PCM
25 February 2012 | 11:31 PM
#31
Yay, as if by magic the Immy Defence League arrives...IDL FTW !
Loyal to the end....chief questioner of anything other than a glowing PCM reference...
Fpmsl, is there no end to your brown noseing of '****' subaru 'officianardos'
26 February 2012 | 12:13 AM
#33
Unmapped 12.4s @ 105
iTrader: (29)
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,777
Likes: 4
From: Newcastle. 330bhp-289lb/ft @ 1bar boost - 12.4s @ 105mph
TX's nose and tongue are covered in excrement?
Immy is, IMO as dodgy as they come on the face of it, I for one wouldn't buy a, well anything from him.
26 February 2012 | 12:17 AM
#34
ok well as always 2 sides and all that. if deposit was giving to a car in transit. for example japan or in this case singapore and person bringing it in changes asking price then they have changed terms of contract really so deposit should be refunded.
Now if there is more facts in between then really need be answered by immy.. im neautral with independant responses.
Now if there is more facts in between then really need be answered by immy.. im neautral with independant responses.
26 February 2012 | 12:20 AM
#35
Thread Starter
Scooby Newbie
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: Highlands of Scotland
PCM
In reply to terminator, simply because I could afford it, was elated at the deal and as said genuinely, because I felt he had gone out of his way to help me. Little did I know at that point that the batch of cars would arrive in Manchester unsold, despite the info I was given. He had two white cars advertised although I was told they were all sold on pre-order. I asked for white when enquiring!
When I tried to reason a way through it he told me the only deal I could have for the original price was a second hand 57 plate sti spec c. How much do I regret not going with Litchfield?
Mickey.
When I tried to reason a way through it he told me the only deal I could have for the original price was a second hand 57 plate sti spec c. How much do I regret not going with Litchfield?
Mickey.
26 February 2012 | 12:30 AM
#36
Thread Starter
Scooby Newbie
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: Highlands of Scotland
ok well as always 2 sides and all that. if deposit was giving to a car in transit. for example japan or in this case singapore and person bringing it in changes asking price then they have changed terms of contract really so deposit should be refunded.
Now if there is more facts in between then really need be answered by immy.. im neautral with independant responses.
__________________
I have it all on emails, everything. Thank God I used my work email to conduct my business with him. I have been told there is a clear breach of contract amongst other things. The cost to raise issue at the small claims is £62. It could have been sorted so easily. He obviously thinks he is above the Law!
Now if there is more facts in between then really need be answered by immy.. im neautral with independant responses.
__________________
I have it all on emails, everything. Thank God I used my work email to conduct my business with him. I have been told there is a clear breach of contract amongst other things. The cost to raise issue at the small claims is £62. It could have been sorted so easily. He obviously thinks he is above the Law!
26 February 2012 | 12:40 AM
#37
Well well, all those decent, law abiding aggrieved petrolheads with Immy the common theme! You know what they say; " if it looks like a duck " and all that!
Thanks for the support Guys but be careful he talks like a gangster. Here's me desperate to meet him in person and everyone else apparently hides from him - an unfair world for sure.
I would be happy to answer bodski & co's question.
Without Prejudice. Some time ago I responded to an ad in the S/N forum in relation to a batch of spec c's being imported from Singapore. The trader in question told me they were bought by a rally team and not used. He went on to say he had found customers for all of them but one and that the rest of the order had been pre-paid in full.
I told him I was building a new house and not in the position to enter into a transaction like that at that moment. He said there would be no more cars like this again and if I missed out now there would be no future opportunities for the same. I decided not to pursue my interest for reasons previously stated.
The trader then phoned me back stating he believed I was a genuine person and that because of this he was willing to import the car at his own expense if I agreed to come to Manchester to buy it of him when I had paid for my house. He also said this only stood if I made my mind up immediately because the container ship was due to sail at midnight.
