Customers: UzAuto Motors is evading its obligations
|02:15 / 08.10.20224,27814 min
Despite having the official permission of the state, UzAuto Motors concluded that Captiva-5 car is “not suitable for Uzbekistan” and terminated the contracts. Customers demanding their legitimate interests are surprised: three state agencies – court, antimonopoly and consumer rights protection bodies – cannot take action against the monopolist.
In 2021, UzAuto Motors signed contracts with several customers for the delivery of the updated Chevrolet Captiva. But after a certain period of time, this process was stopped. Allegedly, Captiva-5 does not fit the climate of Uzbekistan as a reason.
Some customers did not want to receive an apology from UzAuto Motors and appealed to the court demanding their legal rights. Kun.uz correspondent interviewed consumers Uktam Kakhorov and Jamshid Bakhshillayev about the situation.
Uktam Kakhorov: After the start of concluding a contract for Captiva-5, on October 12, I took a loan from the bank and paid 85%. After a certain period of time, it was announced on the official page of UzAuto Motors that concluding the contract was suspended, but no official information was given anywhere about the fate of the concluded contracts.
Jamshid Bakhshillayev: In November last year, it was announced that Captiva-5 would not be delivered to customers. The reason for this was that Uzbekistan is a mountainous country, and this car was not suitable for our climatic conditions. Then I contacted the car dealership. I asked them, if it is autumn now, where did they create winter? They could not answer. In general, which company in the world produces climate-friendly cars? For example, Captiva-5 cars brought from Dubai are being driven without any problems, there are no problems with the engine either.
When I went to the car dealership to conclude a contract, they showed a presentation about the advantages of the updated Uzbek model Captiva over the model sold in Dubai. So, there are many questions, but as always, there are no answers.
***
The most interesting thing is that on September 17, 2021, that is, 11 days before the start of concluding contracts for Captiva-5, the “Center for Scientific Testing and Quality Control of Uzbekistan” issued a certificate of conformity for 4 units of Captiva-5 cars. However, on October 18-22, the internal tests of UzAuto Motors have already begun, and the Captiva-5 car, which was also certified by “Uztest”, simply failed.
Related topics
At this point, a question arises: will tests be conducted on the technical level, reliability and safety of Damas car, which has been produced for almost 30 years and does not have modern amenities?
In general, it is absurd for the company to say that it is unable to fulfill its obligations. Until now, from Malibu to Tracker, they only imported. Which of them was produced?
Uktam Kakhorov: I filed an application to the Consumer Rights Protection Agency regarding this situation. The Agency protected my interests and sent a request to UzAuto Motors, but they gave answers that had no legal basis. After that, we took the company to civil court. The original trial was scheduled for August 5 this year, but was postponed due to the defendant’s failure to appear. On August 17, the same situation will be repeated again. On the third occasion, the lawyer of UzAuto Motors asked not to accept the claim and to postpone the trial for another term. On the fourth occasion, the judge of the inter-district court of Karshi did not take into account any of the evidence I presented and dismissed my claim.
UzAuto Motors cites its own internal conclusion as a basis. It is leaping to conclusion that the car it did not manufacture is “unusable”. In fact, this car had to be imported from China. Before the start of concluding contracts, “Uztest” issued a certificate of conformity for Captiva-5 car on September 17, 2021. It shows the VIN codes of the 4 imported Captiva cars.
Jamshid Bakhshillayev: I finally went to the call center of UzAuto Motors and asked them to give me two Lacetti-Gentra cars that they are producing, because the money I paid was enough. They did not accept my offer. They said that they will give only one car because it is stated in the contract. Interestingly, they remember the terms of the contract when it comes to the number of the car, but forget the obligations when it comes to Captiva-5. UzAuto Motors has no authority to unilaterally cancel the contract.
Then I applied to the Anti-Monopoly Committee. They issued an instruction to the dealership to deliver a Captiva-5 to me. Although the deadline passed, the car dealership did not fulfill its obligation. After that, the car dealership filed a lawsuit against the Anti-Monopoly Committee itself regarding the decision. But their appeal was dismissed. In turn, the lawsuit submitted by the car dealership to the administrative court was also not satisfied, and the court upheld the car dealership’s obligation to deliver Captiva-5.
