Car needs new engine 1 day after i bought it!

JQ.

vaio wrote: »

It all really hinges on whether you are a consumer and the leasing company is a business.

Certainly the leasing company is a business and, assuming you bought it in a personal rather than business capacity, then I’d say you are a consumer in which case normal sale of Goods rules apply and they are obliged to repair or refund at no cost to you.

JQ. wrote: »

For that to apply, does the business need to be a car trading business?

ie, if I bought a Mini off a firm of Estate Agents as I happened to know the manager of a branch who were about to send their stock to auction would the Sale of Goods act apply?

vaio wrote: »

Not 100% sure about your example, I suspect not but might be wrong

Different for a car leasing company, their core business is buying, leasing/hiring and then selling cars so I can’t see anyway they could avoid being a business seller and equally, if they sell to members of the general public rather than exclusively to traders/auction, then I can’t see how they can avoid their sale of goods liabilities.

So you agree that an estate agent offloading a car they own does not form a transaction under the sale of goods act, as they're not in the business of selling cars.

Take that a stage further - if a catering firm I regularly use sold me a secondhand cooker (one that the catering firm had used in their commercial kitchens for the last 4 years), would that be subject to the sale of goods act? Personally I think not, because the catering firm is not in the business of selling cookers, they are just offloading an asset of the company.

I don't see car lease companies any differently - the cars are assets held by the company, they are not in the business of buying and selling them. The buying and selling of them are completely incidental to the business of the company, in the same way that the buying and selling of cookers is incidental to the business of a catering firm.

Also you say that leasing companies are selling to the general public, do you have a link to such operations where I am able to buy direct from a lease company? I know some used to do it several years ago, but I thought they'd all stopped now. Possibly for exactly this reason.

Wig

BTW, if the OP is a company, a company bought the car from a company, SOGA does not apply.

cyclonebri1

Ok, lets get real here,

IF its a knackered con rod then they will know because it will have trashed the crank or the crankcase, and even if it hasn't it may have bent the crank.full stop.

No one with an ounce of brain would buy a reconditioned engine over a low mileage OE engine.

Sorry if there's an honest reconditioner out there but the general standard is slightly under pathetic, and that's from experience.
Thje price you've been quoted is pants, take advice from here. please

Wig

JQ. wrote: »

So you agree that an estate agent offloading a car they own does not form a transaction under the sale of goods act, as they're not in the business of selling cars.

Take that a stage further - if a catering firm I regularly use sold me a secondhand cooker (one that the catering firm had used in their commercial kitchens for the last 4 years), would that be subject to the sale of goods act? Personally I think not, because the catering firm is not in the business of selling cookers, they are just offloading an asset of the company.

I don't see car lease companies any differently - the cars are assets held by the company, they are not in the business of buying and selling them. The buying and selling of them are completely incidental to the business of the company, in the same way that the buying and selling of cookers is incidental to the business of a catering firm.

Also you say that leasing companies are selling to the general public, do you have a link to such operations where I am able to buy direct from a lease company? I know some used to do it several years ago, but I thought they'd all stopped now. Possibly for exactly this reason.

If this leasing Co. has clauses for the buying of their leased cars upon expiry of lease, then they are "in the business of selling cars" In the absence of any such clause, if they sell 3 or more cars a year, they would be seen as a motor trader, unless they can show otherwise, the more cars they sell -over 3- per year in this way the less likely they will be able to convince anyone they are not a motor trader.

IMHO

vaio

JQ. wrote: »

......Also you say that leasing companies are selling to the general public, do you have a link to such operations where I am able to buy direct from a lease company? I know some used to do it several years ago, but I thought they'd all stopped now. Possibly for exactly this reason.

http://www.sinclair-fl.co.uk/fleet-management/fleet-disposal/ is Sinclair disposal of their lease cars. They’ll sell to leasers, friends & family of leasers and the general public.

As I said above, the OP's rights are going to depend critically on whether he bought the car by way of business or as a consumer.

For example (and not saying this applies to the OP)…….

If I run a business and buy a pre-loved car from a business seller then my Sale of Goods rights depend on how I buy it.

If I buy it as a private individual then I get full rights, if I buy it as a business purchase then I get none and in reality this could come down to whether I use my personal or business cheque book or whether the name on the bill of sale is Mr Vaio or Vaio Ltd.

The OP needs to come back and fill in the gaps

atrixblue.-MFR-.

i would give those terms to trading standards to examin TBH im sure they are illegal.

if they sell end lease to the public, thats classed as trading. SOGA would apply here in my opinion.

my vote for SOGA in this case, that clause(s) just revokes your rights to comeback at them when the vehicle Fcks up within 6 months of final payment.

but had the shoe been on the other foot and you handed back the car only for it to blow its conrod the next day, youd be pitted with this bill from lease company.

consumer direct, trading standards, solicitors,the press the courts go all the way.

vaio

Yep, and clause 4.2.2 in the terms the OP posted actually says that all the standard stuff about no warranties & liabilities etc etc that can apply to a business to business sale don’t apply where the buyer is a consumer.

