Dodgy 2nd hand car problem - legal standpoint?

Homershairdo

Hi all, long time reader (infrequent poster!)

Looking for some advise please - I'll give you a brief breakdown!

Bought a car (2nd hand 02 polo, 68k miles) from a independant dealer last week, with a 30 day warranty. Noticed a knocking straight away, but was late for work, so didn't turn back.

Put the car in for a full service at a different garage - more for my peace of mind. Had a call today with the following issues

ceramic shattered in the cat converter
front brakes worn
power steering problem
fuel mix problem.
They also said that the brakes which had been replaced at the back were a "bodge job"

What are my rights? The garage offered a 30 day warranty, but nothing in writing. I need the car for work and ferrying the kids about, so I can't do without for too long!

Thanks in advance people!!

Ian

harveybobbles

Take it back pointing out (nicely) what the other garage had found. Say you took it there for a 2nd opinion.

You have to give them chance to address the matter before taking it any further.

Yes the Sale Of Goods Act is out there for your protection (http://www.berr.gov.uk/consumers/fact-sheets/page38311.html)

Wig

Sorry I disagree, you don't have to give them a chance to repair if it is your intention to reject the car.

Date of purchase?
Date of service/inspection?
Price of car?

The problem here will be the warranty is not written it is only verbal.

The warranty is relevant on used cars because it implies a period of trouble free use, so it makes rejection easier.

However, as you have had the car inspected so soon after purchase, and found those serious problems, it should be clear that they were all present at the time of sale.

The brakes are important, were they worn below the legal limit? or just worn

If the brakes were below the legal limit the car was unroadworthy, if the steering problem and the rear brakes and the front brakes make the vehicle dangerously unsafe then a criminal offence has occured. To find out whether it is dangerous, it should be submitted for an MOT, the examiner will write unsafe. Then you could go to trading standards with your evidence.

If it is not unsafe, then you could try to reject it because the faults were all present at time of sale, hence it was not of satisfactory quality & Had no durability - not even a neglible amount of durability.

What you need to do is Phone up trading standards to ask for their opinion on rejecting it. And maybe ask a solicitor for his view. You might have legal advice helpline cover on your motor or house insurance.

I would do all of this tomorrow, and then reject the car tomorrow aswell. You are rejecting it under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (As ammended) Section 14(2) & (2A) Not of satisfactory quality
(2B)(a) Fitness for purpose
(d) Safety (if the brakes are below limit or the steering is dangerous)
(e) durability

IANALTINLA ask for professional advice before deciding what to do.

Homershairdo

Hi,

Thanks for the help so far. In answer to the questions:

Date of purchase - last thursday (17/07)
Date of service - today (24/07)
Car price - £3,000 (£1,000 part ex, £2000 cash)

Front breaks were down to the metal.

However, the car "passed" it's MOT last month. So maybe something dodgy is going on there also.

Where would I stand with the car I part ex'd?

Wig

Did you have the brakes repaired? Did you keep the old pads, did the discs need replacing?

The trouble will be if you had the work done, you will not be able to go to an MOT person to get the car declared unsafe.


If you have not authorised any work on the car, you must speak to trading standards tomorrow and request that they engage a consultant engineer to inspect the car in order to prosecute the seller for the criminal offence of selling an unroadworthy vehicle.


Not sure about the part ex, but if you went to a court and won I'm sure you would be awarded £3000 damages.

You could report the MOT to VOSA and ask if they think it would be appropriate to re inspect the car.... with a view to prosecuting the MOT tester.

Date of MOT pass?
Mileage on the MOT pass ?
and the miles today?

anewman

It would still pass MOT with bare brakes I think if a visual check could not be made, and it was braking at appropriate efficiency on roller test. Would probably make a bad give-away noise though.

Wig

anewman wrote: »

It would still pass MOT with bare brakes I think if a visual check could not be made, and it was braking at appropriate efficiency on roller test. Would probably make a bad give-away noise though.

Maybe, but I'd be surprised if they would be allowed to ignore the noise. No harm in asking the local VOSA station if they are interested in looking at it.

Homershairdo

Wig wrote: »

Did you have the brakes repaired? Did you keep the old pads, did the discs need replacing?

The trouble will be if you had the work done, you will not be able to go to an MOT person to get the car declared unsafe.


If you have not authorised any work on the car, you must speak to trading standards tomorrow and request that they engage a consultant engineer to inspect the car in order to prosecute the seller for the criminal offence of selling an unroadworthy vehicle.


Not sure about the part ex, but if you went to a court and won I'm sure you would be awarded £3000 damages.

You could report the MOT to VOSA and ask if they think it would be appropriate to re inspect the car.... with a view to prosecuting the MOT tester.

Date of MOT pass?
Mileage on the MOT pass ?
and the miles today?

Howdy,

MOT Pass - May 4th @67,400
Miles now - 68,500

Breaks have been replaced, as have the KT cable. apparently this is what caused the cat to explode! The garage has kept all the pads and cables, so that I can take then to the dealer.

Thanks again for your help - looks like a busy day tomorrow....

Wig

You might have difficulty now in getting trading standards to be interested in a case of selling an unroadworthy vehicle. Which would have been a guaranteed way of getting your money back. and you would not have been the litigator.

Leaving your only option to ask the seller to pay for the repairs, and you keep the vehicle or
You reject the vehicle and hope that it all goes well for you in court - assuming he refuses to refund you.

However there is something called Accepting the goods or affirming the contract, by having the vehicle serviced and repaired (at your own expense and instruction) it could be seen that this is an act of acceptance. Thus you could be unable to reject the car now.

If you are unable to reject then you can now only demand the goods are repaired, replaced, or damages/costs incurred by you, because the goods were defective at the time of sale.

anewman

As you've paid to have it repaired you might have some difficulty recovering those costs. The old pads etc could also have come from any car from any parts bin at a garage - so I'm not sure they'd be accepted as evidence.

I'm guessing you mean HT rather than KT? Not sure how a bad HT cable would cause such damage to the catalytic converter. The ceramic normally shatters due to the cat being hit or manhandled.

Wig

Yeah I was confused about the KT aswell, I also don't see that the HT could affect the cat.

Anyway, thinking about it for a while, if people with more experience than me (trading standards/CAB/solicitors etc)
agree that you have now accepted the vehicle because you paid for it to be repaired....that means rejection is not possible, so it kind of makes your situation simpler, because then you only have one option, to negotiate with the seller on the repair costs and the the other things that are wrong with the car. If he does not pay to sue him in small claims court for those costs.


However we still don't know if the rear brakes were repaired, and if not, what is the nature of the bodge job? If that still makes the vehicle unsafe, Trading Standards might still be interested.