[GuyT]

Hi all
I ordered an HSE Black back in April , prior to the price increase and also at 1.9% APR. I have a vehicle offer proposal showing this.
My car is due for pickup on the 1st Sept and I am wondering if I should expect to pay a revised proposal with the current prices and the current 2.9% APR offer.
I have told them I want the original proposal ( obviously ) and the salesman is going to "check".

I think they must honour the "original" proposal ...but I would be interested in anyone's experience on this ?

cheers

 

[Chrisnic]

Unfortunately I think you will be lucky to get the original price and rate. My company car lease went up slightly (pre delivery) because the build wasn’t locked in before the cut off for the price changes which was mid April.

 

[GuyT]

Unfortunately I think you will be lucky to get the original price and rate. My company car lease went up slightly (pre delivery) because the build wasn’t locked in before the cut off for the price changes which was mid April.

surely if I have a quote , and it is their prob that they cant deliver immediately ...then they have to honour it ?

 

[Methers]

Hi all
I ordered an HSE Black back in April , prior to the price increase and also at 1.9% APR. I have a vehicle offer proposal showing this.
My car is due for pickup on the 1st Sept and I am wondering if I should expect to pay a revised proposal with the current prices and the current 2.9% APR offer.
I have told them I want the original proposal ( obviously ) and the salesman is going to "check".

I think they must honour the "original" proposal ...but I would be interested in anyone's experience on this ?

cheers

Purchased at price when ordered should be honoured

 

[hdasmith]

surely if I have a quote , and it is their prob that they cant deliver immediately ...then they have to honour it ?

Did you pay a deposit? Supply and demand, and raw material price increases means that the car companies (all of them) are quite happy to have customers cancel orders because they know they’ll sell the car almost immediately at a higher price.

I’ve been hit with a July increase, although thankfully my lease company has agreed to take the hit on that one. I just hope I get a build floor before any more increases!

 

[GuyT]

Did you pay a deposit? Supply and demand, and raw material price increases means that the car companies (all of them) are quite happy to have customers cancel orders because they know they’ll sell the car almost immediately at a higher price.

I’ve been hit with a July increase, although thankfully my lease company has agreed to take the hit on that one. I just hope I get a build floor before any more increases!

I did pay a deposit yes...does this make a difference ?

 

[electric beagle]

I did pay a deposit yes...does this make a difference ?

Yes it makes it a binding contract.

My neighbor did tell me recently about how the JLR dealer tried to screw them over on the purchase of a new F Pace (they were trading not explicitly paying a deposit) and the dealer wanted to hike the price so they bought an Evoque elsewhere.

Contractually though you should be watertight if you paid a real deposit.

 

[ICDP_EV]

Did you get any documentation to sign etc. that will have T&Cs outlining any specifics on the agreed price. Generally the T&Cs will state the price and spec of the car are subject to change At any time after the order has been placed. So if you paid a deposit and the car was ordered they would not legally have to honour the sale price.

So read those T&Cs but realistically they can legally increase the price and your options are to accept or cancel.

 

[hdasmith]

It’s really difficult, but you’ve got a stronger leg paying a deposit - you’ve paid them money to secure the order and allow them to order parts or secure prices at time of order would be my argument. As ICDP says, need to check the terms though.

 

[TheRonin]

You will get the price on your original order form. I ordered at 0% and waited 9 months and in that time interest rates and prices went up. I paid the original price and 0%.

 

[hdasmith]

If the car’s available, personally I wouldn’t be worried about having a 72 plate, and collect ASAP to avoid risk - but then I’ve never cared about number plates, and if I did, I’d have a personalised one.

 

[electric beagle]

If the car’s available, personally I wouldn’t be worried about having a 72 plate, and collect ASAP to avoid risk - but then I’ve never cared about number plates, and if I did, I’d have a personalised one.

This makes no sense

The risk will not materially shift in 3 weeks but the value will be up by a few hundred quid from the newer plate. You may not care about it (and I have a private plate) but others buying from you when you sell will care.

 

[Aurora Blue]

I did pay a deposit yes...does this make a difference ?

Good morning GuyT

Yes it does make a difference. It means that was the price ’agreed upon’. That doesn’t mean they will honour it as in essence they may think the customer can ‘take it or leave it’ as they can sell the car immediately based on demand as previously mentioned.

If that situation arose and I could afford the difference I would buy the car and then chase the difference post sale based upon the legal agreed upon contract and the failure to advise you of anything different (if Jaguar didn’t).

Some may argue this means you are agreeing to the newer sale price but if you don’t buy at the new sale price then you may be without the car you chose. Then you would have to chase (if you wanted to) the original agreement that Jaguar agreed upon to supply you with a car for the agreed upon original price, plus compensation and headache and time.

