- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,417
- Location
- Surrey
For something bought in February 2023?
returning car to dealer after 2 faults
- Thread starter unwashed potato!
- Start date
Should have done it instead of waiting for the court. You get up to 120 days
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,417
- Location
- Surrey
Yep hindsight. Where were you when this thread was made? 
no chargeback on cash or bank transfer which is what the OP paid with.
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,417
- Location
- Surrey
On top of the other load paid already, and winning against a company that is trying to close up shop.
He won't get paid though, the company will fold it's a ltd company so he'll get nothing other than satisfaction he was right.
He should have taken their offer of the refund less £250, hindsight a wonderful thing
With the company seemingly going bust he might aswell pay to get the car fixed, it's not something that can't be fixed, a cat shouldn't be too expensive, and it might just be a lambda sensor
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,417
- Location
- Surrey
the attempt by the company to dissolve has been suspended until summer at the earliest by companies house. so some good news
Last edited:
Why did the companies house do that? Didn't realise they could do that.
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,417
- Location
- Surrey
Because there is an ongoing court case. Apparently they just asked for proof and then a couple days later agreed to suspend the company from trying to dissolve until the matter is settled. The company has to remain until at least summer
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,417
- Location
- Surrey
Court date is tomorrow morning.
Get a letter today from court
"it is ordered that the application is dismissed because the defendant is a limited company and another director/officer can attend"
Wtf does this mean? Phoning court but as its 4.30 unlikely to get through before they close
Get a letter today from court
"it is ordered that the application is dismissed because the defendant is a limited company and another director/officer can attend"
Wtf does this mean? Phoning court but as its 4.30 unlikely to get through before they close
Is there a wider context to that statement? In isolation it almost sounds like a director made application for an adjournment which has been dismissed for the said reason that they are not the defendant, the company is.
Whatever the case best of luck with it.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,417
- Location
- Surrey
Turns out that is correct. They tried to say that they are too busy to come tomorrow lol
There was no other wording in the paper other than the persons name and theirs.
Very poorly worded letter imo.
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 17,417
- Location
- Surrey
Was my thought until this letter. Why bother trying to say the case needs to be delayed if they aren't planning to attend any way