Uktam Kakhorov: I have paid about 30 million interest payments for the loan I received for 11 months, but I still can’t get the car. In the court held on August 26, the non-delivery of the car was evaluated as a force majeure situation. However, force majeure circumstances are clearly defined in the contract issued by UzAuto Motors itself, and the reasons given now are not included in it.
Jamshid Bakhshillayev: UzAuto Motors representatives presented their internal opinion in court. But the situation there was very funny. Vaporized mirrors were shown in the picture. However, all cars vaporize in hot and cold weather. According to the conclusion, the car was described as defective. According to the decision of the Cabinet of Ministers, the cars must pass the relevant standards before being imported. Based on that certificate, the car is released to the domestic market. Similarly, UzAuto Motors also certified cars in this way. All are technically faultless cars. But after some time, they made their conclusion and presented it to the court, and the court accepted it. They said it was force majeure. But force majeure should be a situation that is independent of both parties. The contract clearly states what circumstances are considered force majeure.
I don’t know what the interests are, but the cars are not being delivered. I would ask the competent authorities whether the certificates issued by our state organizations are strong, or the internal conclusions of some organization prevail. If their conclusion prevails, tomorrow we too will seek ways around the law through our own internal conclusion. If Captiva-5 does not meet the requirements, please inspect the Damas car imported in 1996 and show it to the people.
Uktam Kakhorov: In fact, Captiva-5 car manufactured in China is still being sold in a number of countries around the world. It is not removed from production. Otherwise, it would be a case of force majeure. But today this type of car is sold in free auctions.
Jamshid Bakhshillayev: I can say from my personal experience that from the first models of this type of car until now, it has changed only for the better. It has been modernized. After all, how bad can the final model be?
Let’s look at the Malibu: the first model sold in our country was actually the 8th generation. The one sold as two is the 9th generation in America. It has only been changed for the better. If they think the Captiva-5 car is bad, let them pass the test in front of the media.
***
The only requirement of consumers who paid for Captiva-5 a year ago is fulfillment of the contract terms. They are asking law enforcement agencies to ensure the rule of law.
Uktam Kakhorov: Dealers told me several times to write an application and get my money back. Then I rejected writing an application. After all, they are not fulfilling the contract terms. So let them return it to the bank and give an explanation. The reason is that I took out a car loan. So, several times I asked them to give me another type of car for this money, but they refused.
I told them to give me a 7-seat car because our family is big. They told me to get a Damas car. This is an open mockery: we pay for Captiva-5 and get Damas?
Jamshid Bakhshillaev: We just want our rights to be ensured. If our rights are not protected, won’t these laws create a feeling of discontent among people?
Uktam Kakhorov: I went to UzAuto Motors several times. Its staff pressured me to write an application. Of course, they did not succeed. In the end, they said that I will neither get my money, nor my car. I would like to see if the law prevails in our country. Despite the negative opinions of the people about UzAuto Motors, its monopoly has not yet been eradicated. They still carry on violating the rights of consumers.
Jamshid Bakhshillayev: Do you think that other companies do not have cars that can compete with our cars? There are. Why don’t they bring it? Then, of course, we call it a monopoly. There are restrictions on the entry of these competitive vehicles from abroad. What kind of competition will there be? When will we evolve?
If you go to Germany, they proudly drive their world-renowned cars. When will we have such cars? When you go abroad, get into a modern car, then you will be shy of not taking full advantage of the comforts it has. Because we do not know about these novelties. Uzbek people do not have the right to drive a quality car, do they?
In Uzbekistan, one can buy a high-quality car abroad at the prices offered by UzAuto Motors. After these situations, you will be depressed. If the laws do not apply to UzAuto Motors, let them inform in advance that their internal conclusion is superior to the conclusion and certificate of the state organization. Alas, there is no choice.
P.S. Kun.uz cited the opinions of two people who have been roaming around for a year and are tired of attending courts.
