Car dealership changed company name and are now saying not liable.

[MrsKoala]

We bought a car for £2900 in June. On the way home from the dealership the cars break light was flashing and bleeping madly - it was evident there was a big problem. DH pulled over and called them from the side of the road and they were apologetic and said to take it into a local (the dealership was other side of London and we live in Kent) garage and then send them the invoice - they were sure it was just something small.

Anyway, the garage said it was a massive computer fault and would need a very expensive new part which cost about £2k and that the car wasn't worth repairing.

We contacted the dealership and they shouted abuse at me, then hung up and never answered any more of our calls.

We contacted trading standards/citizens advice and they advised us to send a series of letters giving 28 days notice that we would start legal proceedings. In all 4 letters were advised to be sent. None were acknowledged and were returned (recorded deliveries).

We proceeded with a court claim after advice from trading standards that we could show that we had done all in our power to resolve this.

We now have had a letter from the dealership acknowledging our claim but saying they have added LTD to their company name and became incorporated subsequent to our purchase (on the day after our first letter was received) and therefore 'have nothing whatsoever to do with the claim'.

Is this right? Can they do this? I am so cross that the advice we had has actually helped them. :(

[LotusLight]

Okay, that's complex then,. It is like me saying in law I sued BT plc and won as they did not defend it but in fact my neighbour Jane Smith was the person who did the wrong and asking the court can I change this judgment to Jane's name without her having seen the claim or had the chance to defend it. I very much doubt they would let you just change the name of the person you won against despite what they seem to have said.

If you wanted to try and spend some money on court bailiffs enforce against the company you won the judgment against. Did you use their full company name as is now on the register at companies house and ideally their company number and sent it to their registered office address?
They did not exist when you sued them which is another big problem so they could easily get this judgment set aside if it is against their full company name. If it is not their full company name on the claim they can just say you must have tried to sue some company with a different name.

I am sorry it is so complicated. The first thing lawyers do before suing is look at exactly who is the other person - full company name and number, check addresses, electoral roll, sole trader full names, names on invoices, contracts etc. The reason for that is if you sue a company which does not exist or just a trading name without limited without giving the sole trader's name then even if you win you do not really win as you have not caught the right person.

[MrsKoala]

I don't understand. It was the company who sold us the car. Not an individual. The receipt is from the company. Surely whoever the actual salesman was was just a company representative and is irrelevant. We contacted and wrote to the company requesting to return the car and it was them as a whole who had responsibility I assumed.

The company is not listed at companies house.

[MrsKoala]

I just can't believe this is so nightmarishly complicated. We have spent hundreds now pursuing this and we might as well not have bothered. So we are even more out of pocket. The car was £2900 and with garage fees to diagnose the problem, court costs etc the heap of shut has cost about £3500

Can we scrap the car now? We have been keeping it in case the garage say they want it in return for giving us our money back.

[Collaborate]

Looks to me as if you sued a trading name. Not a legal entity if you've done that. You really need to identify the legal entity that sold you the car. That will be a sole trader or partnership, given you say it's not a limited company. But did you also know that ltd companies can also have trading names?

Contact trading standards to see if they can help you identify who you need to sue. The invoice should have clearly identified who owns the business.

[MrsKoala]

I have done everything on advice from ts who have been utter shit. They have given me terrible advice all the way along. We have now spent £300 on 2 suing them twice. We cannot afford to sue a different person a third time.

We simply cannot find any name of any sole trader. The garage is called (not really but just for example) 'fig leaf autos'. The receipt says 'fig leaf autos'. We have used 'fig leaf autos'. So can we not collect from 'fig leaf autos'?

[MrsKoala]

*Sued not used.

[Collaborate]

No. Because fig leaf autos doesn't exist as an entity. You'd have to sue "John Smith trading as Fig Leaf Autos".

