Sale of goods act and refund of faulty 2nd hand car

Niowrtt

With apologies for raising another thread on a well trodden subject, can someone confirm my legal rights here?

• I bought a second hand car 3 weeks ago from a trader. The cost was in the region of £4000 and several hundred over the book value price. The car was sold without faults and was claimed (no evidence provided) to have been checked by a main dealer for the marque. It was sold with 11 months MOT.
• One of the items specially mentioned by me that must be okay, and explicitly stated by the trader as being checked by the main dealer, was the auto gearbox. Stated verbally and in an email.
• On the drive home, the car threw a warning for lean fuel mix and restricted itself to 2,500 rpm, but recovered after a few minutes. This has happened at least once per day.
• Due to this recurring every day, the car was restricted to local trips of under 2 miles (as a precaution) and booked in with a specialist for service and inspection. It took a couple of weeks to get a slot for that to be done. The car was serviced first as it was not serviced by the trader and was required by the service schedule.
• The specialist has panned the car, suffice it to say that it could not have passed a correctly done MOT in the last few months, and out of the many mot-able items which were found at fault only one was shown as an advisory on the MOT. The costs to make the vehicle road worthy (not perfect, just safe and drivable) have been quoted as £2,100 (and that's not main dealer rates). Some issues which would have cause and mot failure were simple adjustments, such as the dipped headlights pointing literally skywards. Other issues were raised like a bald tyre, but while I'd expect legal tyres on the car at point of sale it is the least of my concerns here.
• The initial error code which triggered me to book it in for inspection was identified as a not serious issue, and not related to other faults.
• The gearbox was found to have a leak (repair estimate included in the value above) though it's not possible to state that this was present when I bought the car.
• The specialist advised that my best course of action was to invoke the sale of goods act and return the car for a refund as it is not fit for purpose. He was very clear on this, offer to back up his inspection work and even suggested that Vosa be involved as the car should not have been issued with a MOT.
• Following the inspection the car was driven in heavy rain for the first time and broke down, and currently does not drive, throwing errors related to the throttle position sensor. It was recovered by the RAC for the 500 yards to my home.
• I have called the trader today and stated that the car is not fit for purpose. They have requested it be delivered back to them for inspection.

The question is therefore do I have a legal right to ask for my money back and return the car?

The list of mechanical faults identified gives me no confidence that repairs could bring the car up to the value paid or that this could be done in a timely manner.

My concerns are:

• It's been 3 weeks since I bought it with today my first contact with the trader. Is that too long to wait?
• The car has been serviced while in my possession. I worry this may indicate 'acceptance' under SoGA.

The car was paid for in full on a credit card if that might help me.

Apologies again for this long post on an old subject, but you might guess this has me extremely worried.

forgotmyname

If its been parked for a while or had a flat battery then you can get issues with it running in for a while as the ECU relearns the correct fuel mapping.

Short trips under 2 miles wont have allowed it to learn that properly. It needs a decent drive with variable speeds and conditions.

Similar issue with the lights are the automatically adjusted? Flat battery losing the settings?

MOT'd a month before you bought it so fairly unlikely that VOSA will investigate. You should have inspected the tyres when buying it.
But also you should inspect them and check the pressures weekly. How did you not notice the bald tyre? But some garages say 2mm or more is bald.

Gearbox leak. Could be a lot of things. Did they actualy show it dripping or a wet patch thats been there since its last service?

Throttle sensor could be the cause of all the running issues.

Obviously without seeing the car i could be way off the mark. But just an outside opinion from the other side of the fence so to speak. And no i dont sell cars.

The fact you mention you paid over the book value has me wondering if your having 2nd thoughts. Even if these are minor faults the seller with sort.

motorguy

Niowrtt wrote: »

With apologies for raising another thread on a well trodden subject, can someone confirm my legal rights here?

