Car purchase half paid with creditcard and problems.

tara1082

Hi there we purchased a car from a family run garage on 19th sept and used it for around 1 week and the handbrake is stuck on and we could not move the car,(it has electric handbrake) its a renault scenic. Anyways we had it towed to a garage by the AA and have been told it needs a new motor for the handbrake, cost £700 + vat. I rang the garage we purchased the car from and he said "sold as seen written on receipt so he wont do nothing".
I was really upset as i thought i was buying from a decent garage and would have some help if any problems. The manager was really rude to my partner telling her not to call him anymore.
Now i have a question: Are we covered through our creditcard as i paid half in cash and half on creditcard (0% for 12 months)? The total price was £2000 which is alot of money to us. Any help would be great. Thanks

lisyloo

The trader is wrong, you have statutory rights.
Yes you are covered through your credit card company but they will want evidence that you have contacted the garage first.

Who bought the car? You or your partner?
I'm just thinking that the credit card company may not be happy with contact from your partner if the partner is nothing to do with the contract between you and the garage.
You need some evidence of what you have tried to do to resolve the problem.
This could be a proof of posting of a letter, recorded delivery receipt, list of phone calls (itemised phone bills may show them), copies of emails ideally with delivery/read receipts.
The card company are likely only to help once you can show you have pursed the company first.

I would write a letter stating what you want them to do i.e. fix the defects and pay 75p to send it recorded delivery, then print off the receipt showing it was delivered and put that in with your claim.

The only problem is that credit card claims can take some weeks or months to sort out.

The alternative is to go thorugh the small claims track in the county court which I think costs about £35. You would need a report from the second garage about the repairs needed (or for them to attend the court).

GemBlueTopaz1984

Sorry don't have any info on your rights but I have a renault scenic and had a similar issue, button start wouldn't work and couldn't release the hand brake to do a push start. In the manual it shows the manual release for the brake as a lever in the boot, if you lift the boot base off near the seats there is a plastic cap that you have to snap off and under is the lever that reases the brake.

dalesrider

tara1082 wrote: »

I rang the garage we purchased the car from and he said "sold as seen written on receipt so he wont do nothing".

Have a word with trading standards/consumer direct.

That garage needs to be reminded that they cannot say anything like that.

Yes. You maybe covered on the credit card. Who's card was used to pay. needs to contact the card provider and have a word with them.
As it was not faulty from the start there won't be any chargeback option. So it is looking at CCA.
But as other posters have said you need to do some leg work yourself 1st.

thenudeone

Traders can't get out of obligations under the Sale of Goods Act just by saying "sold as seen" (or anything else).

However, those rights apply to what you bought at the time. Things are going to break and wear out on a second hand car all the time. One of these might be a week after you bought the car but it doesn't mean the car was faulty when you bought it.

If the handbrake was working fine when you bought it and is now seized, it suggests a mechanical failure that occurred after the purchase.

I think you would need more information about the cause of the fault.

chattychappy

lisyloo wrote: »

The card company are likely only to help once you can show you have pursed the company first.

I agree with your post. However though the above might be a practical approach, as a reminder, this is not the legal position. Subject to all the other issues discussed, s75 makes the CC jointly and severally liable with the merchant for performance. Ie it stands equal with the garage. When claiming from the CC, you do not have to show you have exhausted your remedies with the garage anymore than you have to show the garage you have exhausted your remedies with the CC. If covered by s75, the OP is entitled to choose just to go after the CC if they so elect. In this event, it would be up to the CC to handle the garage if they wished to recover from them.

The OP should be aware of this so as to be "on guard" if faced with CC fob-offs or attempts to make out that the OP has to go back to the garage.

Being really pedantic:
The card company are likely only to help ...
They are not really "helping". By authorising the transaction, they became legally bound to perform the obligations under the contract for supply of the car. They must peform, or pay damages for the breach.

S75 is a nasty piece of legislation from a CC's point of view and personally I think it tilts things too far in favour of the consumer. But the law is the law.

I would always recommend a cooperative approach (that looks better in the event of litigation anyway) - in this case going back to the garage first. But it is important to know the legal position so that you can make an informed decision about how and when to involve the CC.

(I have nothing to add on the subject of the merits of the claim. I know nothing about cars.)

lisyloo

If covered by s75, the OP is entitled to choose just to go after the CC if they so elect.

I've said this before and someone quoted some rules at me. Don't know if you'll be able to find the post from a search.
But in any event if a bank/CC Company have procedures it's very hard to enforce something else (even if your right) unless you want to actually take the CC company to court.
If not then it's probably best to at least try to co-operate with the CC company first,.

chattychappy

lisyloo wrote: »

I've said this before and someone quoted some rules at me..

They were wrong and you were right. It's in s75 itself. I don't need to search!

lisyloo wrote: »

But in any event if a bank/CC Company have procedures it's very hard to enforce something else (even if your right) unless you want to actually take the CC company to court.
If not then it's probably best to at least try to co-operate with the CC company first,.

I would always cooperate/follow CC procedures insofar as they are reasonable and without prejudice to my rights. But as we know, operators often don't know the law or follow a script that is inconsistent with the law and designed to fire fight these complaints away. At the first sign of this - eg being told I have to deal with the garage first - I would fire off the first written complaint. Too often these things drag on. A pre-action letter can end up elevating a case such that someone senior enough to resolve it takes some action. (Engaging a CC whilst they can still recover through chargeback might mean they are more likely to concede liability.)