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

Niowrtt

I have it in writing that I can reject the car if the listed faults are not corrected to standard (no mention of if other faults are found, hmm..).

Section 9.20 on page 29 of the following seems fairly clear that this is a right:
http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/676408/oft1241.pdf

Within the reasonable period after
the sale, consumers do not lose their
right to reject the vehicle and require
their money back simply because they
ask for or agree to let you try to repair
the vehicle. Where a consumer agrees
to allow you to repair the faulty vehicle
(within the reasonable period after the
sale) he is still entitled to a refund if the
repair turns out to be unsatisfactory or
was not done promptly enough.

No citation back to the SoGA paragraph but I'd assume the OFT know their stuff.

Joe_Horner

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

at this point you cannot reject it, you have an agreement with them to investigate and repair.

SOGA s.35(6)(a) is absolutely clear on that. Agreeing to a repair attempt does NOT signify acceptance of the goods, so rejection is still an option.

(6)The buyer is not by virtue of this section deemed to have accepted the goods merely because—
(a)he asks for, or agrees to, their repair by or under an arrangement with the seller,

OP, it sounds like the dealer might be behaving properly but he may be trying to string you along until everyone gets bored and goes away. If he doesn't manage to bring the car to an acceptable standard in a reasonable time then don't give him second chances.

Allow one go at fixing agreed problems (may not be everything the other garage picked up, but should be the important stuff). If it comes back sorted then great, if not then reject.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Within the reasonable period after
the sale, consumers do not lose their
right to reject the vehicle and require
their money back simply because they
ask for or agree to let you try to repair
the vehicle. Where a consumer agrees
to allow you to repair the faulty vehicle
(within the reasonable period after the
sale) he is still entitled to a refund if the
repair turns out to be unsatisfactory or
was not done promptly enough.


the bit i underlined is the key phrase, the interpretation here is that now the OP has agree'd to a repair he can only reject IF the repair is substandard. so ultimately at this point he cannot reject it UNLESS the repair is not timely (i.e repaired within the agree'd time scale), is not to standard.

if the OP has agree'd to a repair, then decides an hour later he can get a refund, then thats his entitlement, if the seller takes longer than the agree'd time scale that is not caused by the garage's own stalling and fault then OP has entitlement to refund, if the repair is done but substandard using worn parts etc etc the OP is entitled to refund, but if the seller is fullfilling his obligation, is quickly carrying out his repair to the vehicle using good quality parts the seller is entitled to refuse refund untill the repair is carried out and the vehicle inspected by the OP.

Tilt

Niowrtt wrote: »

Update:

I took the car back to the trader today and rejected it in writing, but have been convinced to let them try to fix it first.

I have a promise that the faults found will be inspected and repaired if found to be genuine. I can then have the car independently reinspected at the specialist, and if it is still not correct then I can reject it and have a full refund.

This seems okay if the car really can be sorted (I have serious doubts about this) but I made some mistakes in agreeing this, one that I have and will drop off and pick the car up. If it proves to not be fixed correctly, that's a 400 mile total trip in addition to the miles I've done just today. Plus, I'm car-less until it is fixed or I have the money back to pick up a runabout.

You mean that you didn't ask for a courtesy car as part of the 'agreement'? :eek:

Can I point out that yes, by agreeing to allow the seller to repair, you still have the option to reject using the SOGA if necessary (by taking the seller through the small claims/county court).

BUT The court process can be a long drawn out affair which will incur the OP with quite a few (recoverable) expenses on the way. And even when the OP gets his judgement, there is no guarantee he will get all (or any) of his money back. Rouge dealers know exactly how to play the game here and have no doubt done so many many times.

So it is always better to exhaust other options than the SOGA first.

Oh, and BTW someone in the thread mentioned Consumer Direct. It no longer exists, you have to go through CAB to get to Trading Standards.

Niowrtt

Here's a final update from me.

The trader had the car for inspection. They disputed every point raised except two, leaving £300 to £400 of repairs, and disputed that it would fail an MOT. Beyond having the independent inspection (as required under SoGA) I was shown some of the more serious faults so am sure it would not pass an MOT.

At this point I was told that 'I could take them to court if I liked, but I wouldn't have a leg to stand on'. This I believe is not true under SoGA. Until this point the trader had not said anything to make me think he was untrustworthy but this felt like a threat.

I was told I was definitely not getting a full refund. After a while I was offered a 90% refund with no expenses. I've decided to go with that and put this business to an end rather than go through the courts.

I feel totally ripped off.

steve-L

Niowrtt wrote: »

Here's a final update from me.

The trader had the car for inspection. They disputed every point raised except two, leaving £300 to £400 of repairs, and disputed that it would fail an MOT. Beyond having the independent inspection (as required under SoGA) I was shown some of the more serious faults so am sure it would not pass an MOT.

At this point I was told that 'I could take them to court if I liked, but I wouldn't have a leg to stand on'. This I believe is not true under SoGA. Until this point the trader had not said anything to make me think he was untrustworthy but this felt like a threat.

I was told I was definitely not getting a full refund. After a while I was offered a 90% refund with no expenses. I've decided to go with that and put this business to an end rather than go through the courts.

I feel totally ripped off.

I think you did WELL!
90% back is quite good.....
As Tilt already said this process is long and drawn out.... and you might not get anything back....

Not all expenses would be covered if for instance you had extra that comes up once you submit the case... (I'm sure there is some mechanism but we had extra insurance that accrued after we submitted the claim)

As Tilt also say's these rogue traders know exactly how to play...
and even when they are in the wrong can drag it out and drag it out.

You are 10% down and free to get a new car and on with your life!
Count it a success!

motorguy

Niowrtt wrote: »

Here's a final update from me.

The trader had the car for inspection. They disputed every point raised except two, leaving £300 to £400 of repairs, and disputed that it would fail an MOT. Beyond having the independent inspection (as required under SoGA) I was shown some of the more serious faults so am sure it would not pass an MOT.

At this point I was told that 'I could take them to court if I liked, but I wouldn't have a leg to stand on'. This I believe is not true under SoGA. Until this point the trader had not said anything to make me think he was untrustworthy but this felt like a threat.

I was told I was definitely not getting a full refund. After a while I was offered a 90% refund with no expenses. I've decided to go with that and put this business to an end rather than go through the courts.

I feel totally ripped off.

Sounds like the dealer knows exactly how to play the system to the max.

I think you did right to take the money - they'd string this out for months or years in court.

Best to cut your loses and have nothing more to do with them - and tell as many people as poss what a bunch of sheisters they are.

Niowrtt

It's not quite over.

Due to the distance involved, I posted the signed V5 to the garage for themselves to sign and post on to the DVLA.

So, two months on, guess who's just found out they're still liable for insuring and taxing the car?

I did read the warnings on the V5 about this, so it's as much my fault really. The trader said they'd sign and send it on but I should have known by then not to trust them. I really can't think of much they've done which I'd consider above-board.

DVLA say to send a written letter with the details. I'll get that done and hope this mess finally ends. I should have enough of a dated paper trail with registered letters to avoid being held liable for any fines.