£13,000 new and its broken

davidlloyd

I recently bought a brand new motorcycle for £13,000 from the dealership on 6th May 2013. I picked the bike up on 27th May and returned it on 4th June. I was unable to select 1st gear (every time) and when eventually did, it would jump out of gear and into neutral making it extremely dangerous to ride. I returned the bike as soon as I startedto experience the later problem as I thought the earlier one was ‘running in’ issues.

The dealer principal instructed his chief technician to take the bike out and test it. As a result I was told that the clutch plates need replacing, apparently this was an ‘inherent problem’ with this model.

I Contacted the Manufacturers and asked customer services if this was the case, denied of course. They did authorise fitting the new clutch plates however.

I was asked to contact dealer principal on 12th June as the repairs had been made. I was told the bike was now 100% correct and should give me no further problems.

I asked for a replacement bike under the Sales of Goods Act1979 as I believed that when I purchased the motorcycle it was not fit for purpose amongst other things (to be honest I could probably hit all of Martins SAD FART headings)

I was informed by the dealer principal that his obligation was to repair the motorcycle only.

It now has over 300miles on the clock (I returned it with less than 150miles) It has a second BRAND NEW CLUTCH and has been ridden extensively by everybody else, except me.

Financially, I loaned half of the purchase price from a lender (Black Horse) as I traded in my old motor cycle for the rest.

I have today received an email from the Manufacturers stating that they have been informed by the dealer that the bike is repaired and no longer jumps out of gear and therefore they see no reason why they should replace the motorcycle but referred me instead to the dealer principal.

Does anyone have any experience in this area and can advise me further please as I am so very, very angry :mad: and feel quite honestly like Ihave been taken for a ride…no pun intended..

pinkshoes

If it's repaired with a new clutch and works fine, what's the problem?

A new one could have the same issue!

arcon5

You can't necessarily demand a replacement. Under SoGA you have reasonable to time to inspect the goods before you are considered to have 'accepted' them, thus any remedy would effectively be their choice. But within this reasonable time you can reject faulty goods for a refund. Acceptance occurs when you indicate such or if you fail to act in a way that would be considered the contrary.

So in my opinion you are not yet considered to have accepted the goods! Thus, can reject the faulty bike. However, the bike is no longer faulty so at present you have no grounds to reject. If the clutch goes again within the next few weeks you would possibly still have this option available to you - however, if say it goes again in 6 months, a repair would be an option for them.

shaun_from_Africa

arcon5 wrote: »

So in my opinion you are not yet considered to have accepted the goods! Thus, can reject the faulty bike. However, the bike is no longer faulty so at present you have no grounds to reject.

Even though a repair has been carried out and the bike is no longer faulty does not mean that the consumer has lost their right of rejection if the goods are not deemed to have been accepted.
This is covered under S35-6 of the SOGA.

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, or

arcon5

That doesn't say he still has the right to reject the goods, just that acceptance is not deemed to have occurred. For which I agree, ops not deemed to have accepted the goods at this stage so if the fault recurs or the repair is unsuccessful op can claim a refund - but now the repair is complete and successfull, although ops still within the period before acceptance, the goods now conform to contract and goods can only be rejected if they don't conform to contract and the terms implied by law.

agrinnall

Ignoring what the manufacturer says about it being an inherent problem, as they have a vested interest, what do other people who have bought the same model say? There must be forums for bike owners out there, and if the dealer is correct that this is a common problem you can be sure people will have been keen to talk about it.

If it turns out that the dealer was talking nonsense and this was a one-off then your repaired bike should be as good as any other one now. But if it is a problem experienced by others, and particularly if the repair doesn't resolve the problem, then you'd be in a better position to press your case to reject completely (and buy a different model).

dalesrider

agrinnall wrote: »

There must be forums for bike owners out .

There are masses of them. Many that relate to certain bikes.

I always think it strange when in threads like this. No mention is made of make or model.

30 secs on the internet and if it's a well know issue it would have been found.

To be fair if the bike has only failed once and been fixed, is it right to reject it and request a new one....
If it is as they say and a "inherent problem". Then odds on its just going to do the same again.
Or is it more of a case of the Op has not got on with the bike.

davidlloyd

dalesrider wrote: »

There are masses of them. Many that relate to certain bikes.

I always think it strange when in threads like this. No mention is made of make or model.

30 secs on the internet and if it's a well know issue it would have been found.

To be fair if the bike has only failed once and been fixed, is it right to reject it and request a new one....
If it is as they say and a "inherent problem". Then odds on its just going to do the same again.
Or is it more of a case of the Op has not got on with the bike.

In some respects your right as that was the first thing I did, checked it out on the internet...owners club etc. This was a problem in the past with this model but apparently it was ironed out by 2006. I have asked for a replacement, same model, same spec...I love the bike..just not the service..

Hintza

davidlloyd wrote: »

I have asked for a replacement, same model, same spec...I love the bike..just not the service..

So the bike is fixed and back with you you still want another ? :eek:

davidlloyd

Hintza wrote: »

So the bike is fixed and back with you you still want another ? :eek:

No its still with the dealer...my contract was for a NEW motorcycle, not a 'unfit for purpose' motorcycle then repaired and now ridden on by god knows who...Yes I do still want 'another'..well actually what I want is what I paid for a brand new, fit for purpose motorcycle..