Car needs new engine 1 day after i bought it!

s_b

basically in my opinion seller is trying to deny buyer his rights with words
i dont honestly think after day of ownership unless the failure was down to no oil or abuse that they would win if taken to court
i would see a solicitor
i would have an engineers report done
i would consider the way forward on what comes

Delivery_Driver

Just to add another slant to this-I don't suppose you drove through a big puddle did you with all the rain we've had lately?

QuackQuack_2

mike123456 wrote: »

I declined to buy an optional warranty.

Bad luck then. Quote any contract you want IANAL but I'd take the view that you've had long enough to test drive it, you know the history of the vehicle and you were offered the chance to buy a warranty, which you declined.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

QuackQuack wrote: »

Bad luck then. Quote any contract you want IANAL but I'd take the view that you've had long enough to test drive it, you know the history of the vehicle and you were offered the chance to buy a warranty, which you declined.

you havent read anything here have you?

FORGET THE LEASE. its a newly purchased vehicle, regardless if he has leased it for 4 years that contract ended the moment he handed cash over for it. as its classed as a new PURCHASE declining warranty is nothing the buyer has a right to shop elsewhere for one its not compulsory to purchase from the SELLER. for all we know he declined it because it was expensive and was going to purchase one soon elsewhere but S**T happens and now he hasnt got that option as no warranty cover would allow a claim for an already blown engine.

OP if you purchased on a credit car call the credit card company for help also.

Flyboy152

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Maybe so, however its not going to be a secret that the op has had the car for the last 4 years and was possibly responsible for the maintenance of it. The company may well use this in their defence and even counter claim that the op failed to maintain it. Weird things happen in legal spats.

If the lease compnay have an issue relating to the OP's responsibilities under the terms of the lease, then they have every right to challenge it and seek remedy under the terms and conditions of the lease. However, they have a responsibility, as a seller, to follow the terms of the law when it comes to selling the OP a car. These are two very distinctly different things. For example, if the seller wanted to reduce the risk of possible action against them, they should have inspected the car thoroughly before selling it.

If the OP had never had the car serviced, it is irrelevant, in terms for who is responsible for the sale of the car.

Also.. you really need to use the multiquote buttons

I think you misunderstand the purpose of the "multi-quote" system.

property.advert

You have some time, 100 days I think, to charge it back to Visa on debit cards. The amount does not even have to be £100. I would inform your bank and start that process rolling.

As to the purchase, I cannot see them escaping the SOGA here as the fact that it was previously his lease car, through his employer, is immaterial. It is up to the seller to make sure that the goods were fit for sale.

The seller may enquire with those who maintained the vehicle and the manufacturer to offset their liability but that is solely their worry. The contract between the consumer (the OP) and the vendor falls under the SOGA.

IMHO.