 

[electric beagle]

It’s really difficult, but you’ve got a stronger leg paying a deposit - you’ve paid them money to secure the order and allow them to order parts or secure prices at time of order would be my argument. As ICDP says, need to check the terms though.

You have a binding contract it's basic contract law.

No amount of weasel words in the T&C will allow them to wriggle out of that if it comes to a legal fight.
What was the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations is now subsumed into the consumer rights act of 2015. This effectively strikes out any ridiculous purported contractual terms such as the customer loses his deposit by changing but the dealer can change at will penalty free.

Then there are the pre-contractual representations made before signing (I won a claim against a dealer who was months late supplying a new car where delivery date was a key factor in placing the order years before UCTA became a thing). Straight contract law is very protective of parties acting in good faith versus those that are not

 

[ICDP_EV]

The OP is going ot need to speak to the dealership to confirm if they will honour the original sale price. If not then Citizens Advice, or a solicitor will give some proper advice. Some really poor info in this thread already about 'binding contracts' and how T&Cs are not legally binding etc. It is contradictory to claim a contract is binding... apart from the parts you don't like.

There is only potential for legal recourse if the T&Cs do not have a clear clause stating that the price is subject to change AND that you have 14 days to cancel the order without penalty (loss of deposit). Sellers are protected under the Consumer Rights Act as well and if there is a reasonable and fair reason for the price increase, then they are covered under the T&Cs.

What this means is if they give you sufficient notice for what may be deemed a fair and reasonable price increase, you have a right to cancel or accept. They are not in breach of the contract you signed because the fair and reasonable T&Cs are in the contract you signed (see how that works?). On the other hand, if you turn up to collect the car on delivery day and they tell you to pay them more money or they will not sell it. Then they are in breach of contract.

My advice is not to take my advice other than to seek professional advice. The same applies to some of the frankly nonsensical advice being given in this thread.

 

[electric beagle]

The OP is going ot need to speak to the dealership to confirm if they will honour the original sale price. If not then Citizens Advice, or a solicitor will give some proper advice. Some really poor info in this thread already about 'binding contracts' and how T&Cs are not legally binding etc. It is contradictory to claim a contract is binding... apart from the parts you don't like.

There is only potential for legal recourse if the T&Cs do not have a clear clause stating that the price is subject to change AND that you have 14 days to cancel the order without penalty (loss of deposit). Sellers are protected under the Consumer Rights Act as well and if there is a reasonable and fair reason for the price increase, then they are covered under the T&Cs.

What this means is if they give you sufficient notice for what may be deemed a fair and reasonable price increase, you have a right to cancel or accept. They are not in breach of the contract you signed because the fair and reasonable T&Cs are in the contract you signed (see how that works?). On the other hand, if you turn up to collect the car on delivery day and they tell you to pay them more money or they will not sell it. Then they are in breach of contract.

My advice is not to take my advice other than to seek professional advice. The same applies to some of the frankly nonsensical advice being given in this thread.

This is just factually wrong sorry. Suppliers must love dealing with customers like you.

Not all T&C's are legally binding that doesn't mean to say that none are. It depends on several factors, reasonableness, negotiating weight of the two parties (consumer v. large supplier is always at low negotiating weight when being given a standard bolierplate contract on a take it or leave it basis), visibility of the relevant terms, any contradictory pre-contractual representations etc. etc.

Any T&C which gives a supplier unbalanced rights compared to the consumer is likely to be legally invalid (and thus unenforceable). The classic example of this is longstanding UK contract case law (e.g. an attempt by a car park owner to exclude liability for damage "howsoever caused"). Many suppliers rely upon consumers legal ignorance to impose unenforceable terms and are very glad of consumer ignorance that furthers their aims.

Many people now have legal cover as part of their home insurance, if in doubt consult a proper legal expert rather than a well meaning amateur in a CAB.

In the unlikely event that GuyT has an issue upon collection he has two courses of action available to him either reject the change (and seek damages as a result, which could be tricky to quantify) or to accept the change, get documentation that the dealer will not honour the original price and sue the dealer for the difference.

Clearly no-one should make far reaching decisions based upon instructions from an internet forum but the law here is very much on the consumers side and this can be validated by independent advice. "Good" independent advice is often harder to come by than "some" independent advice, consumer law specialists are the best to consult and may well be available free of charge via Home Insurance.

Taking issues like this on the chin is often more of a choice than expected.

 

[hdasmith]

Sorry electric_beagle, I disagree, and am more in ICDP’s camp. Citizen’s Advice is the best place to get advice, but it does depends on what’s in the T&Cs. Paying a deposit helps as it can be argued that a quote has been provided, price agreed based on that quote, and substantiation has been made to (and I can’t remember the correct term) effect the quote - also argue contract through performance.

