About this Site

My name is David and I bought a 2010 model Subaru Legacy Sports Tourer 2.0D SE Nav Plus, registration number BF59ODL from Pentagon Motor Holdings Ltd of Pentagon Island, Nottingham Road, Derby. DE21 6HB, on Friday the 13th of May 2011.

After some problems with the vehicle came to light I started a to do a little detective work, and this led me to find out the REAL HISTORY behind the Subaru that Pentagon sold to me as you will find out through reading my blog on this website.

I believe that BF59ODL was mis-sold to me by Pentagon Motor Holdings Ltd because I was not told the true history of this vehicle when I asked the Pentagon Motor Holdings salesman for it. If I had known its true history at the time I would not have purchased the vehicle. Pentagon’s salesman Mr Martin Hudson told me in the presence of my Father that the vehicle had been a Subaru area manager’s car. He did not tell me that it had in fact been used by the press as is evident here:  http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/longtermtests/253576/subaru_legacy.html

I have 8 A4 pages of calendar entries, a list of phone calls and a pile correspondence to date to illustrate the story so far and the saga still continues.

To start from the beginning click “Timeline of Events Blog” and go to the oldest post and work your way up.

I took the decision to create this site on the 5th of March 2012.

I still have the option to issue proceedings against Pentagon Motor Holdings Ltd and I retain the right to issue proceedings until the 12th of May 2017 under s.2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967.

I have not been using the vehicle since I asked for my money back from Pentagon Motor Holdings Limited and to carry on storing, insuring and taxing a vehicle that I cannot use, as I have done for nearly 4 months, is not an option any more so I have started to use the vehicle again.

My partner Helen and I have been seriously inconvenienced and put to substantial cost as a result of this situation. I feel a line needs to be drawn under the it and that Pentagon Motor Holdings Limited should be made aware of it.

Up until now I have not mentioned the situation to the press or written about it on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. However, writing here breaks my silence.

If Pentagon Motor Holdings Limited resolve the situation in a satisfactory manner at any time in the future I will update this site accordingly.

18 thoughts on “About this Site

  1. As stated above, how do they get away with it?? Utterly speechless at their catalogue of disgusting treatment, hope you get the outcome you want and deserve.

  2. I am not commenting on what is right or wrong – but I am a motor journalist and I am not commenting on this car. But what I would say that most press cars (not all) are driven with great care (forget what you see on Top Gear). Firstly most are driven on the road by experienced motoring journalists who have to keep their driving licences and in my case I drive over 100 different cars a year it becomes very boring, we do not tend to trash the cars that are lent to us. Most car manufacturers look after their press cars, they are mostly washed and waxed each week, undergo extensive maintenance and safety checks. Most scratches, kerbing and tyres, etc are sorted when they happen. They would not want anything to go wrong with when on loan.

    I would be more worried about buying an ex-rental car under the disguised of an ex-company car. Some rental companies register their cars to companies with no connection to the rental company’s name.

    Hope this makes some sense off ill at home, probably not much help to you.

  3. When will these corporates learn that the Internet exists now. Word is spreading well David … they will have to resolve the situation before the BIG MARCH ON THEM and the papers get involved … they like this sort of story on the front page.

  4. Many manufacturers have a pool of nearly new cars that they make available to the dealers to purchase, most of them are used as ‘staff cars’. How were Pentagon supposed to know the car was used in a long term press test? Does it really make any difference? The car could have also been used in a pornographic shoot, would that be Pentagon’s fault?

  5. If you read the site you will realise that I asked Pentagon’s salesman about the history of the car and he told me that it was a Subaru Area Manager’s car. I had asked him twice, once on the phone and once at the dealership as to the car’s history. If the salesman didn’t know he should have said so rather than in my belief fabricating a history. In addition to that if you look at the specification sheets for the two vehicles offered to me it states on one the previous usage but on BF59ODL it is blank hence my asking. You can view them here: http://mypentagonhell.com/wp/?p=1 It is my belief that Subaru didn’t tell Pentagon of its history and that Pentagon didn’t ask Subaru when I asked Pentagon. I bought the Subaru for £500 over CAP value in the belief that I was getting what the salesman had described. As for does it matter that it was used as a press car? Yes in my opinion it does, driving around a track and across a beach isn’t your average Area Manager’s usage.

  6. Hi
    My name is Kate and I have worked for Pentagon for 20 years. This is a family run business and we take our customer satisfaction and level of service very seriously.
    Every customer that buys a used car from Pentagon is invited to take part in a satisfaction survey either by email, text or letter which involves answering questions about the dealership, staff, the vehicle they purchased and their overall satisfaction. We have been using JudgeService since December 2011, and prior to that we used a company called Feefo.
    The figure of 4.6/5 is based on everybody’s feedback since we started using JudgeService.
    Anyone who leaves feedback via the Judge Service website that hasn’t been invited to take part has their comments read by the General Manager and the Sales team at the relevant dealership.

    As an employee of Pentagon I have been very much involved with customer satisfaction, and I can assure you that we do work tirelessly, quickly, and as fairly as we can to resolve any customer issues or complaints.