This is from part 6 of the Companies (Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2008:
Registered name to appear in communications

6.—(1) Every company shall disclose its registered name on—

(a)its business letters, notices and other official publications;
(b)its bills of exchange, promissory notes, endorsements and order forms;
(c)cheques purporting to be signed by or on behalf of the company;
(d)orders for money, goods or services purporting to be signed by or on behalf of the company;
(e)its bills of parcels, invoices and other demands for payment, receipts and letters of credit;
(f)its applications for licences to carry on a trade or activity; and
(g)all other forms of its business correspondence and documentation.
(2) Every company shall disclose its registered name on its websites.

Chapter 2 of the Companies Act 2006 makes it a civil and criminal offence for a sole trader of partnership not to disclose their full name:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/notes/division/10/39/12/2

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/1201

If I were you I'd get back in touch with TS and ask them how they're going to help you in light of the fact that an offence appears to have been committed.

[MrsKoala]

Thanks, that's really helpful. Why did the court let me sue a non legal entity?

So even if the company is not ltd does it need to be registered?

There is a company 'fig leaves autos LTD' registered to the same road but a few doors up. This is the company we originally used who said they had no affiliation with the 'fig leaves autos' we were talking about. They apparently did posh taxis and didn't sell cars at all. So we re-sued the non registered company of 'fig leaves autos'.

The other issue is we have no idea if the trader is still even there. We live in kent and it's in w1. Plus (and this has just been disclosed to me from dh ) there is no public access to a 'forecourt' (which is what I thought there was) and you have to go to some railings and phone them and they come and let you in and the cars are in some kind of underground car park. So I'm not sure how a bailiff would get access to remove goods or cell egg money.

When we call the number we have it just rings and rings.

[Collaborate]

Because that would mean the court staff giving you legal advice. And they're not supposed to do that.

From your description it sounds like you've been had. Back street trader. I still think TS should be interested. Are you going to go back to them and quote what I've posted above?

[MrsKoala]

I just called them, altho it isn't ts exactly but ts consumer advice who then pass on my info if they think it's something ts would be interested in. They would let me talk straight to ts. Said I had to go thru them first. They have been monumentally shit throughout the whole thing. just really weak and crappy advice.

Anyway, they have advice I check with the insolvency service to see if the trading name has gone out of business. Then said if it hasn't to cal them back and they would advise me further. They also told me I'd be better off going to a solicitor. But we really can't afford to waste anymore money on this.

I thought this process would be fairly straight forward but it's a complicated nightmare.

[Collaborate]

If you want to find out who it was, your best best would be to use a private investigator. They usually charge a flat fee for tracing someone. The fees I usually get sent to me via linked-in or my spam box usually are less than £100. If you do get to sue him you could try and recover the 2 lots of wasted fees.

One other thing to do would be to amend your court claim rather than issue a fresh one (if the court fee would be cheaper). You could also ask the court to order (within your existing proceedings) that the mobile phone company disclose the name and address of whoever the phone was registered to.

[MrsKoala]

Right. Well I called insolvency services who said the name of some random I have on the receipt (ie no idea if it's the owner or a salesman) hasn't filed for personal insolvency. As the company isn't registered they have no company details. I called the consumer advice line back who said I should call the court for advice on whether I need to refile against an individual sole trader as they are not trained to give that info. They said they would pass the details on to trading standards for information purposes only and that trading standards would not get involved in this as it is a civil matter but would hold the information (so no help to me).

Called the court, who, as said above, don't give legal advice and have recommended I see a solicitor. Or make an app with citizens advice. Which I cannot do as I have 2 small children and no childcare.

So all in all, I reckon that's it done and dusted and we should just sell the car for £100 for scrap.

I feel very upset now and even quite mentally unwell. I wish I hadn't started it all up again.

Thank you all for your advice.

[LotusLight]

I think the hardest thing for you to learn as C is very well explaining is that you can only sue something with legal personality. So you could sue a limited company but that did not exist then and you did not buy from one.

If John Smith set himself up as a "sole trader" called JS Autos (I trade as a sole trader by the way) that is not a new legal person or company. So you have find out John's name and you sue John. So your claim would say John Smith trading as JS Autos. When you won you would seize the money of Mr John Smith, his house, his personal assets, cars at his garage etc.