Unfortunately, there will be clauses in the T&Cs to allow for wiggle room. Aluminium prices have decreased from $3,450 at the 1st April on a 3-month contract to $2,414.50 yesterday -https://www.lme.com/Metals/Non-ferrous/LME-Aluminium#Price+graphs - so use that to your advantage. Copper has similarly decreased in that time frame -25% (same website). I don’t know about the batteries though which are in short supply.

 

[hdasmith]

This makes no sense

The risk will not materially shift in 3 weeks but the value will be up by a few hundred quid from the newer plate. You may not care about it (and I have a private plate) but others buying from you when you sell will care.

Second hand buyers don’t care, otherwise they’d buy new. They car more about mileage and features than age. (if it wasn’t for company cars, I’d always buy second hand).

Secure the price now without a fight, or risk a pay increase with a 72 plate. I know which I’d chose, but I’m not a reg snob.

 

[ICDP_EV]

Sorry Electice Beagle but you seem to conflating 'fair and reasonable T&Cs' to mean any T&Cs. The fair part is vital in the CRA 2015 in that a term is only deemed unfair, IF it is deemded unreasonable and causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer.

A dealsership stating that prices may increase due to unforseen and reasonable cricumstances is not causing significant imbalance and may be deemed fair. If the price of a battery pack jumps 100% are Jaguar going to have to just take it on the chin?

Here is the pertinent part from the UK CRA 2015. As you can see, any T&C or contract term that allows the trader to determine price after entering into a contract, falls under the grey list. So a dealer having such a clause is not automatically illegal and unfair and will be determined on a case by case basis. So it may be deemed fair if they give you a few months notice and an option to cancel because the price has gone up by £2,000 due to unforseen circumstances. Unfiar would be if they fail to give you any notice and refuse to hand over your new car until you pay them an extra £2,000. The key difference is 'fair and reasonable'.

The CRA 2015 Act does add the following three terms to the grey list that may be considered unfair (pertinent part bolded):

• disproportionately high prices where the consumer decides not to conclude or perform the contract (e.g. disproportionate cancelation charges)
• terms which allow the trader to determine characteristics of the goods after the consumer has entered into the contract and
• terms which allow the trader to determine the price of the goods after the consumer has entered into the contract

 

[electric beagle]

Sorry Electice Beagle but you seem to conflating 'fair and reasonable T&Cs' to mean any T&Cs. The fair part is vital in the CRA 2015 in that a term is only deemed unfair, IF it is deemded unreasonable and causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer.

A dealsership stating that prices may increase due to unforseen and reasonable cricumstances is not causing significant imbalance and may be deemed fair. If the price of a battery pack jumps 100% are Jaguar going to have to just take it on the chin?

Here is the pertinent part from the UK CRA 2015. As you can see, any T&C or contract term that allows the trader to determine price after entering into a contract, falls under the grey list. So a dealer having such a clause is not automatically illegal and unfair and will be determined on a case by case basis. So it may be deemed fair if they give you a few months notice and an option to cancel because the price has gone up by £2,000 due to unforseen circumstances. Unfiar would be if they fail to give you any notice and refuse to hand over your new car until you pay them an extra £2,000. The key difference is 'fair and reasonable'.

The CRA 2015 Act does add the following three terms to the grey list that may be considered unfair (pertinent part bolded):

• disproportionately high prices where the consumer decides not to conclude or perform the contract (e.g. disproportionate cancelation charges)
• terms which allow the trader to determine characteristics of the goods after the consumer has entered into the contract and
• terms which allow the trader to determine the price of the goods after the consumer has entered into the contract

We are talking here about the specific case of someone about to take delivery who has had no advance warning of an increase or justification thereof.

Where a term is on the grey list my experience is that the onus is on the supplier to then show that the term itself and the specific scenario being relied upon to justify its application for a specific contract must be put forth by the supplier.

Also playing into this is reasonable and actual business practice. JLR may face a spot price hike in a component this month but if they have a supply deal which stipulates a fixed price with their supplier for X units of that component for Y years then within the term of that supply deal it would be unreasonable to pass on a cost increase which is illusory rather than real.

By the logic you are applying here fixed price contracts with energy suppliers would become void the moment wholesale gas prices rose, which is a nonsense.

No volume business is entirely driven by wholesale spot prices (it is commercial madness) and it seems at the very least arguable that a company failing to apply standard hedging/advance supply agreements in the hope of commercial advantage should not pass higher costs on to the customer when the bet made by the supplier goes wrong. The test here would be if a corresponding decrease in wholesale components would result in a lower charge to the consumer (and I think we all know the answer to that).