Despite the inconvenience of the timeframe I would have been unwilling to pay for a car I had not seen anyway so the arrangement suited me perfectly and I agreed to buy the car at the price advertised on the S/N forum. I phoned him back later that day and offered to forward him £2k as a gesture of goodwill to which he agreed. There was no obligation on my part to do so - it was not a prerequisite to the deal just as said, a gesture of goodwill due to the fact he was willing to operate outside the criteria he apparently applied to the other customers which in turn enabled me to get the car.
In the intrest of brevity I'll bypass the guts of it. Long past the anticipated departure dates I was given, he contacted me to say the car was in transit and requested full payment. I was taken aback by this request given the arrangement we had made and reiterated at that point I would pay on collection as agreed at the outset.
He reluctantly acknowledged this and went on to say that he was going to have to change the total price of the car we agreed (in writing) because of additional import charges he had incurred. He cited road tax increases as an example. I told him I knew these amendments had been put in place by the government the previous year but he insisted it had happened while my car was in transit and that all the other customers agreed to pay the extra and I was the only one unwilling to do so.
I thought about it and in conjunction with other irregularities became highly suspicious. I felt I was going to be exploited due to the fact he already had cash and the car. I contacted him and refused to pay the additional charges citing the fact we had a pre-agreed price and that if he insisted on this I would just take my money back and he could sell the car to another potential customer. (apparently he had a waiting list). He then proceeded to tell me he was viewing my expression of trust as a non-refundable deposit and if I didn't meet his new valuation I would lose my £2k??
I then read about the lad on S/N that won the spec c on ebay and how Immy refused to honour the bid! I accused him of not being the person he portrays publicly and he just laughed. I knew I had trouble on my hands. Since then he has told me to stop contacting him and has refused to provide me with his personal details. When serving legal documents the recipient must be accurately identified or the writ is void and costs lost.
At this stage I have to show the court I have taken all possible "reasonable" steps to ascertain the address of his current residence and due to his non compliance I have no choice other than doing it publicly.
I am confident I have a case via the Sale of Goods Act and I am willing to initiate a small courts claim and trust their judgement when the facts are presented. If, as has been previously suggested, he has nothing to hide, he should be happy to recite his defence under oath.
Mickey.
Thanks for the support Guys but be careful he talks like a gangster. Here's me desperate to meet him in person and everyone else apparently hides from him - an unfair world for sure.
I would be happy to answer bodski & co's question.
Without Prejudice. Some time ago I responded to an ad in the S/N forum in relation to a batch of spec c's being imported from Singapore. The trader in question told me they were bought by a rally team and not used. He went on to say he had found customers for all of them but one and that the rest of the order had been pre-paid in full.
I told him I was building a new house and not in the position to enter into a transaction like that at that moment. He said there would be no more cars like this again and if I missed out now there would be no future opportunities for the same. I decided not to pursue my interest for reasons previously stated.
The trader then phoned me back stating he believed I was a genuine person and that because of this he was willing to import the car at his own expense if I agreed to come to Manchester to buy it of him when I had paid for my house. He also said this only stood if I made my mind up immediately because the container ship was due to sail at midnight.
Despite the inconvenience of the timeframe I would have been unwilling to pay for a car I had not seen anyway so the arrangement suited me perfectly and I agreed to buy the car at the price advertised on the S/N forum. I phoned him back later that day and offered to forward him £2k as a gesture of goodwill to which he agreed. There was no obligation on my part to do so - it was not a prerequisite to the deal just as said, a gesture of goodwill due to the fact he was willing to operate outside the criteria he apparently applied to the other customers which in turn enabled me to get the car.
In the intrest of brevity I'll bypass the guts of it. Long past the anticipated departure dates I was given, he contacted me to say the car was in transit and requested full payment. I was taken aback by this request given the arrangement we had made and reiterated at that point I would pay on collection as agreed at the outset.
He reluctantly acknowledged this and went on to say that he was going to have to change the total price of the car we agreed (in writing) because of additional import charges he had incurred. He cited road tax increases as an example. I told him I knew these amendments had been put in place by the government the previous year but he insisted it had happened while my car was in transit and that all the other customers agreed to pay the extra and I was the only one unwilling to do so.