The OP made it all caps and took spaces out which makes it hard to read but if I reformat it......

4. Guarantee and exclusion clauses


4.1 The Seller will endeavour to transfer to the Buyer the benefit of any warranty or guarantee given by the manufacturer of the Vehicle


4.2 Save as provided in clause 4.1 the seller will be under no liability under the contract for any personal injury, death, loss or damage of any kind whatsoever (other than death or personal injury resulting from the seller’s negligence) whether consequential or otherwise including but not limited to loss of profits and the seller hereby excludes all conditions, warranties and stipulations, express or implied, statutory, customary or otherwise which but for such exclusion would or might subsist in favour of the buyer except that such exclusion will not apply to:-


4.2.1 Any implied condition that the seller has or will have the right to sell the vehicle when the property is to pass; or


4.2.2 When the buyer deals as a consumer (as defined in section 12 of the unfair contract terms act 1977) any implied terms relating to the conformity of the vehicle with its description or sample or as to its quality or fitness for a particular purpose…….

that'll make make it easier to read and you can see that the lease company accept that buyers who are consumers get all the normal statutory rights which obviously include Sale of Goods.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

vaio wrote: »

Yep, and clause 4.2.2 in the terms the OP posted actually says that all the standard stuff about no warranties & liabilities etc etc that can apply to a business to business sale don’t apply where the buyer is a consumer.

The OP made it all caps and took spaces out which makes it hard to read but if I reformat it......



that'll make make it easier to read and you can see that the lease company accept that buyers who are consumers get all the normal statutory rights which obviously include Sale of Goods.

then thier bound to rights or rather SOGA here and the cost of that engine is on them.

TrickyWicky

vaio wrote: »

And also, the fact that the OP has been hiring the car for the last few years makes no difference.

It does if the op hasn't been maintaining it as stated in the hire/lease contract. A place where I worked used to hire a fleet of vans. To avoid issues like this the hire company would come have them in and do the servicing themselves every 6 months.

vaio wrote: »

Catastrophic engine failure after less than four years/60k miles with FSH should certainly qualify for a significant if not total goodwill payout from the manufacturer, apart from anything else I’d have thought their quality control department would want to get their hands on the wreckage for examination.

I very much doubt they'll be fussed about the wrecked engine, most manufacturers these days just want to shift another one from the stores to get their money out of it. Sure, if they can wangle it via he dealer they'll have the original lump back as scrap metal but I doubt they'll be concerned about investigating the cause of the failure. This does of course vary from each manufacturer. The likes of Volvo, VW and Audi may well want to examine the engine but if its any of the french makers forget it.

vaio wrote: »

Yep, about the same for a boxter engine but 2.2 petrol vauxhall one was "only" £4k (from memory)

That explains your previous answer then as the boxster engines are very well known for putting conrods through the block however this isn't the same with other engines so your previous advice about it being a common issue does not apply to all cars. It may be common with yours but thats not the same as it being a problem in all cars.

I still recommend either an engine rebuild or a salvage engine. Using a salvage engine may be the straight forward option here as long as it is overhauled before it goes in (EG new timing belt, tensioners, water pump etc). Stick it in, new oil, new gearbox oil, new coolant etc get it all back together and job done. You need to get quotes for the engine replacement itself from a garage and then the cost of a salvage engine vs the cost of fixing the current engine and the time it will take (which could be a lot longer than a direct engine swap). If you do the engine swap remember to haggle on the price as your dead engine is no use to you but will hold significant scrap metal value which the garage will probably think is theirs to keep (very few garages give back duff metal parts that've taken out but instead put them in the metal bin to make a few quid from). It's your metal and they're being paid to take it out and put in another one so you're entitled to get a discount on it. Don't ask about that though until AFTER you've got a quote otherwise they'll just say its already included in the price.. wait until you've got the quote and THEN ask what they'll take off for the scrap engine metal.

JQ.

Wig wrote: »

If this leasing Co. has clauses for the buying of their leased cars upon expiry of lease, then they are "in the business of selling cars" In the absence of any such clause, if they sell 3 or more cars a year, they would be seen as a motor trader, unless they can show otherwise, the more cars they sell -over 3- per year in this way the less likely they will be able to convince anyone they are not a motor trader.

IMHO

Do you have a link to the legislation that a person or company that sells more than 3 of the same items in a year is considered a trader. Can't say it sounds like a good business plan - buy a brand new car and then sell it for circa 60% less 4 years later.

I would imagine the general principal of car trading is that you sell them for more than you buy them for.

I bought my ex-company car off the lease company about 10 years ago and I would never have considered that I got any kind of protection because the price I paid was effectively the trade price. They did however offer a 12 month RAC warranty which I gratefully accepted. Got a complete bargain, sold it 18 months later for my than I paid.

I'd be interested to know the outcome of this - OP, get some legal advice and let us know what they say.