Section 75 claim & valuation

InsideInsurance

So, bought a car a couple of years ago. Paid the £1k deposit on CC and the balance by DC.

Car has had continuous problems with leaks into the vehicle which then damage the electrics. This year alone its been into the garage 6 times for water ingress with 3 different sources of the leak being "fixed". One of those locations had leaked and been fixed by a different garage last year and the year before it had 2 other leaks in two other locations.

So basically the car is closer to a bath than than a car. The previous repairs were done under warranty and this years £12,000 of repairs were done as a gesture of goodwill by the vehicle manufacturers - leaks are a known issue with the model of the car.

Basically now want to reject the vehicle as not being fit for purpose. Speaking to the retailer they are "sympathetic", advise that they know of all the problems and feel its unfair that they have to deal with a manufacturing/ design problem but know they have to under the law. The have made an offer to "buy back" the car but the offer they've made is less than the Glass' guide trade in value.

So another obvious option is to go down the Section 75 route and involve the good old bank.

I am aware that I cannot claim the full invoice price of the vehicle back as clearly I have had a significant amount of use out of the car. What I am uncertain of is what value to enter into the template letter that is on here

Should I am high and expect to be negotiated down? Is it more binary that if they reject what I want then I have no further right to claim?

If I do settle with the card company I therefore assume they then will start their own action against the retailer. If the settlement they receive is less than the settlement they pay me am I liable to reimburse the shortfall?

Cheers

thenudeone

Given the information in your post I expect the claim would be quite sizeable and would therefore probably be contested.

It is too late to reject the goods and demand a full refund. What you can expect is compensation for the loss in value due to the fault. This will be a difficult value to pin down. I suggest you decide whether you want to keep the car and obtain compensation or trade it in and receive a better than expected trade in value.

If you did agree a settlement with the card company, it would have to be in full and final settlement. They would only agree a settlement if they were pretty sure that it was a reasonable amount to compensate you for your losses, and they thought that they would lose if you escalated it to court. I doubt they would expect to be able to claim any back later.

If you have legal cover with your home insurance it is probably worth involving them.

ILW

You have had two or three years to rject the item. I would suggest it is probably a bit late now.

InsideInsurance

With online forums others are rejecting the same vehicle (globally) with many being older than mine. They predominately have either had issues immediately and so had a full cash refund or have done it later but been happy to get another vehicle from the same manufacturer and so had a much better than normal trade in offer.

My issue is not wanting another vehicle from the same manufacturer and their offer being far too low for cash - about 30% below private sale value if you ignored the fact its constantly leaking.


I did speak to the legal expenses insurers, they've confirmed there is a strong case (above the required 60% chance of success) and the estimated £8,000 of legal fees would be covered however they want to evaluate the claim before acting.... that took 2 months... they then decided it was a Fast Track case and so it went back to the back of the queue in the next department and they've been evaluating the received offer and its "fairness" for the last month with the fee earner now on holiday for two weeks.

Cars MOT is due soon, rear tyres need changing at £150 a corner, cambelt is due to be changed at circa £500, all expenses I'd rather avoid on a vehicle I want to dispose of. I did speak to a company about its value given the leaking which they placed at a little above scrap unless bought by an unknowing ignorant which I dont particularly want to do. Hence wondering if I could accelerate things via a section 75 claim against the CC company rather than waiting months for the solicitors to decide what they're going to do.

ILW

Freelander?

InsideInsurance

VW Eos .

chanz4

no matter what you will need to change the tyre, the value given will be a trade value.

InsideInsurance

Why would it be trade in value? Ultimately the claim is breach of contract so seems odd that "the law" would then say the remedy actually puts the claimant in a worse position as if it weren't for the leaks etc the vehicle would attract the private sale price which is obviously significantly above trade in. All of that doesn't consider the 6 months with either no car or just a Fox which was not fit for purpose.

As to the tyres, why do I have to change them whatever happens? At the moment they are road legal but probably wont be by the time the MOT occurs. If the settlement was agreed tomorrow why do you think i'd need to change road legal tyres for new ones for the new owner of the car?