Consumer rights - used car......

Maria81

I hope that you got it all sorted out, it sounds like a awful thing to happen.

And that's what this forum is about isn't it, asking for advice and help! And you wonder why some people don't want to write anything on here!
Don't listen to the small minded.

Have a good day!

goldspanners

Maria81 wrote: »

I hope that you got it all sorted out, it sounds like a awful thing to happen.

And that's what this forum is about isn't it, asking for advice and help! And you wonder why some people don't want to write anything on here!
Don't listen to the small minded.

Have a good day!

being stabbed in the !!!!! would be an awful thing to happen, a car going in to limp mode is just annoying and nowhere near as frightening as the op would like you to beleive.

the op asked for advise when they already knew the answer and exactly how they were going to deal with it,so this thread is pointless.

some folk think this forum is all about telling folk what they want to hear,but fortunatly on the motoring forum that doesn't happen often, folk get the truth and brutaly honest replies where needed.

have a good day!

Wig

sheslookinhot wrote: »

Surely resetting the fault codes and returning the car to the buyer is not acceptable. The supplier must investigate and rectify the faults that manifested as the problem in the first place.

Yes unacceptable, but it's what they might do, hence why OP should ask questions of what exactly they have done to 'fix' car.

Does OP have a warranty? Which is another factor that influences SOGA claims.

Kilty_2

goldspanners wrote: »

being stabbed in the !!!!! would be an awful thing to happen, a car going in to limp mode is just annoying and nowhere near as frightening as the op would like you to beleive.
]

A 1.3 CDTI Astra isn't exactly quick off the mark when it's not restricting itself to 3,000 revs and the turbo isn't working - it was literally crawling off the line and I either held up the queue of traffic behind me or didn't have enough time to pull onto a roundabout, or both.

It's annoying when you can't do more than 35-40mph comfortably on a clear, straight road with other traffic expecting you to - it's dangerous to not be able to move off from traffic lights / roundabouts at a resonable pace in a busy city centre.

Kilty_2

Thanks Wig - no warranty however bearing in mind I had the car for less than an hour and drove only around 10 miles before the problems started I think I have a stronger case than usual.

harveybobbles

sheslookinhot wrote: »

Surely resetting the fault codes and returning the car to the buyer is not acceptable. The supplier must investigate and rectify the faults that manifested as the problem in the first place.

But sometimes the light might not come back on for days, weeks, months. Which is why we resewt the light and give the car back toi the customer, telling them to drive til it comes back on...

Wig

Kilty wrote: »

Thanks Wig - no warranty however bearing in mind I had the car for less than an hour and drove only around 10 miles before the problems started I think I have a stronger case than usual.

I think you do have a good case, good enough to "have a go", if I were you.


Can you answer some questions?

What mileage did you think it had when you saw it advertised and when you decided to agree to buy it? They could fall down on description.

What car was it? What Reg? How much£££?

Your basic case is that it was obviously sold in a condition which meant it could not be driven in the manner you had reasonably expected to be able to. You could argue that it does not matter what the fault was or if it has now been fixed...the facts of the case are that it was clearly in an unsatisfactory condition at the point of sale. Had the fault developed after a week or two you would have much less of a case.

The argument the retailer will put forward is that when you left the sales yard the car was working and minor faults are to be expected on used cars and do not render them unsatisfactory - because a reasonable person would expect an older car to develop faults.

It will be up to the judge (sheriff?) to decide whether the fault was present at point of sale, and whether or not it rendered it unsatisfactory.

If I were the retailer, I also would not argue. Fault so soon? So sorry. You want refund? Ok here's your refund, can I interest you in any of my other cars?

sheslookinhot

harveybobbles wrote: »

But sometimes the light might not come back on for days, weeks, months. Which is why we resewt the light and give the car back toi the customer, telling them to drive til it comes back on...

Yes, but the light is coming on to warn you of a potential problem. It is therefore imperative to find out why the light came on before further driving. Resetting the light is avoiding the issue.

Kilty_2

Wig wrote: »

I think you do have a good case, good enough to "have a go", if I were you.


Can you answer some questions?

What mileage did you think it had when you saw it advertised and when you decided to agree to buy it? They could fall down on description.

What car was it? What Reg? How much£££?

The mileage I thought it had is correct - 44,000. The sales invoice states 38,000 and the third party warranty has also been registered @ 38,000 miles rendering it void - but obviously I'd have had this amended if I did decide to keep the car.

It's a 2005 Vauxhall Astra 1.3 CDTI Club - registered November 2005. £4795 + £149 for 6 month warranty from AutoProtect. £2000 part exchange for my current car and the rest paid by debit card.

Kazipoo

The hubby bought a car last year, shortly after he was knocked off his bike, just to get him to work and back. On the way home it cut out and he had to pull over on the motorway. Finally managed to limp home, but could not reach the seller (a dealer). Contacted him a few days later and he refused to acknowledge a problem. I got in touch with consumer direct, they got me in touch with trading standards. Turns out that the head gasket was completely shot. Dealer refused to refund or fix, trading standards said that our chances of winning if we took him to court were good, however, getting him to pay up is a different kettle of fish. They also informed us that a judge may consider the age, mileage, condition of the car and may not award us the full amount. In the end we decided to cut our losses (£900) because trading standards thought we would be lucky if we were awarded half of that back, and we may not even see the cash if the dealer refused to pay up and we scrapped the car for £100!!

From this I have learned a few things 1, trading standards can only do so much... 2, I will buy from dealerships only from now on... 3, I will always pay to have an AA or RAC inspection carried out.