress is with the dealer.
How many miles have you done in the time you had it? Unless it is a lot then the car had the fault at point of purchase. For that reason alone the warranty company are likely to take a back seat because effectively you were sold a car with a defect when you purchased it.
That is not what the warranty is for.
I would strongly advise that you get a solicitor who is qualified in contract law to write a letter on your behalf. It will really be worth the money. The offer you will make is effectively a refund minus the mileage you have covered at for example 20p per mile or an equivalent replacement car or a full engine rebuild at the garage of your choice. Give them 14 days to reply and if no joy the matter will proceed to the small claims court.
They will definitely not want to go there. The facts of the case are knackered car that is a gradual process or a few thousand miles and they CANNOT provide any evidence that it had been checked before point of sale for bore scoring.
Should they produce something in the Mags Court it would seriously be frowned upon or dismissed as not admissible as it has been asked for on several occasions prior.
It will be a bit of a pain but a letter from a qualified contract law solicitor even if it is £150 with a offer and deadline for reply will be the best way to being down the 'ignore him he will go away' tactic.
Just read their review in 911 & Porsche World, they come across as an outfit who are only interested in making money from the boom in classic Porsche prices! _________________ Present
Carrera C2S Manual
Mercedes CLK DD
Ducati 996
stichill99 Monza
Joined: 03 Nov 2013 Posts: 191 Location: Scottish Borders
Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 8:32 pm Post subject: 993 rs replica
I am sure that a few weeks ago the yellow 993 rs replica was only priced at £64950 so it looks like the magazine article is worth another £10k. Or has the 993 market rapidly appreciated!
Rhodris-dad Nürburgring
Joined: 28 Nov 2013 Posts: 480 Location: RHYL
Posted: Fri May 12, 2017 1:02 pm Post subject:
I think the decision you have to make here is ....do you want to take the car back as "not fit for purpose" Dealer to pay you back...
or.....pursue the warranty company to repair.
!st option....the dealer has not provided any evidence that the bores were fine at point of sale (you need a letter about the borescope you had done and their opinion about the condition of the engine)
You need to gather as much evidence as you can so you have a nailed on case.
2nd option........warranty companies always try to get out of paying claims. It took the company I dealt with over 5 weeks to decide they would honour the claim I made (phone call to https://www.themotorombudsman.org/ worked in this instance.)
However, you will have to pay a percentage for new parts and for any "betterment" work carried out.
I ended up with a bill for £4k and the warranty paid the rest (£10k bill)
Personally I would go for option 1 as you have a nailed on case.
I really hope you get this resolved to your satisfaction. This country is full of people with no integrity.
fants Newbie
Joined: 03 Sep 2016 Posts: 1
Posted: Tue May 16, 2017 11:23 am Post subject:
alex yates wrote:
I think the warranty company will probably say it is a known generic fault these cars have, therefore not covered with the warranty.
If thats the case with the warranty company, then that needed to be disclosed when the warranty was taken out, I would say.
Also if they issued the warranty documents, without a specific disclaimer concerning this particular issue, with this specific make and model, then I suggest the warranty company has not acted in good faith. There may be redress there?
Zeb Montreal
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 Posts: 538 Location: Lancashire
Posted: Tue May 16, 2017 2:48 pm Post subject:
_________________ 991 C4S
Huntergatherer Newbie
Joined: 14 Oct 2016 Posts: 22
Posted: Tue May 16, 2017 3:04 pm Post subject:
fants wrote:
alex yates wrote:
I think the warranty company will probably say it is a known generic fault these cars have, therefore not covered with the warranty.
If thats the case with the warranty company, then that needed to be disclosed when the warranty was taken out, I would say.
Also if they issued the warranty documents, without a specific disclaimer concerning this particular issue, with this specific make and model, then I suggest the warranty company has not acted in good faith. There may be redress there?
Ive got to agree with the above, as insurance is a contract and therefore risks should be specifically excluded if they exist (track days on road insurance policies for example).
So in my simple brain, the outs they may go for are - wear and tear or its excluded.