• I bought a second hand car 3 weeks ago from a trader. The cost was in the region of £4000 and several hundred over the book value price. The car was sold without faults and was claimed (no evidence provided) to have been checked by a main dealer for the marque. It was sold with 11 months MOT.
• One of the items specially mentioned by me that must be okay, and explicitly stated by the trader as being checked by the main dealer, was the auto gearbox. Stated verbally and in an email.
• On the drive home, the car threw a warning for lean fuel mix and restricted itself to 2,500 rpm, but recovered after a few minutes. This has happened at least once per day.
• Due to this recurring every day, the car was restricted to local trips of under 2 miles (as a precaution) and booked in with a specialist for service and inspection. It took a couple of weeks to get a slot for that to be done. The car was serviced first as it was not serviced by the trader and was required by the service schedule.
• The specialist has panned the car, suffice it to say that it could not have passed a correctly done MOT in the last few months, and out of the many mot-able items which were found at fault only one was shown as an advisory on the MOT. The costs to make the vehicle road worthy (not perfect, just safe and drivable) have been quoted as £2,100 (and that's not main dealer rates). Some issues which would have cause and mot failure were simple adjustments, such as the dipped headlights pointing literally skywards. Other issues were raised like a bald tyre, but while I'd expect legal tyres on the car at point of sale it is the least of my concerns here.
• The initial error code which triggered me to book it in for inspection was identified as a not serious issue, and not related to other faults.
• The gearbox was found to have a leak (repair estimate included in the value above) though it's not possible to state that this was present when I bought the car.
• The specialist advised that my best course of action was to invoke the sale of goods act and return the car for a refund as it is not fit for purpose. He was very clear on this, offer to back up his inspection work and even suggested that Vosa be involved as the car should not have been issued with a MOT.
• Following the inspection the car was driven in heavy rain for the first time and broke down, and currently does not drive, throwing errors related to the throttle position sensor. It was recovered by the RAC for the 500 yards to my home.
• I have called the trader today and stated that the car is not fit for purpose. They have requested it be delivered back to them for inspection.

The question is therefore do I have a legal right to ask for my money back and return the car?

The list of mechanical faults identified gives me no confidence that repairs could bring the car up to the value paid or that this could be done in a timely manner.

My concerns are:

• It's been 3 weeks since I bought it with today my first contact with the trader. Is that too long to wait?
• The car has been serviced while in my possession. I worry this may indicate 'acceptance' under SoGA.

The car was paid for in full on a credit card if that might help me.

Apologies again for this long post on an old subject, but you might guess this has me extremely worried.

Speaking with my motor trader hat on here, i think you have a very good case for rejecting this car under that sale of goods act.

Far too much wrong with it, and a massive bill looming.

But you MUST act quickly. Phone consumer direct as soon as you can - they should be open tomorrow - and get their take on this. You will need to follow their steps on this exactly though - which will mean you being without the car until this is sorted.

Let us know how you get on.

colino

Jag? A good fettle would sort out the TPS connection, two bolts to tighten to stop the gearbox drip, but then again a rival trader who thinks they specialise is hardly likely to tell you that. Then again, if it's a Citroen CV, who knows?

Niowrtt

Regarding the battery, that's a good point. However, the car has been driven at least twice at distance - the drive home from the trader was more than a hundred miles and I'd driven to relatives at a 100 miles round trip once or twice early on. The basic "user visible" problems occurred on all those trips. I perhaps shouldn't have bothered to mention those minor points, they were there to "paint the story" with the main issue that on having the vehicle inspected a specialist in the marque has said in no uncertain terms that the car is not fit for purpose or to drive and strongly suggested that I should invoke SoGA.

forgotmyname wrote: »

MOT'd a month before you bought it so fairly unlikely that VOSA will investigate. You should have inspected the tyres when buying it.
But also you should inspect them and check the pressures weekly. How did you not notice the bald tyre? But some garages say 2mm or more is bald.

I agree I should have inspected better. I remember running my hand along the tyres, but did not notice this inner edge wear. The specialist did suggest that the "crabbing" caused by the suspension faults could affect tyre wear both front and rear. I'm not technically minded really - my experience with previous cars is that a trader/dealer has replaced balding tyres before I picked the car up.

forgotmyname wrote: »

Gearbox leak. Could be a lot of things. Did they actualy show it dripping or a wet patch thats been there since its last service?

