Vauxhall warranty query

motorguy

Tilt wrote: »

No i'm not!

Yes you ARE!!

The O/P's response to your first post was "Yeah this is what I thought. I think he will try and wash his hands of that. Best stay clear then."

Tilt wrote: »

there are certain things to consider such as the service history of the car, whether it has been done in accordance with the manufacturer's schedule and specification etc. Also, where the nearest VX dealer is. If it is further away from the OP than the supplier, then surely the supplier is responsible for getting it there (if necessary).

Clearly, but thats not what the O/P asked, and not what you responded, and now you're adding in variables that you have no evidence are fact, just to win an arguement on the internet.

Tilt

motorguy wrote: »

I despair.

Genuinely.

This is a simple easy process. The car the O/P is looking at is covered under warranty by Vauxhall.

This is a great plus. Massive positive. But you're turning it round that its the supplying dealer avoiding their responsibilities under the SOGA.

Stunning.

You don't know that for sure. Depends on the history.

I think it's "stunning" that you think it's OK for a seller to indicate to a potential customer that if anything goes wrong, 'don't bring it back to me, take it straight to a VX dealer'. Had he of said 'if there is a problem, bring it back and WE will get it sorted on your behalf via the VX warranty', then I would of said "GO FOR IT!"

Anyway, i've expressed my opinion on the matter, you've expressed yours and we don't agree. End of the day it's the OP's choice, he spoke and dealt with the seller, not you or I and it's his money and this is a forum about saving money.

OddballJamie

Tilt wrote: »

No i'm not! But he is thinking of buying it from a non-franchised dealer! If he was going to by it from a VX dealer, then no problem at all.

Thousands of people buy nearly news cars from car supermarkets every year and don't have problems with taking the cars back to main dealers for warranty repairs.

Tilt wrote: »

BUT he isn't so there are certain things to consider such as the service history of the car, whether it has been done in accordance with the manufacturer's schedule and specification etc.

Which you only remembered once I mentioned it.

Tilt wrote: »

Also, where the nearest VX dealer is. If it is further away from the OP than the supplier, then surely the supplier is responsible for getting it there (if necessary).

Surely that's what breakdown cover is for, unless you are recommending not having that too.

Tilt

motorguy wrote: »

Yes you ARE!!

The O/P's response to your first post was "Yeah this is what I thought. I think he will try and wash his hands of that. Best stay clear then."

And? Are you the seller? Am I taking away YOUR custom? End of the day, the OP dosn't have to follow my advice!

motorguy wrote: »

Clearly, but thats not what the O/P asked, and not what you responded, and now you're adding in variables that you have no evidence are fact, just to win an arguement on the internet.

Now you are talking rubbish. We are on a consumer forum. Surely then when someone comes on asking for advice, it is better to put all possible issues forward to be considered... even the worse case scenarios.

I've just given my opinion based on what the OP has asked and the way he has asked it. The OP can decide to follow the advice or opinions of who he/she chooses at the end of the day.

motorguy

Tilt wrote: »

You don't know that for sure. Depends on the history.

The O/P said in their very first post "Everything checks out about the car", are you suggesting that the O/P is brain dead and

(a) didnt even check the service history
(b) didnt think of the consequences if their local Vauxhall dealer happens to be 200 miles away??? (very unlikely dont you think)

Tilt wrote: »

I think it's "stunning" that you think it's OK for a seller to indicate to a potential customer that if anything goes wrong, 'don't bring it back to me, take it straight to a VX dealer'. Had he of said 'if there is a problem, bring it back and WE will get it sorted on your behalf via the VX warranty', then I would of said "GO FOR IT!"

If the supplying dealer has any wit it would have been positioned as "and of course because this car is under 3 years old you're covered by the balance of Vauxhalls 3 years warranty". I would much rather take the car to a franchised dealer that drop it back to (potentially some) back street garage.

If the O/P is playing this right, they're getting a good, used Vauxhall at non franchised dealer prices, but with all the benefits as you simply take it back to the franchised dealer for any warranty issues.

Is that not money saving?? :money:

Tilt wrote: »

Anyway, i've expressed my opinion on the matter, you've expressed yours and we don't agree. End of the day it's the OP's choice, he spoke and dealt with the seller, not you or I and it's his money and this is a forum about saving money.