I think the simplest route if you are having no joy is to employ a lawyer to at least review your position (not discounting the superb advice given here) and
then take his advice, which may involve getting them to persue for you.
Best of luck
kye_997 Newbie
Joined: 04 Feb 2017 Posts: 11
Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:36 pm Post subject: update
hi All,
More advice needed .. been a while as this is moving very slowly. Got the ombudsman involved who gave the finance company 8 weeks to issue a final resolution. They did not issue anything so then the ombudsman gave them 14 days and they (Ankle) have come with a report from an independent expert who states that the fault (bore score) could not have been present when purchased and it is due to something i have done (cold starts, hard driving etc etc). claiming this is the case as the car failed after 4 months of ownership.
They have completely ignored that from month 1 of ownership i had to put oil in as was burning 1 to 2 litres a month and completely ignored the well known issues with these engines.
I have spoken to a few experts who have told me bore score develops over a longer period but these are Porsche specialists that will not put this in writing for use in a court.
does anyone have any contacts to help ? I don't see how an expert can claim something like this without any evidence to back it up at the actual point of purchase?
speaking with the ombudsman on Monday morning .. any help appreciated.
infrasilver Fast & Furious
Joined: 04 Oct 2010 Posts: 6959 Location: East Midlands
It's a know fact that this gets worse over time and I'm sure someone could put this in writing for a fee. Getting a non expert to write a report is nonsence they have no knowledge of these engine quite clearly. _________________ http://euroroadtripper.blogspot.co.uk/
jonno_ Monza
Joined: 29 May 2014 Posts: 166 Location: Oxfordshire
Why not give Baz @ Hartech a call?
Can't get anyone more expert on these issues. _________________ 997.1 Seal Grey c2s manual, ltt, mobridge, zunsports, carrera IIs (summer)
Why not give Baz @ Hartech a call?
Can't get anyone more expert on these issues.
_________________ Current: 2009 997.2 C2S, 1999 Audi A3
Previous: 2008 Cayman 2.7, 2002 Audi TT, 1999 BMW 318!
resigner Imola
Joined: 19 Dec 2013 Posts: 842
Posted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 2:51 pm Post subject:
nigel99 wrote:
jonno_ wrote:
Why not give Baz @ Hartech a call?
Can't get anyone more expert on these issues.
Yup, that + 1.....
Make sure you bill them for your time spent sorting it out as well....
seeforez Barcelona
Joined: 10 Jan 2016 Posts: 1405 Location: up norf
Posted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 4:19 pm Post subject:
i think you may struggle to get an expert to say that Bore scoring can't be caused by one instance 0f hard driving - the truth is nobody is sure 100% what causes it, also i doubt an expert could confirm high oil usage is directly related to bore scoring on your car etc...etc....definitely worth speaking to Baz tho
On the flip side i would say it is impossible for their expert to prove otherwise - so that might be one tact but i would be more inclined to seek expert legal advice?
Good luck and keep us updated _________________ 997.1
mzmini Suzuka
Joined: 30 Jan 2015 Posts: 1164 Location: Somerset
Posted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 4:33 pm Post subject:
+1 as Seeforez has said _________________ 997 3.8 C2S
987 Boxster 3.4S
Disco 3
2012 VW Polo
1964 1071 Cooper S
1964 1071 Cooper S 1991 Pirelli Classic winner
1971 1275 Cooper S as new time warp
1996 106 Peugeot van (pride of the fleet)
All times are GMT - 11 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum You cannot post calendar events in this forum
![Porsche 911 [991]](./images/models/998.png)
![Porsche 911 [997]](./images/models/Model-997.gif)
![Porsche 911 [GT]](./images/models/Model-GT.png)
![Porsche 911 [996]](./images/models/Model-996.gif)
![Porsche 911 [993]](./images/models/Model-993.gif)
![Porsche 911 [RS]](./images/models/Model-RS.gif)
![Porsche 911 [964]](./images/models/Model-964.gif)
![Porsche 911 [Early]](./images/models/Model-Early.gif)
