Tony Hetherington is Financial Mail on Sunday’s ace investigator, fighting readers corners, revealing the truth that lies behind closed doors and winning victories for those who have been left out-of-pocket. Find out how to contact him below.
J.W. writes: I had a contract with Domestic Care & Repair Ltd for the repair or replacement of appliances, including my freezer.
The company owes me £356 for a freezer repair which it requested I pay for as it had no one in our area to carry it out.
I had an assurance from the company’s director, Mubasher Asim, that it would refund me.
I even obtained a county court judgment against his company, but I have still not been paid.
Tony Hetherington replies: I hope you are sitting down, because I have to tell you that the chances of you getting your money are so slim they are pretty well invisible.
Uncovered: Customers find out contracts with Domestic Care & Repair Ltdare worthless
You are not the only person to win a court order and not be paid. And Mubasher Asim has done this again and again.
Domestic Care & Repair advertises: ‘Home appliance cover will repair or replace your home’s white goods and other appliances if they stop working, usually through mechanical failure or accidental damage.’
The cost depends on how many appliances you want to cover, but all of its plans offer unlimited call-outs, qualified approved repairers and dedicated customer support. Customers are promised: ‘One simple phone call, email or text will automatically initiate the ‘claim process’ and our team of experts will be tasked with beginning to resolve your issue within 24 hours.’
That was the theory, but when your freezer broke down you found you were on your own.
A decent local firm fixed it for £306, which Asim’s company had pledged to cover. Asim even emailed you, requesting: ‘Could you very kindly provide me with proof of the repair and I will personally ensure payment will be made asap.’
You provided proof, but Asim still would not pay, so you spent £50 to sue his company.
You won – but he still failed to stump up.
When you contacted me, I noticed that Asim’s company’s website displays registration number 14777363. But this is the number of a completely different company called AA Domestic Appliance Care Limited, also run by Asim. It was compulsorily struck off by Companies House last year, so no longer exists.
I dug a bit further, and found Companies House has already begun proceedings to strike off Domestic Care & Repair as well.
And there was Homefront Services, Universal Appliance Care, Clickrnd, Tristan Financial Services, and Housecare Professionals – all limited companies, all run by Asim, all compulsorily struck off.
Most never even filed any legally due accounts. Asim simply moved on to his next business. He is currently sole director of Brand Elite Ltd, which has failed to file ownership details due by last September and which is also facing compulsory striking-off.
Ignoring Companies House is bad. Ignoring courts is even worse. A check of court records shows your own judgment against Domestic Care & Repair plus another from last year for £497.
Some months ago, Asim, 48, moved the company’s registered office from London to his £470,000 home in Abbots Langley, Hertfordshire. When I investigated there I found yet another court judgment, this time against Asim himself for £301.
I put all this to Asim. He offered no comment, no explanation and no apology. I asked him whether there was any reason he should not be banned from setting up any new companies or acting as a director of any existing company. Again, he failed to offer any reason.
So I have passed all these details over to the Insolvency Service, which brings disqualification proceedings.
Asim has staggered from company to company, running up debts, ignoring court judgments, and generally playing the system. It’s time to stop him.
£35k Motorway car sale that never was
G.B. writes: I sold my vehicle via Motorway to a company called Auto 100. Its offer was accepted by me and the sale was confirmed by Motorway, subject only to there not having been any misrepresentation by me. Auto 100 messed me around over collection and payment.
I complained, and it withdrew from the deal. I have been told this appears to be a breach of contract, but Motorway now says the contract was ‘non-binding’.
Accepted: But Motorway now says the contract was ‘non-binding’
Tony Hetherington replies: Motorway and its website act as a middleman, advertising vehicles for sale and attracting buyers. It told you: ‘Your Land Rover has sold!’ And it went on to say ‘You sold your Land Rover Range Rover for an agreed price of £35,235.’
The message added: ‘Please confirm within 24 hours to secure this price.’ The buyer was said to be car dealer Auto 100, and the only way for the deal to fall through would have been for Auto 100 to inspect your vehicle and find it was not as described.
Relying on this, you agreed to buy a new car, believing you would have more than £35,000 in the bank before paying for it.
But Auto 100 never carried out an inspection, and when you posted a critical message on Trustpilot, claiming it had delayed this, Auto 100 scrapped the purchase altogether. It says there never was a sale or a contract, and that either side was entitled to pull out at any time, with no reason needed.
Motorway admits this is correct, saying it cannot force a buyer to buy, any more than it can force a seller to complete the sale. Motorway itself is not a party to the transaction. And that means that its claim that your Land Rover was sold, and a price agreed, was just plain wrong. Sellers beware.
If you believe you are the victim of financial wrongdoing, write to Tony Hetherington at Financial Mail, 9 Derry Street, London W8 5HY or email [email protected]. Because of the high volume of enquiries, personal replies cannot be given. Please send only copies of original documents, which we regret cannot be returned.
Some links in this article may be affiliate links. If you click on them we may earn a small commission. That helps us fund This Is Money, and keep it free to use. We do not write articles to promote products. We do not allow any commercial relationship to affect our editorial independence.
