car problems

fishingcinema

hi all i have also posted this on motoring as was unsure where to post

I am posting on behalf of my brother and his partner.

He has just phoned me up in a bit of a pickle, basicaly they brought a vauxhall astra, automatic, 06 reg, 25,000 miles on finance from sparshats for £10,000 including a £500 waranty.

They have owned the car 3 days short of 90 days and the gearbox has gone.

Now it has been sent of to vauxhall who have quoted £900 for it to be repaired .

Sparshats are saying that the whole car baring the gearbox is covered by the waranty but NOT the gearbox.

I do not know the legals on cars from sparshats on finance but my brother seems to think the has 90days to return the car for a refund ????? is this true or is he getting over excited.

I read online that as the car is on finance and not legaly owned by my brother untill the last payment has been made to the finance company that they finance company should sort this, is this true??

What can they do can they return it??
Should the gearbox be covered by the waranty ??
any help and advice would be greatly appreciated

many thanks

4743hudsonj

If the warranty lists the gearbox as excluded then its excluded so you cannot persue that route.

As for the finance company, they do own the car technically but your brother still needs to sort this himself.

The cars is covered under the Sale Of Goods act as it was purchased from a dealer.

Go to Consumer Direct for advice and templates for letters.

You may just be able to get this repaired through the dealership.

gordikin

4743hudsonj wrote: »

If the warranty lists the gearbox as excluded then its excluded so you cannot persue that route.

As for the finance company, they do own the car technically but your brother still needs to sort this himself.

The cars is covered under the Sale Of Goods act as it was purchased from a dealer.

Go to Consumer Direct for advice and templates for letters.

You may just be able to get this repaired through the dealership.

I'm not arguing with you on the above but are you 100% sure about the car being covered under the SOGA with it being secondhand and 3+ years old. I know new cars are covered under SOGA but thought second hand cars were/could be different?

magpiecottage

There are two possible approaches I can see to this.

The first is that the warranty on a three year old car is almost certainly an insurance policy. In which case, there may be grounds for complaint that the exclusion was not properly drawn to the purchaser's attention at outset.

An argument along the lines of "if I had been told that the gearbox wasn't covered I'd have bought an alternative policy from another company" might be looked on sympathetically by the Financial Ombudsman Service.

The other is that if they claim that the car was unsatisfactory because the gearbox failed so soon after purchase then they have a claim not only against the dealer but also the finance company who would be jointly and severally liable. The Finance Company can also be taken to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

Whichever route you take, the insurer or Finance Company must first be given the opportunity to sort it out themselves (up to 8 weeks or until they tell you that you can now take it to the Financial Ombudsman Service if they do that earlier).

4743hudsonj

gordikin wrote: »

I'm not arguing with you on the above but are you 100% sure about the car being covered under the SOGA with it being secondhand and 3+ years old. I know new cars are covered under SOGA but thought second hand cars were/could be different?

It would not be covered if it was bought privately (i.e. buyer beware)

But from a dealer (a retailer), you have your full rights under soga.

I just found this that backs me up, makes good reading.

In regards to previous use.... soga takes this into acount as goods mst be as described, so if you are told its second hand, x miles, x history, etc etc. And all faults/defects are pointed out, then you start with a clean slate if that makes sense? So any new faults ARE covered from YOUR purchase (not the first purchase from new), any older faults are not.

gordikin

Sorry no it doesn't make sense...

Scenario:-

I go into a dealers and buy a 9 year old car that has been accepted by the dealer as a trade-in. I pay for example, a purchase price of £3-500..and I can claim for anything that fails that they haven't disclosed...even if they didn't know it was an existing problem?

Anihilator

gordikin wrote: »

Sorry no it doesn't make sense...

Scenario:-

I go into a dealers and buy a 9 year old car that has been accepted by the dealer as a trade-in. I pay for example, a purchase price of £3-500..and I can claim for anything that fails that they haven't disclosed...even if they didn't know it was an existing problem?

No

The SOGA does cover the car but the reasonableness of its application is entirely dependent on the age, price, mileage and general condition.

If you buy a £300-500 car and on day 2 it blows up it would be covered. If it blows up on 9 months far less likely to be. The decisions of whether its acceptable are based on reasonableness.

In this case I think the OP may have a case as its only a 25k example and quite new. As its within 6 months it will be for the dealer to prove the fault wasnt there at purchase and it shouldnt have lasted longer.

As long as the OP isnt trashing it should be ok. Ignore the warranty and go straight to SOGA rejection - You could let them repair it but I think a gearbox would warrant grounds for rejection.

Tozer

Yep, pretty much as Anhilator says.

The implied warranties (satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, as described, etc) apply to second hand goods as much as new goods if sold in the course of a trade or business. However, the test for "satisfactory quality" is lower than it would be for new goods.

OP has the right to a repair in my opinion. If the dealer refuses, OP can claim the cost of the repair from the dealer.

4743hudsonj

Anihilator wrote: »

No

The SOGA does cover the car but the reasonableness of its application is entirely dependent on the age, price, mileage and general condition.

If you buy a £300-500 car and on day 2 it blows up it would be covered. If it blows up on 9 months far less likely to be. The decisions of whether its acceptable are based on reasonableness.

In this case I think the OP may have a case as its only a 25k example and quite new. As its within 6 months it will be for the dealer to prove the fault wasnt there at purchase and it shouldnt have lasted longer.

As long as the OP isnt trashing it should be ok. Ignore the warranty and go straight to SOGA rejection - You could let them repair it but I think a gearbox would warrant grounds for rejection.

Much better way of explaining it than mine:D lol

fishingcinema

Thank you for all your advice,

I have now just spoken to my brothers girlfriens and explained what you have all told me and she is saying she is going to reject the car under the SOGA.

She spoke to sparshats and they told her that the finance company should make the payment and deal with the car.

I have said to her i think it will be best if she goes into the dealer with the keys a lettter of rejection and even post a copy to them via special delivery, even record her handing back the keys and letter, i know it may seem a bit extreem but,

my mum is currently being taken through the courts as she took a car back with faults handed the keys back, they the drove it and placed it back outside her house so my brother took it back for her again, they now say she never returned the car even though she did but she did not write a letter record or anything so its there word agains hers.

Tozer

I doubt she has the right to reject the car. Yes, she has a right to a repair or to have repairs paid for. But rejection? I doubt it.