Charles Hurst Fined For Bogus Car Service

Aristotle Flynn · July 18, 2007, 11:12:23 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6903310.stm
This is the biggest car dealership in the North. Has anyone any experience of them?

full back · July 18, 2007, 11:20:52 AM

Am quite shocked this actually came out in the public domain
There have been many more instances of this with almost all of them sweeped under the carpet by the Broadcasters in the north.
The last brown envelope must have been a bit thin

amallon · July 18, 2007, 11:30:33 AM

Fair dues to your man for catching them out and taking it as far as he did.

Main Street · July 18, 2007, 12:52:59 PM

I remember an RTE investigation years ago into the service practices of the major car dealerships.
It was very similar to this case. The cars sent in for the service had the parts marked, filters,, plugs, distrib caps, oil samples were taken. The results were similarily shocking. But it was nice to see the dealer having to explain himself on camera to the indignant outraged investigator.

Such an investigation programme should be done at 6 month intervals

Lecale2 · July 18, 2007, 12:54:51 PM

£2,000 fine is nothing to these crooks but the bad PR will do them more harm in the long run.

inisceithleann · July 18, 2007, 12:57:22 PM

I was watching a spokeman for Charles Hurst on the TV last night, saying it was a genuine mistake and put it down to human error. If this was the case then why did Trading Standards proceed with the prosecution? If Charles Hurst admitted it straight away and simply refunded the fella then surely it would never have been taken this far. Did they deny it for a long time or was it the case that Trading Standards wanted to make an example of Charles Hurst? Anyway cases like have to be good for the consumer.

Main Street · July 18, 2007, 01:16:31 PM

Quote from: inisceithleann on July 18, 2007, 12:57:22 PM
I was watching a spokeman for Charles Hurst on the TV last night, saying it was a genuine mistake and put it down to human error. If this was the case then why did Trading Standards proceed with the prosecution? If Charles Hurst admitted it straight away and simply refunded the fella then surely it would never have been taken this far. Did they deny it for a long time or was it the case that Trading Standards wanted to make an example of Charles Hurst? Anyway cases like have to be good for the consumer.

The customer contacted the TS
"he was offered £50 off his next car service, but he was not happy about his treatment and contacted Trading Standards."
The trading law was broken, clear evidence was available, sorry was not enough the rebate was not enough.

Does the aggrieved customer get any of the £2000?