    Don’t get me wrong, we do get things wrong sometimes, but our mission has always been, and will continue to be, to keep all our customers happy and to deliver an exceptional level of customer service. I understand that this will not always be the case, and every so often we do get customers that we cannot please no matter what we do, and are quite frankly impossible to deal with.

    As I understand it, Pentagon have tried on many occasions to resolve your issues with various substantial offers, and Subaru UK also made you a very generous offer a few weeks ago that hasn’t been mentioned anywhere. I also believe that you informed Subaru UK that you were perfectly happy with your car which leads me to believe that you do not have any issues with this car any longer.

    It really does sadden me when someone is tainting the name of Pentagon, a family owned business whose mission hasn’t changed in over 20 years which is “to make car and van buying and servicing easy and affordable and to treat people as we would like to be treated”.

    The motor industry has had a bad reputation in the past, but its companies like Pentagon that have helped to improve that reputation in recent years by providing customers the opportunity to let us know if they are unhappy with the service they have experienced. This in turn gives us the opportunity to put matters right, and to improve our service in the future for everybody.

    • Hi Kate,

      Thank you for taking the time to add your view to MyPentagonHell.com.

      I understand that Pentagon is a family run company, this is partly what influenced my decision to place my trust in their Chilwell dealership and purchase the Subaru. I have at no point been asked to take part in a satisfaction survey by email, text, letter or otherwise.

      Comments via the JudgeService.com website may well be read by the General Manager and the sales team although they aren’t all published publicly. However in my experience the Pentagon employees that I have dealt with, tend to ignore problems in the hope that they will disappear, with the exception of Neil Vernon.

      Mr Steve Armstrong Sales Manager at Pentagon Chilwell repeatedly didn’t return my telephone calls and Mr Trevor Reeve Managing Director of Pentagon Motor Holdings Limited still hasn’t replied to the letter that I sent to him by registered post on the 21st of November 2011.

      You are quite right companies do sometimes get things wrong, I accept this, but they have to accept when they are in the wrong and face up to their mistakes.

      Pentagon’s mistake was to tell me the vehicle was something it wasn’t, this is misrepresentation. It is my belief that your salesman did this to close the deal and and make a sale to the value of £22990.00.

      At no point have I been impossible to deal with. I would add quite “frankly” as you put it, that if I wanted to be impossible to deal with I would Ignore Pentagon’s calls and letters and then instruct a solicitor to write letters which contain incorrect facts to Pentagon’s solicitor and perhaps drag things out by asking for more time to reply to a letter and then reply late.

      Pentagon has only made me one offer and this was in the form of a replacement vehicle it was far from substantial and not acceptable you can view the details here: http://mypentagonhell.com/?p=123

      You mention the offer that Subaru made to me, which as yet I haven’t published because my contract of sale is with Pentagon Motor Holdings Limited and not Subaru UK (International Motors). However you are correct Alan Able of Subaru UK as an interested 3rd party did make me an offer on the condition that didn’t take any legal proceedings against Pentagon Motor Holdings Limited. This was not acceptable to me. I will put full details of Alan Able’s offer in my next blog post but it was basically this, in return for BF59ODL, £1000 and my silence they would provide me with BV10YCR a vehicle which I mentioned earlier in my blog here: http://mypentagonhell.com/?p=115

      I am not happy with the car because it is not what your salesman said it was and not what I paid £22800.00 for. I hope this is clear.

      If the truth taints Pentagon’s reputation I would respectfully suggest that in my opinion, it’s time for a change of “mission”.

      The motor industry may have had, as you put it a “bad reputation” in the past. However Pentagon have in my mind only enforced that reputation. I wish this was not the case and that my purchasing of the Subaru had been as I had planned, a pleasurable experience. In reality it has cost me considerable stress, time, money and inconvenience.

      I remain receptive to dialogue with the aim of acceptably resolving the situation as always.

      David.

    • I read with interest the figures quoted by kate 4.6/5 that equates to about 92% – so 8% of Pentagon’s customers are not happy.
      Surely a business would wish that 100% of it’s customers are happy – that 8% may never return and they will not recommend you as a dealer either.

  7. Believe it or not, manufacturer demonstrators are the ones to have, This is because they are over maintained. Take a Land Rover Discovery used at Land rover experience off road centre. Yes it is a demonstrator and it is also subjected to arduous conditions, but every 1000 miles it is fully serviced and inspected with new fluids and filters and any necessary repairs are carried out , so better looked after than a domestic. Also remember that the majority of nearly new cars for sale these days are cast offs from manufacturers own fleet operations who lease to car hire companies (europcar, national etc) or any company for that matter! for a certain time usually 12 months or either 6/8/12,000 etc miles after which time they have to be returned to go up for sale at the main dealer. These are cars that have been thrashed up and down the country. They probably didn’t tell you its history due to the stigma of ex demonstrators being negative for some, however a manufacturer demonstrator is different and really wouldn’t worry about it.