Your advice was not related to saving money, it was related to over complicating a simple situation by quoting the SOGA out of context and putting the O/P off buying the car.

So, yes, perhaps money saving as the O/P may now not buy the car at all. :eek:

motorguy

Tilt wrote: »

And? Are you the seller? Am I taking away YOUR custom? End of the day, the OP dosn't have to follow my advice!

So you're admitting you may have put the O/P off buying the car?

Tilt wrote: »

Now you are talking rubbish. We are on a consumer forum. Surely then when someone comes on asking for advice, it is better to put all possible issues forward to be considered... even the worse case scenarios.

I've just given my opinion based on what the OP has asked and the way he has asked it. The OP can decide to follow the advice or opinions of who he/she chooses at the end of the day.

You put your opinion forward - that the seller is trying to avoid their responsibilites under the SOGA - as the most likely reason for the seller doing this, rather that look at the vast positive reasons why this is a good thing.

motorguy

OddballJamie wrote: »

Thousands of people buy nearly news cars from car supermarkets every year and don't have problems with taking the cars back to main dealers for warranty repairs.

Which you only remembered once I mentioned it.

Surely that's what breakdown cover is for, unless you are recommending not having that too.

:beer:

Totally agree.

motorguy

Tilt wrote: »

We are on a consumer forum.

A minute ago we were on a money saving forum? You seem to have changed your opinion to suit your arguement?

Tilt

OddballJamie wrote: »

Thousands of people buy nearly news cars from car supermarkets every year and don't have problems with taking the cars back to main dealers for warranty repairs.

No doubt and we had one not far from a franchised dealer that I worked at.

Well here goes then with a scenario I was presented with when the Car Supermarket sent one of THEIR customers for us to deal with an immobiliser issue with a Fiat Punto.

At the time, all new Fiats were supplied with ONE red coded master key unique to the car. The customer had bought the car without being made fully aware how the system worked and what happens if you loose the red key.

Yes, you guessed it, the key was missing and wasn't supplied with the car. Customer then had problems with a flat battery which (to be fair) the supplier sorted out but couldn't sort out the resulting intermittent ECU/immobiliser problem that the customer was now experiencing because her keys needed to be re-coded. Without the red master key, that is impossible so it needed a new immobiliser unit AND a new set of keys. Guess who had to pay for it to be sorted?

Yes, the supplier of the car.

OddballJamie wrote: »

Which you only remembered once I mentioned it.

So? Isn't it better for us to give collective information which may assist the OP? Or do you want me to acknowledge that you pointed this out?

OddballJamie wrote: »

Surely that's what breakdown cover is for, unless you are recommending not having that too.

Sorry, I didn't know the OP has break down cover. But as long as he/she can get the car back to the supplier, then he has fulfilled his obligation by providing the seller with the opportunity to rectify?

Exemplar

Tilt wrote: »

Even if there is, it would still be the seller's responsibility to deal with an inherent fault. Thus meaning the OP returns the car to the seller who then chooses whether to claim of the warranty or not.

The seller is trying to remove his statutory responsibility to the OP by 'selling' the remaining VX warranty. As I understand it, depending on how old the car is will depend on whether the OP can benefit from the VX warranty anyway.

Wrong.

Having worked at both independent and main dealers I can say that with knowledge. When I worked for a Smart Car dealer we only sold 18 to 24 month old Smart cars all sold with the balance of the manufacturers warranty. We never saw a car back as the ones we bought to sell all had service history.

Your story about the red key is correct and yes the supplying dealer would have to sort that as the car was sold without something that is necessary for the car to function. That scenario is down to poor knowledge by the buyer and the supplying garage and is nothing whatsoever to do with warranty and it is a poor example by you trying to win an internet argument........ A bit like selling a car without a steering wheel or an engine and expecting the main dealer to sort it out...

So as per the OP. If the car has a history that is in accordance with the manufacturers specification and there is a balance of manufacturers warranty I would jump on it.

Another good example is when we sold our Mini last year. It had 9 months manufacturers warranty remaining including breakdown etc.

Would the buyer come to me as an individual if there was an issue? No. He goes to Mini...