Advice on rejecting a used car.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

mikey72 wrote: »

You have right to reject, once you give them the option to repair, you lose the right.
Speak to trading standards.
You'll get advice from them.

so basically as you and i have said lets wait and see what happens after repair as that has been agreed. like ive beein saying all along with stringent terms in the agreement like i outlined in previous posts. consumer direct would be the place for info not TS as of yet theres no need to go to TS theres differences between the two. TS will only involve themselfs when they know a clear breach has been made. as where consumer direct could help negatiate things along and give more practical advice.

vaio wrote: »

I'd say stugib in post #74 has it pretty much spot on.

a fault that requires a major engine repair/block replacement after 24 hours is automatically grounds for rejection and if the dealer isn't prepared to honour this obligation under sog would you really trust him not to bodge a welded repair to the block or use a 100k engine from a scrapyard to "get out of jail"?

this is the point vaio we do not know what was agreed, and do not know if the seller has or hasnt refused to refund, from what i gather the OP has agreed to let them inspect it, so for all we know the seller may deem it unrepairable and offer a replacement or refund anyway.

if the OP wants the car the repair with strict terms imposed on the seller would be the way forward, if he wants to reject the car then he could. this has my point all along and even then if the repair turn out to be substandard or poor the OP still could reject it.

but as posts progressed many deem jumping to TS and demanding this and that would be the way forward and not calm collective negotiation with the seller.

motorguy

mikey72 wrote: »

"We do know of a few rogues who try that line, who are they, we'll have a word with them"

... and then not be able to enforce anything and advise the customer to go down the court route....

mikey72

pgilc1 wrote: »

...........As they have already left the car in to be repaired, then they have agreed to that, so at the moment they have no right to reject.

At least you admit they have right to reject, but accepting a repair will damage that right, as I've been saying all along.
That's an underhand trick.

But as the op has stated, they haven't left the car or agreed yet.

motorguy

mikey72 wrote: »

At least you admit they have right to reject, but accepting a repair will damage that right, as I've been saying all along.
That's an underhand trick.

But as the op has stated, they haven't left the car or agreed yet.

Hows it underhanded to offer to repair the car??

If the repair isnt done to an acceptable standard, then the customer can reject it at that point. Whats the issue with that?

mikey72

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

so basically as you and i have said lets wait and see what happens after repair as that has been agreed. like ive beein saying all along with stringent terms in the agreement like i outlined in previous posts.

No.
The exact opposite.

Poor repair only has to last 6 months, then it's near enough impossible for the customer, as any trader knows.

24 hours, and even the worst trader won't have a leg to stand on.

stugib

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

this is the point vaio we do not know what was agreed, and do not know if the seller has or hasnt refused to refund, from what i gather the OP has agreed to let them inspect it, so for all we know the seller may deem it unrepairable and offer a replacement or refund anyway.

All fair questions, but the OP came here to ask if he could reject his car. He was given misinformation that he did not have that right and he must allow an attempted repair. Now the facts have been established the OP can make a better informed decision.

stugib

pgilc1 wrote: »

Again, i was talking about the SOGA in a general context, rather than specific - i've already said that? Did you miss it?

What on earth does that mean? Even in the most general context, the options differ between the time before acceptance, and the period after acceptance up to the 6 month mark.

pgilc1 wrote: »

As they have already left the car in to be repaired, then they have agreed to that, so at the moment they have no right to reject.

It's not clear whether they have left the car with them, but as no repair has been attempted then they do still have a right to reject.

mikey72

stugib wrote: »

What on earth does that mean? Even in the most general context, the options differ between the time before acceptance, and the period after acceptance up to the 6 month mark.



It's not clear whether they have left the car with them, but as no repair has been attempted then they do still have a right to reject.

It doesn't matter if the dealer has tried to pull a fast one, and claims the repair has started. If the op hasn't agreed, they still have the right to reject.

motorguy

stugib wrote: »

What on earth does that mean? Even in the most general context, the options differ between the time before acceptance, and the period after acceptance up to the 6 month mark.

You're not grasping this are you?

I wasnt referring to the SOGA and in any way relating it to the O/P's situation - i was referring generally to the use of the SOGA - NOT specifically in relation to the O/P

You keep saying but whats this got to do with the O/P? I wasnt referring it to the O/Ps situation.

Please read the context at the time.

mikey72

pgilc1 wrote: »

You're not grasping this are you?

I wasnt referring to the SOGA and in any way relating it to the O/P's situation - i was referring generally to the use of the SOGA - NOT specifically in relation to the O/P

You keep saying but whats this got to do with the O/P? I wasnt referring it to the O/Ps situation.

Please read the context at the time.

Let's all stick to the question the op asked, and stop trying to muddy the waters.