blown turbo

arcon5

Retrogamer wrote: »

It shouldn't matter as it failed in such a short time.
The Sales of Goods Act states that goods sold must be fit for purpose and last a reasonable amount of time. As it's failed under 6 months then the OP should have some come back.

If / when it's fixed i'd recommend moving onto another car instead if possible.

Of course it matters.

The 6 month rule is merely who the burden of prove is on.

If for example I buy a Mondeo with 130k miles on then the DMF goes (assuming it's never been changed), would you honestly say the car is faulty and i'm entitled to a full and free repair? Or agree i've bought used goods with lots of wear and tear and the DMF has actually lasted a very long period of time for this model of car?

SoGA also factors in price and description. And the car will be described as x miles & y years.

As it's failed under 6 months then the OP should have some come back.

To focus inparticular on this point...

It's not failed after a few months, it's failed after 7 years and x mileage (or it's been replaced in the service history, whatever the time that has lapsed between then and now). People seem to take the logic that I bought it a week ago, so it's lasted a week. When in fact this type of thinking is incorrect.

Retrogamer

forgotmyname wrote: »

Although as sid several times, They should be fixing it at no cost to you.

But if thats not going well you can get it repaired for a fraction of the amount you suggest its going to cost.

Pick a turbo up for under £200 and £150 to get it fitted easily. Possibly even less.

Unless the turbo has failed from carbon / sludge in the oil and the fault will happen again rapidly on the new turbo until the cause of the problem has been identified. On most cars it's normally not an issue, but the 1.6 turbo diesels from Ford and Peugeot are well known for bad oil circulation and premature / repeated turbo failures.

arcon5 wrote: »

Of course it matters.

The 6 month rule is merely who the burden of prove is on.

If for example I buy a Mondeo with 130k miles on then the DMF goes (assuming it's never been changed), would you honestly say the car is faulty and i'm entitled to a full and free repair? Or agree i've bought used goods with lots of wear and tear and the DMF has actually lasted a very long period of time for this model of car?

SoGA also factors in price and description. And the car will be described as x miles & y years.



To focus inparticular on this point...

It's not failed after a few months, it's failed after 7 years and x mileage (or it's been replaced in the service history, whatever the time that has lapsed between then and now). People seem to take the logic that I bought it a week ago, so it's lasted a week. When in fact this type of thinking is incorrect.

Goods sold must be fit for purpose and last a reasonable amount of time.

I would wager that paying £3500 for a car and only having it last a few months before an expensive failure would constitute not lasting a reasonable amount of time, hence the dealership should be liable for repairs.

Since the turbo failure happened within 6 months, the dealership would have to prove the turbo failed due to misuse, or we fall to my point above about reasonable amount of time.

vaio

Retrogamer wrote: »

...... As it's failed under 6 months then the OP should have some come back......

arcon5 wrote: »

.........To focus inparticular on this point...

It's not failed after a few months, it's failed after 7 years and x mileage (or it's been replaced in the service history, whatever the time that has lapsed between then and now). People seem to take the logic that I bought it a week ago, so it's lasted a week. When in fact this type of thinking is incorrect.

nah...SoG applies to second hand goods too and the "lasted time" starts when you buy it, not when it was made or sold to the first owner.

Buy pre-loved and it should still last a reasonable time and be fit for purpose, subject of course to the normal caveats about description & price

I'd say 3 months on a £3.5k car is not long enough especially considering it is a major fault. Be a different story on a £350 car

EdGasket

Seems a bit tough on the garage. A 7 year old car could have the turbo go anytime and the owner could have thrashed it or not bothered to check the oil and damaged it themselves. Not saying that is the case here but how can a garage be responsible under SOGA for a new owner abusing the car?

Retrogamer

EdGasket wrote: »

= Not saying that is the case here but how can a garage be responsible under SOGA for a new owner abusing the car?

They can't :j


But if it's within the first 6 months, then the seller has the onus of proving that it failed due to misuse.

Depending on the car being bought this is one of the reasons it's good to buy from a dealership as you have some come back and it's almost like a 6 month warranty

Ultrasonic

Retrogamer wrote: »

But if it's within the first 6 months, then the seller has the onus of proving that it failed due to misuse.

Is there any way that they could do this?

AS2RW

Traders are required to carry out a pre-sale inspection of the vehicle's mechanical condition / roadworthiness and keep records of such incase Trading Standards want to see them.

"The vehicle should be of satisfactory quality such that it is fit for use on the road and in a condition that reflects its age and price and must be reliable"
The checks must be carried out by a qualified person and they should not just rely on an MOT or service history.

This information is lifted from the OFT checklist for second hand car dealers (it makes interesting reading if you're that way inclined!)

I work in the motor industry and have just helped a friend through a similar situation with a garage. He bought a 2002 Freelander and the gearbox disintigrated after a month, the garage didn't want to know initially and tried to say things like sold as seen and they had not provided any warranty etc.
However when faced with the sale of goods act they ended up coughing up for a replacement gearbox, they had not done the checks despite having an MOT station on site and basically didn't have a leg to stand on.
As a private buyer you are not expected or required to have expert knowlege when buying a car, general wear and tear is one thing my friends Freelander still has intermitant central locking on one door and some tatty bits of plastic trim etc and that is expected with the age of the vehicle. Things you can see or test yourself like, do all the windows go up and down? do the lights all work? do the tyres need replacing soon? These things should be easily identifiable by anybody and addressed with the Trader before purchase then either rectified or used as bartering tools on the price.
Major mechanical failure within a reasonable space of time should not be expected.

arcon5

vaio wrote: »

nah...SoG applies to second hand goods too and the "lasted time" starts when you buy it, not when it was made or sold to the first owner.

Buy pre-loved and it should still last a reasonable time and be fit for purpose, subject of course to the normal caveats about description & price

I'd say 3 months on a £3.5k car is not long enough especially considering it is a major fault. Be a different story on a £350 car

You're wrong.

Based on this flawed logic I can buy a 250k mile &15 year old car and expect it to last the same as a new car.

You then say it would be different on a £350 car, why so then if this is your logic?!

This would only be the case if the seller was misleading in making you believe the components was 'as new'.

arcon5

Retrogamer wrote: »

Goods sold must be fit for purpose and last a reasonable amount of time.

I would wager that paying £3500 for a car and only having it last a few months before an expensive failure would constitute not lasting a reasonable amount of time, hence the dealership should be liable for repairs.

Since the turbo failure happened within 6 months, the dealership would have to prove the turbo failed due to misuse, or we fall to my point above about reasonable amount of time.

Okay, if you are going to completely overlook my point then don't both replying to my post!

And you are wrong, fundamentally wrong.

It depends on the merits of each individual case.

AS2RW

The OP stated the vehicle was sold to him as a nice example which had been well looked after.
Most car manufacturers build their cars with a 10 year or 100,000mile life span regardless of the fact they will most likely last longer.

Assuming all things are equal and the car has been well maintained to manufacturer specifications the car is likely to have done 70-80,000 miles based on UK average mileage of 10-12,000 per year.

Therefore at the point of sale the OP should reasonably be able to expect approx 3 years or 30,000 miles useful life left.

I'm not suggesting that 2 years and 11 month down the line the OP should be able to go back to the garage and claim for repairs or replacement but within months of purchase the OP should consider the garage has not undertaken sufficient checks to say this vehicle is reliable and free from major defect before sale.