So it sounds like you sued in the name of JS Autos (but that that was just Mr Smith). So I don't think it's hopeless. You didn't add tyhe word limited - you didn't sue the new limited company from whom you didn't purchase and which did not exist when you bought the car. You did leave off the owner's name however. Now that owner is required by law to put their name on their website, invoices, receipts, orders, correspondence, letter head =- not just JS Autos but John Smith's name so mine for example gives my law firm name (me) and my full name, personal name so if anyone wants to sue they know whom to sue. This is a legal requirement. people hate it. I've just written some terms for a new business and had to tell the lady yes her full personal name has to appear and she cannot hide and deceive by using just a trading name (she is going to be a sole trader).
Now in practice loads of sold traders break these laws so solicitors have to do a bit of detective work such as I suggest above looking up the VAT number, websearches etc to try to find out exactly whom to sue before they start.

I am sorry we are giving legal views rather than saying sorry you feel so awful about it and obviously it is horrible. Have you tried the obvious like sending a special delivery letter to the man or woman who owned the garage - the sole trader - with a copy of the judgment saying that unless you receive the funds in 7 days the bailiffs will be sent in?

[MrsKoala]

I do appreciate the legal views and I'm sorry if I sound ungrateful and snappy, I'm really not, well not snappy at you lovely lot anyway!

I have a lot going on in my life at the moment and this is just one extra thing dragging me down.

We tried sending letters. They all come back unopened. I will need to think about a solicitor if I want to proceed. I don't think I have the mental strength to do it myself. I will discuss ?ith dh.

:(

[sebsmummy1]

Mrs Koala I wonder if you could try and get as much as you can to recoup your expenses. Ie would your car be worth more if you sold it off in pieces? I know that sounds a bit mad but you might find that the car's component parts would be worth more than it's scrap value. Alternatively lots of cars go for a good price on eBay with their faults clearly listed. If it is a desirable car then you might find someone in the business will buy it for a decent price. All of this would be worth checking out before you scrapped it for a couple of hundred.

[MrsKoala]

I was thinking of calling round some local Kia dealers to see if they wanted to but it. But the nearest one already told us it wasn't worth anything as they were the ones who diagnosed the problems in the first place. Also the battery is now totally flat and the tires are going down.

I just want rid of the thing.

[LotusLight]

I think the problem is going to be if you show a judgment which does not name a limite dcompany and does not name a living individual that the bailiff has no evidence AC Cars is Mr John Smith trading as AC Cars.

Do you know the name of the person who used the trading name? It ought to have been on their website, on the invoice, on his emails, on his letterhead?
I realise you might well have said above but am not reading the whole thread each time.

[MrsKoala]

They don't have a website, we had no emails, we just saw the ad on the auto trader website and phoned up and dh went along that day and paid cash as they charged 10% extra for credit card payments.

After that they answered their phones 3 times to us and then never again.

There is a name/signature on the receipt, but I don't know whether that's just the salesmans name or the owners. I have tried googling him and I can't find any trace.

[Collaborate]

Was the auto trader advert a "trade" advert? The court would order auto trader to pass on the details of who placed the advert, you know.

[MrsKoala]

Oh really. How could I get the court to do that?

[MrsKoala]

It all sounds very 'law and order'

[Collaborate]

You apply within the existing proceedings for an order that Autotrader do disclose to the court the paperwork in connection with the advert, identifying the name address and contact details of the person who placed the advert.

[MrsKoala]

Thnaks but Sorry to say I'm clueless with this stuff, what does 'within the existing proceedings' mean? I'm afraid your sentence has meant nothing to me. Was it in English?

Do I contact the court and ask them to do this?

[Collaborate]

You have instituted court proceedings, albeit against the wrong defendant. They are the existing proceedings.

[MrsKoala]

Sorry, I still don't understand. Thanks anyway. I'll call the court and ask them.