In the first case a customer sued for rejection of a vehicle where the engine had failed after two months but a whopping 8,000 miles since purchase. When the client eventually saw the car it had very badly worn tyres with exposed steel cords, which in fact cut the mechanics hand. The client was prepared and did, in fact, fit a fully reconditioned Ford engine. The client argued that liability should be limited to a replacement engine and to fit a reconditioned engine amounted to betterment (a difference of about £1,000).
The full claim rose to just under £10,000 including exorbitant solicitors costs.
Regrettably, the Judge ordered the client to pay for the full cost of repair (without an allowance for betterment). However the customer got his own penalty as the Judge would not award him a penny of his solicitors costs. The customer it is believed, may have to sell the car to pay the solicitors!
On another slightly amusing note, another client who operates a Bosch Service Centre brought a County Court case against a smug and arrogant customer. It was a ridiculous case involving his insistence that he be allowed to pay a bill by American Express.
The client refused to accept this mode of payment on the grounds that they had terminated their agreement with AMEX. They asked the customer to pay by an other means, including Visa, MasterCard, cheque or cash. The small minded man refused all alternatives but did agree ultimately that, if he was allowed to take his car away, he would bring cash in the next morning.
The obvious occurred. After a month of phone calls, a letter was written asking when he would pay, but as no answer came and further phone messages were ignored, the client paid a visit to the house. The customer’s wife answered the door, but tore up the copy letter she was handed and screamed at our client never to bother them again.
We assisted in preparing proceedings for them, but the defence alleged harassment, assault, terrorism of the neighbourhood, unprofessional conduct and a counterclaim was instituted amounting to many times the debt.
It included the cost of downloading messages on board a ship at sea and other inventions. The defendant went as far as to recite the Human Rights Act, the Companies Act, The Mercantile Act and insisted on AMEX being brought into the proceedings. He additionally sought to have the client closed down for failure to lodge accounts on time and insisted on a preliminary hearing to obtain an order that the clients were not a legitimate company and thus were guilty of fraud, requiring the Court as a matter of duty to ensure the police were ordered to arrest the clients on a declaration of failure to comply with the Companies Act.
If this all reads as preposterous nonsense, of course it was. The matter might have been written off as the rantings of a madman with mad ideas who simply does not like paying bills.
However, the defendant was a so-called adviser to the Government on strategic thinking and allegedly, an influential adviser to NATO. This wretched little man claims to make his living travelling around the world talking to world leaders and claims further to have set up many internationally important organisations.
He lost, of course.
When he paid the judgement direct to the client, he asked if he could bring his car in for further work!
We may at last have an explanation for the current state of international relations!