I thought about it and in conjunction with other irregularities became highly suspicious. I felt I was going to be exploited due to the fact he already had cash and the car. I contacted him and refused to pay the additional charges citing the fact we had a pre-agreed price and that if he insisted on this I would just take my money back and he could sell the car to another potential customer. (apparently he had a waiting list). He then proceeded to tell me he was viewing my expression of trust as a non-refundable deposit and if I didn't meet his new valuation I would lose my £2k??
I then read about the lad on S/N that won the spec c on ebay and how Immy refused to honour the bid! I accused him of not being the person he portrays publicly and he just laughed. I knew I had trouble on my hands. Since then he has told me to stop contacting him and has refused to provide me with his personal details. When serving legal documents the recipient must be accurately identified or the writ is void and costs lost.
At this stage I have to show the court I have taken all possible "reasonable" steps to ascertain the address of his current residence and due to his non compliance I have no choice other than doing it publicly.
I am confident I have a case via the Sale of Goods Act and I am willing to initiate a small courts claim and trust their judgement when the facts are presented. If, as has been previously suggested, he has nothing to hide, he should be happy to recite his defence under oath.
Mickey.
I will keep it simple and avoid sexing up my version of events like yourself.
You and three other members of this forum bought new spec c's.
The procedure was money upfront and I charge commission.
Every other member payed for there car upfront apart from you!
You rang me and told me your life story and your financial predicament as to why you couldn't afford to buy the car outright however you would have the money in 8 weeks and you really wanted the car and couldn't give me a £2k deposit.
Me like a **** decide to "help you out" and offer to bring the car over for you as it was the last one at the time.
I made you aware the deposit would be none refundable and told you of a story when I had done this before for a chap from wales who didn't give me a deposit and could get the cash together when his car arrived.
You assured me nothing like that would happen and you were very thankful and over joyed at the "service" I had offered.
Fast forward 8-10 weeks you haven't finished extension and have over shot the budget ,but will get the money somehow.
I had not imported a car for 12 months and in that time the government had introduced showroom tax on new cars. I told you about this and you tried to use this as an excuse and said you were unwilling to pay this.
So I was in a position where I had just funded your car/housing project for three months and you were unwilling to pay the showroom tax.
At this point I know no matter what I do you are looking for a way out because you haven't got the money.
I offered to subsidise the cost of the showroom tax through my commission which should put us back on track.............
I guess you've already worked out the answer to this.
NO I don't want the car I would like my deposit back.
I thought about it and in conjunction with other irregularities became highly suspicious. I felt I was going to be exploited due to the fact he already had cash and the car. I contacted him and refused to pay the additional charges citing the fact we had a pre-agreed price and that if he insisted on this I would just take my money back and he could sell the car to another potential customer. (apparently he had a waiting list). He then proceeded to tell me he was viewing my expression of trust as a non-refundable deposit and if I didn't meet his new valuation I would lose my £2k??
phoned him back later that day and offered to forward him £2k as a gesture of goodwill to which he agreed. There was no obligation on my part to do so - it was not a prerequisite to the deal just as said, a gesture of goodwill due to the fact he was willing to operate outside the criteria he apparently applied to the other customers which in turn enabled me to get the car
You done me the favour of forwarding me £2k for a car that you were buying. It was a good will gesture as you put it? Do you really expect people to believe that you give me £2k as a good will gesture or a deposit?
Even the essex crew will find that one a little odd.
There's three other members who can confirm the process in which they bought there new spec c's and paid the showroom tax.
I am sorry this is not as juicy as you Essex lot would have had liked it to be.
Last edited by juggers; 26 February 2012 at 01:12 AM.
26 February 2012 | 12:46 AM
#39
26 February 2012 | 12:50 AM
#40
It's due to people like the above I have packed it in. What was once an enjoyable pass time and bought in some pocket change it's just become time consuming with bull like this.
