Arnold Clark - BEWARE !

s1lv3rdal5

I went to buy a car from Arnold Clark, Shiremoor Ford. They failed to disclose the fact that it had been a Hire Car.

A car dealer is REQUIRED BY LAW to disclose under The Consumer Protection Regulations, they MUST volunteer the information, without being asked.

I have been left out of pocket, as I changed my car insurance over to the car I was going to buy.

[text removed by MSE Team]

colino

While there are many tales of woe about the eponymous garage, not telling you it was previously a Hire Car doesn't constitute deception by omission under the 2008 Unfair Trading Law. Think about it. Large dealer groups like this constantly have a steady flow of nearly new second-hand cars. Where do they come from? These self-same groups also are into hire cars, lease cars and do bulk deals with the manufacturers, all contributing to that large pool of shiney near-news in their glass and chrome emporiums. (That sadly will also provide the stamped-up "service" book).
Unless you asked where the car was and what it had been used for previously and they lied, you don't have any recourse for this.

s1lv3rdal5

If you look under The Consumer Protection Regulations, Section 4.5 and 5.18 & 5.26 (misleading omissions). They are Quite Clear.
Arnold Clark Broke the Law.

CPR's sec 4.5

Creating a misleading impression that a vehicle has one previous private owner – for example through the use of statements such as 'one previous owner' – when in fact it is an ex-rental vehicle that has been rented out to many drivers.

Misleading omissions (regulation 6)

4.6

It is an offence to mislead consumers by failing to give them the information they need in order to make an informed purchasing decision before the sale ('misleading omissions'). This might, for example, be by omitting or hiding important information or providing important information in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous, or untimely manner.

Examples:

Failing to disclose the existence and results of all checks carried out on the vehicle (for example, mechanical, history, mileage) and any adverse findings.

Failing to disclose details of any additional charges payable, for example 'administration fees', until the point of sale.

Failing to disclose that a vehicle for sale is an ex-rental vehicle which may have had a number of drivers/users - it is not sufficient to only inform the consumer of the mileage and the number of previous owners.

C. Providing consumers with important information prior to the sale
5.17 You must give consumers the information they need to make an informed choice, before a sale is made. You must not omit or hide such information, or provide it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.

5.18 Non-exhaustive examples of the types of information you should inform the consumer about prior to the sale include:

the main characteristics of the vehicle - for example:

price, make, model, engine capacity and other physical characteristics

OFT1152con | 14

any problems you are or ought to be aware of, after taking reasonable steps, such as:

if the vehicle has been written off as an insurance loss or has been accident damaged

if the vehicle was imported into the UK

if there are any 'MOT Advisory' items

discrepancies in the mileage or service history of the vehicle

faults with the vehicle.

If the vehicle is ex-rental

partan

i got a vectra from arnold clark, and the salesman willingly informed me (without me asking) that it had belonged to a rental company, partly because these cars often come with only one key.

smitchy73

Well according to what you have posted it does look like they have broken the rules, in which case i'd go back and ask for a full refund, if not go to Trading Standards or the Police and report them, you will need proof of it being an ex-rental and it may end up being your word against theirs, as they may just turn around and say that they told you, or that it was a trainee and he 'forgot'.
You could also contact Arnold Clark's head office and speak to them about it too, not sure they'd like the adverse publicity this could cause, there is also a helpdesk at WhatCar that like to get involved in these type's of cases too.

s1lv3rdal5

Hi Smitchy73.
I told Arnold Clark that I was "cancelling the contract" and that I was not buying the car, they refunded my deposit.
That in itself says something, as they would not have refunded if they were in the right.
The V5 registration document stated the previous owner was a Hire Car Company.
My posting was just meant as a Warning for others, you expect this behaviour from Arfur Daley, not a Ford main dealer.
The salesman was not a trainee, I have his business card.
Rest Assured that I have already taken this matter elsewhere.

harveybobbles

But the car WAS one owner - Hertz pr whoever. Its just ot'd had several drivers.

Bit like a Lease car is one owner but COULD have been driven b ya few people. We used to buy cars from a Group4. the V5 was in the leasing companies name. so it techinically WAS one owner, its just itd been driven by the day shift, the night shift and the inbetween shift.

The law you quote above does say "one previous private owner"

CPR's sec 4.5

Creating a misleading impression that a vehicle has one previous private owner – for example through the use of statements such as 'one previous owner' – when in fact it is an ex-rental vehicle that has been rented out to many drivers.

Where as, it would have been described as "one owner" or "one company owner".

So, as a motor trader I fail to see what the problem is.

I do like this though:

To all potential car buyers. If you intend buying from Arnold Clark, They will try and sell you a Dog of a car, that has been abused and thrashed

Because all privately owned cars get driven so well?

How will you know how any 2nd hand car has been driven? One of my neighbours has a Lexis LS430 thing. Stunning piece of kit - gets washed and polished every weekend. He's a pipe smoker in his late 50's, plays golf and is retired already. However, he drives like a right !!!!!!!. And despite the cleanliness of his car, I'd hate to be the next owner as its been red lined for almost 2 years lol.

Joe_Horner

"taking it elsewhere" isn't going to go anywhere if they've refunded your deposit and cancelled the sale so willingly.

Mistakes do happen with this sort of thing and they only become a problem when a company is consistently "trying it on" or refuses to correct the situation when it comes to light.

Frankly, given how quickly and correctly they've dealt with it, I'd be a little concerned about them "taking it elsewhere" if they happen to see your post!

DaveF327

Does it really matter? I bought a car from Fords of Winsford which turned out to be an ex-rental car. It was 9 months old, had only one key and a load of cosmetic scratches on the interior boot panelling, but other than that, ran like a dream and lasted me for another eleven years without any real problems until old age.

I think you're being a bit picky.

s1lv3rdal5

It DOES matter. Arnold Clark BROKE THE LAW.
And I am not at all concerned if Arnold Clark decide to try and sue me, as I have told the TRUTH, something that Arnold Clark wouldn't know if it bit them on their bum...

gasmanmartin

Arnold Clark have not broke the law.

The car you were buying was USED and had 1 previous owner

The fact it was a hire car makes no difference and they probably cancelled so quickly because if you opening post is anything to go by, why would they want the hassle?

End of.