New car ... problems with car and problems with garage

System

wba31 wrote: »

I second this. A garage may give you a loan car, but they dont have open insurance for people to drive the loan car, so need you to have the cover on your own policy, which is 7 days.

In this case the garage has it's own insurance, their only requirement is that you are fully comp on your own policy to cover you on theirs, so the time frame you are covered for is irrelevant, if you had an accident, you'd go through the garage's insurance, not your own.

fivetide wrote: »

That's a long holiday and a bit of a failing on behalf of the garage really. they should have got it at change over.

You are lucky in that your policy does allow you to drive other cars 3rd party. A lot of them have removed the privilage for younger drivers. The £36 for the temporary cover isn't a disaster as the price of this has rocketed since the continous insurance came in (I found it was cheaper to start a new policy and cancel it than buy temporary insurance on a car I was selling, that's how bad it is) but you are out of pocket for no fault of your own so I'd hope you have a good claim. Not entirely sure what legislation might enforce it though.

5t.

Hi

Sorry if I've caused confusion here. My policy states that I'm not allowed to drive other cars third party, only a car lent to me by a garage whilst mine is in for repair. It's the first line on my Aviva policy.

I agree, the garage should have applied for the V5 at the time of change, simple as that. The fact it seems like the previous owner is on a long holiday is probably me putting it across the wrong way. It took forever for the garage to chase the person for the V5, probably 2 weeks, then they find out he's on holiday, so add another 2 weeks onto that (if he's enjoying a long holiday) and there's simply not enough time before the car needs taxing.

psychic_teabag wrote: »

But wouldn't that be 7 days cover that your own policy provided for the garage's car ? The garage policy wouldn't be conditional on you driving their car on your policy, merely that you have full cover on your own car.

If your policy was comprehensive for your own car, but didn't cover driving any other car at all, then the garage's requirement would still be satisfied. I can't see how your policy having additional flexibility would reduce the cover of the garage's policy. (But it could also mean that there are two separate policies in force for the first 7 days, which might cause confusion over which policy would pay out over a claim.)

Again sorry for the confusion. Garages use traders insurance policies, which cover all vehicles in possession of the garage. It simply stops having to have individual policies for every vehicle they own. Due to the nature of the policies (ie garages being able to lend cars, test driving etc), they restrict the use of young drivers on the policy. It does make sense, as I would be seen as a high risk to any insurer anyway (even though I do drive sensibly) so why would these policies be any different!

It was my insurance that covered me to drive their car, not theirs as theirs did not cover me. Please see quote from my insurance:
"Any vehicle loaned to the policyholder or any other person or classes of persons entitled to drive as described below, for a maximum of 7 days from a garage, motor engineer or vehicle repairer while the vehicle registration described above is being either serviced, repaired or having an MOT test."

The reason I feel I am within my rights to invoice them the insurance bill is:
#1: The car should be in working condition (I bought it 3 weeks ago, shouldn't it have been tested before it goes up for sale!!!!)
#2: I feel the car should be fixed by now, just too long (they told me it might be done by end of this week, again too long)
#3: I'm still paying for the payments on my new car, the payments for my standard insurance policy every month (both totalling over £350 anyway), so then why on top of that should I pay a £36 fee?

I'm not made of money!

Many thanks

System

Just spoken to the garage, another week on the KA, another £36 wasted on top of the £230 a month for insurance anyway. Not in the best of moods!

System

Still not got my car back, do I have any right to refuse the car, I want my money back minus the deposit. He's had the car longer than I have (nearly 3 weeks)

Most mechanical car faults should be rectified within 3 weeks

Tilt

Under the SOGA you should give them reasonable time to rectify and in your case I believe you have. I think you would have a decent claim here to reject the car as being not fit for the purpose which is what I suggest you should now consider. How did you pay for the car? Was it an HP agreement?

System

Tilt wrote: »

Under the SOGA you should give them reasonable time to rectify and in your case I believe you have. I think you would have a decent claim here to reject the car as being not fit for the purpose which is what I suggest you should now consider. How did you pay for the car? Was it an HP agreement?

Hi Tilt,

Thanks for your answer

Yes, the car was purchased under a HP agreement with a third party finance company (Santander). Would you reccomend speaking to them, sending a letter?

Thanks

Tilt

Yes, deffo because technically it's their car so the are jointly responsible. Speak to them by phone first and explain situ but make it clear that you are considering rejecting the car as being not fit for the purpose. Let us know what they say/advse.