    • Hi Sam,

      Thanks for taking the time to comment on MyPentagonHell.com

      If you read the articles from Auto Express which you can access from here: Google Detective Work you will read that the Subaru had no preferential service treatment and in contrast it was run low on oil. I asked about the vehicle’s history twice and on both occasions I was mislead as to the vehicle’s real history. I paid £500 over CAP value for a car that was misrepresented by Pentagon Motor Holdings Limited.

      David.

  8. Hi David, Ive been following it for a while now and it all seem all a bit silly really. Your complaint seems to hinge on if Pentagon deliberately mislead you or not. From what i read, they did not and while accept that they should have double or triple checked the history, what is really so bad about a car that has been used by a member of the press? Pentagon and Subaru seemed to have made you a number of offers that look very fair to me. If they gave you £500 back that you say you paid over CAP value, would you not be happy with that or are you just wanting all your money back? It would appear to me compromise would be the best solution in this case, you have not stated what you want to rectify your problem. Have you told them what you want?

    • Hi Nick,

      Thank you for following and taking the time to comment on MyPentagonHell.com.

      You may think the situation a bit silly. However the situation is extremely serious for me, I was mislead by Pentagon Motors Holdings Limited’s salesman Mr Martin Hudson who took £22990.00 for a car that was not as he described. My complaint does not hinge on whether or not I was deliberately mislead. I was mislead, full stop.

      I also believe that, because the vehicle was used as a press car, and from looking at the photos of it in the press articles, the protective coating that should be on the engine wasn’t present whilst it was out on test with Auto Express and when being driven in salty environments. I think that this could have caused the engine to rust prematurely.

      Pentagon and Subaru have both made an offer each, neither of which were acceptable and both are documented on this site.

      I have repeatedly informed Pentagon, by email and letter, that I require a full refund, these letters are also published on this site.

      Would you pay £22990.00 to accept a compromise or would you want what you had paid for?

      David.

  9. I work in a car dealership myself and have just read the timeline of comments on your blog. I can’t believe there is all this fuss! I could understand if there was actually something wrong with the car but who the previous owner was really doesn’t matter! If it worries you so much in the future I’d advise you buy a NEW one!!! Mountain out of a mole hill comes to mind.

    • Russell,

      All I want is what I paid £22990.00 for, if Pentagon cannot supply what their salesman described I want my money back.

      According to the Office of Fair Trading out of over 56000 complaints they received about used cars, over 13 per cent of them were about misleading claims or omissions by the seller.

      With the costs I’ve incurred as a result of the situation I could have brought a NEW one.

      If any car dealers are not clear about the law and their responsibilities to consumers here is a guidance document from the OFT: http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/676408/OFT1152con.pdf Section 4, Misleading actions (regulation 5) is especially relevant to my case.

      David.

  10. Hello David

    I came across your blog and I am struck a little by what you consider may be a reasonable solution to your problem? I do credit your honesty in forfeiting your anonymity. I would like to give you an example of what it is like to be on the receiving end of internet abuse. Much of which is unaccountable or anonymous
    My wife and I work in the hospitality industry and we are small family run business with a holiday cottage which has been hit heavily by the recession. We are often threatened by customers who if we don’t comply to their sometimes unreasonable demands we will get slated on the internet. Please keep in mind we charge about £30-40 a night and cannot even sell the house due to the current climate.
    For example a gentleman from London who couldn’t light a fire demanded his money back because the fire would not work, incidentally on the hottest day of the year 2012 hard to believe we had one.
    When we arrived the fire place contained a pile of matches and two logs (the fire lighters and kindling remained untouched next to the fire) this was after having arranged for having the chimney swept as well., which incidentally cost considerably more than £60 he paid for the weekend. Early this year another gentleman ruined all the bedding with tomato sauce, we are have to write off these losses because you can’t pursue anyone now for legitimate damages due to the threats by the customer to put it over the internet. Incorrect information you can never challenge or ask to be removed, even when it obviously wrong or not even related to your business.
    I hope you find a resolution which you believe to be reasonable and sincerely hope if you work in a public facing industry no one chooses to do this to you. You have been offered another vehicle and buying a second hand car always has an element of buyer beware. Please be aware many people jobs and business may suffer indirectly because of what you are doing. I am in no way linked to Subaru or Pentagon but, just another small business trying to keep going in tough times.

    • Hi Willbur,

      Thank you for taking time to read my site. My problem with Pentagon is that I did not get what I was told I was paying for. Pentagon told me the vehicle was something that it wasn’t and if they had told me the truth I wouldn’t have purchased the vehicle. I took the salesmans word as to the previous usage and only got suspicious when the logbook never arrived as I was told it would. I finally got the logbook having requested it from the DVLA and read the truth. I’m not the only one either have a look at the comment from Adrian on the contact page of this site.

      Everything I have written on this site is fact and the truth, because of this I do not require anonymity and please remember that if I wrote something that wasn’t true Pentagon’s lawyer Vanessa Wix of Geldards would probably be hot on my case.

      David.

Leave a Reply