Instead of meeting like minded enthusiast who share the same passion everyone is looking to have your pants off..
I did the same thing for a chap from wales who bought an RA-R the guy went as far as to remortgage his house to buy the car, but in the end couldn't come up with the cash. However he was nice enough to be upfront and straight with me.
Last edited by juggers; 26 February 2012 at 12:52 AM.
26 February 2012 | 01:00 AM
#44
Scooby Regular
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
From: Jolly Mechanic
26 February 2012 | 01:01 AM
#45
26 February 2012 | 01:01 AM
#46
and regards the ross thing.
i read and responded. someone driving a car for 6 months. then going nurburgring and then having a failure to come back to car purchaser looking them pay half of a forged build at 3k can totally understand a garage not entertaining it.
i read and responded. someone driving a car for 6 months. then going nurburgring and then having a failure to come back to car purchaser looking them pay half of a forged build at 3k can totally understand a garage not entertaining it.
26 February 2012 | 01:03 AM
#47
Mickey it would be great if you could perhaps use our e-mails as reference for these so called other "Irregularities".
Last edited by juggers; 26 February 2012 at 01:05 AM.
26 February 2012 | 01:03 AM
#48
Scooby Regular
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
From: Jolly Mechanic
As for a con, really, do explain.
I can't wait to hear this pile of rubbish!
26 February 2012 | 01:08 AM
#49
26 February 2012 | 01:16 AM
#50
Scooby Regular
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
From: Jolly Mechanic
Lol, you would t know what engine was in a GTS with out the help of google! Car isn't for sale at any price, especial to to someone who would ruin it.
Ask anyone at Snetterton tomorrow though and they will confirm what it is ;-)
Ask anyone at Snetterton tomorrow though and they will confirm what it is ;-)
26 February 2012 | 01:21 AM
#52
26 February 2012 | 01:28 AM
#55
Thread Starter
Scooby Newbie
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: Highlands of Scotland
pcm
I'm not alone by a long way believe me, nor am I trying to convince anyone on here as to the veracity of my statement - I only need to convince a judge of that.
I have a file of emails that contradict your last statement many times in many ways. Everything you say is conducive to my case not least your last rant.
As far as your theory in respect to my lack of funds, I have a reciept from a garage in Newcastle in relation to a 997 C4S I purchased (paid cash) equivalent value to three of your cars
Anyway, lets not procrastinate further. Lets get it on! Please don't waste anymore time on A4 size excuses, show these good people you are willing to sort this out within the parameters of the Law and provide me with your name and details. I understand if you would prefer to do it by PM and I will trouble you no further.
Re STI Legacy. With respect, I disagree. Three others did not recieve their cars without issue. If, as he claims they pre-paid then they incurred additional costs over and above the original price, in Law that constitutes a breach of agreement. (If they ever was three others??)
"Mon the Essex & Highland brigade"
I look forward to recieving the neccessary.
Mickey.
I have a file of emails that contradict your last statement many times in many ways. Everything you say is conducive to my case not least your last rant.
As far as your theory in respect to my lack of funds, I have a reciept from a garage in Newcastle in relation to a 997 C4S I purchased (paid cash) equivalent value to three of your cars
Anyway, lets not procrastinate further. Lets get it on! Please don't waste anymore time on A4 size excuses, show these good people you are willing to sort this out within the parameters of the Law and provide me with your name and details. I understand if you would prefer to do it by PM and I will trouble you no further.
Re STI Legacy. With respect, I disagree. Three others did not recieve their cars without issue. If, as he claims they pre-paid then they incurred additional costs over and above the original price, in Law that constitutes a breach of agreement. (If they ever was three others??)
"Mon the Essex & Highland brigade"
I look forward to recieving the neccessary.
Mickey.