Definitely leaking. And now I've been shown what to look for, I can see the drips on my driveway (which is far from a smooth tarmac affair so didn't show it up easily) - it's a clear liquid rather the black oil you might expect.

forgotmyname wrote: »

Obviously without seeing the car i could be way off the mark. But just an outside opinion from the other side of the fence so to speak. And no i dont sell cars.

The fact you mention you paid over the book value has me wondering if your having 2nd thoughts. Even if these are minor faults the seller with sort.

I do appreciate the input. I mentioned paying over book price to reinforce that I expected the car to be of reasonable quality, and am willing to pay for that (the "book" in this case being all of the values reported by a HPI check, whatcar and glasses guide).
It's only because I've been told of its condition that I'm upset, the model itself I've been lusting after for a long time and this felt as solid as any I'd driven, given my 'average joe' perception. An ideal outcome would be a direct swap for another of the exact same model and year but without the problems.


pgilc1:
Thanks, I appreciate input from another trade pro. I will phone them on Monday (Citizen's Advice are open 9-1pm on Xmas eve). I am perfectly willing to be without the car, as I will not be driving it again unless directly to the trader (and even then I'm considering getting it trailered)!


colino:
I'm quite happy with the specialist's report and that the faults are genuine. I haven't mentioned everything reported, I have an A4 sheet full of items here. Despite the potential for a big payday, his recommendations were not for him to do the work but for me to take it back to the trader. The cost estimate for the work was done on my request.

muckybutt

Having been in a similar situation earlier this year it depends how long you have had the car.

As I understand it to return the car you must do that in a relatively short period of time ie within a week, after that time it its a case of contacting the dealer with the list of faults etc you have to give them the right to inspect the faults and or repair them, they can also give you a refund which might not be the full amount you paid for the car.

In my case I contacted the dealer with fault number 1 who repaid my repair bill after the turbo boost pipe split within a day of taking it home. A month down the line and the clutch started to go, he ignored me I gave him several quotes for repair, eventually contacted me to ask to see the car, took the car in and he said cut his and my loss and he repaid me in full there and then so didnt lose anything.

spacey2012

What make of car.
If it is a French Auto, they need a very good condition battery or they throw the gearbox limp mode like confetti at a wedding.

patman99

As for the items that would fail an MOT, you can take a vehicle to 3 seperate MOT centres & each will give a different opinion.

You haven't mentioned what make the car is. The issues you have experienced might well be common to that type of car.

At least the trader is happy to take the vehicle back for inspection.

harveybobbles

Speaking as another motor dealer..

You could reject the car due to its condition. But why didn't you take it back to the dealer you bought it off first of all?

They will need to be given chance to fix any faults before you can really go down the SOGA route.

By your own admission, you drove the car for a few weeks knowing there was a warning light coming on and off.

If the light came on "on the drive home" then I would have phoned the dealer and/or turned around and gone back and got them to reset it.

motorguy

muckybutt wrote: »

Having been in a similar situation earlier this year it depends how long you have had the car.

As I understand it to return the car you must do that in a relatively short period of time ie within a week, after that time it its a case of contacting the dealer with the list of faults etc you have to give them the right to inspect the faults and or repair them, they can also give you a refund which might not be the full amount you paid for the car.

No. Your understanding is wrong.

The period for rejection due to non acceptance is roughly up to one month. If you do reject due to non acceptance then you do not give the seller the option to repair.

motorguy

harveybobbles wrote: »

Speaking as another motor dealer..

You could reject the car due to its condition. But why didn't you take it back to the dealer you bought it off first of all?

They will need to be given chance to fix any faults before you can really go down the SOGA route.

By your own admission, you drove the car for a few weeks knowing there was a warning light coming on and off.

If the light came on "on the drive home" then I would have phoned the dealer and/or turned around and gone back and got them to reset it.

I think its unacceptable that there is a repair bill for the car of £2,100 on a car three weeks after it was bought.

I think there is a very strong case for rejection here.

The O/P may wish to give the seller the opportunity to resolve all these issues, but i'd say at the moment - and the clock is ticking on this - they could force a refund