26 February 2012 | 01:46 AM
#57
Thread Starter
Scooby Newbie
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: Highlands of Scotland
You'll not be surprised to hear that I don't want to divulge anything at this point in time. I have a rather simple strategy that doesn't include sharing with you at the moment, I'm afraid!
Before I go let me get this right. You went through all the hassle and stress of Importing cars for fellow enthusiasts. Do people on this forum actually believe stories like this?
I can provide you with my Solicitors contact details in relation to your details if you would prefer to bypass me at this point.
Before I go let me get this right. You went through all the hassle and stress of Importing cars for fellow enthusiasts. Do people on this forum actually believe stories like this?
I can provide you with my Solicitors contact details in relation to your details if you would prefer to bypass me at this point.
26 February 2012 | 01:56 AM
#58
Thread Starter
Scooby Newbie
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: Highlands of Scotland
Legacy, because other enquiries were still ongoing throughout this time. It was always going to end in a civil court because of the nature of the complaint. I tried for a good period to sort it but in the end he stopped responding to me. I don't want to say anymore at this stage as I'm sure you will understand.
In the meantime thank you for your interest.
Mickey.
In the meantime thank you for your interest.
Mickey.
26 February 2012 | 02:05 AM
#59
I'm not alone by a long way believe me, nor am I trying to convince anyone on here as to the veracity of my statement - I only need to convince a judge of that.
I have a file of emails that contradict your last statement many times in many ways. Everything you say is conducive to my case not least your last rant.
As far as your theory in respect to my lack of funds, I have a reciept from a garage in Newcastle in relation to a 997 C4S I purchased (paid cash) equivalent value to three of your cars
Anyway, lets not procrastinate further. Lets get it on! Please don't waste anymore time on A4 size excuses, show these good people you are willing to sort this out within the parameters of the Law and provide me with your name and details. I understand if you would prefer to do it by PM and I will trouble you no further.
Re STI Legacy. With respect, I disagree. Three others did not recieve their cars without issue. If, as he claims they pre-paid then they incurred additional costs over and above the original price, in Law that constitutes a breach of agreement. (If they ever was three others??)
"Mon the Essex & Highland brigade"
I look forward to recieving the neccessary.
Mickey.
I have a file of emails that contradict your last statement many times in many ways. Everything you say is conducive to my case not least your last rant.
As far as your theory in respect to my lack of funds, I have a reciept from a garage in Newcastle in relation to a 997 C4S I purchased (paid cash) equivalent value to three of your cars
Anyway, lets not procrastinate further. Lets get it on! Please don't waste anymore time on A4 size excuses, show these good people you are willing to sort this out within the parameters of the Law and provide me with your name and details. I understand if you would prefer to do it by PM and I will trouble you no further.
Re STI Legacy. With respect, I disagree. Three others did not recieve their cars without issue. If, as he claims they pre-paid then they incurred additional costs over and above the original price, in Law that constitutes a breach of agreement. (If they ever was three others??)
"Mon the Essex & Highland brigade"
I look forward to recieving the neccessary.
Mickey.
Three spec c's for the price of a c4s... They can be had for 40k+
And the imaginary three are members of this forum do a Search and you'll see
Please lets get it on
PCM LTD
89 cromwell ave
Manchester
M16 0BG
07525921401
Give these details to your solicitor or pm their details to me and I will forward them on.
XXX
Last edited by juggers; 26 February 2012 at 02:18 AM.
26 February 2012 | 02:18 AM
#60
Thread Starter
Scooby Newbie
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: Highlands of Scotland
You would be just as popular on the Porsche forum as you are on here if they heard that, just like any vehicle, all different types of people drive them. You've put as much thought into that statement as the others. It's actually all relevant, what if it was a run down 996 turbo that had been to the moon in contrast to a brand new C4S PDK? That confused you didn't it?
Whats your name brother? your real one? As I remember Companies house had Cromwell Ave as a trading place for general goods as memory serves me not car garage?
Whats your name brother? your real one? As I remember Companies house had Cromwell Ave as a trading place for general goods as memory serves me not car garage?