Rejecting a car purchased from dealer.

Foxy-Stoat_3

GOD DAMN IT JAMIE...the second rule of FightClub is YOU DONT TALK ABOUT FIGHTCLUB!!!!

Dafne

The dealer has replied, basically to the tune of "get lost."

When you purchased the vehicle you were full aware of the recall situation on the Vehicle. Which is why you purchased it at a vastly reduced Price.

When the vehicle was in our possession we took the vehicle to Cooper BMW Croydon for assessment and they confirmed it would need the recall carrying out.

This recall includes all four corners of the vehicle being strengthened which you knew as when enquiring about the vehicle it was one of the questions you asked.

We informed you that it had not been done and that there were cracks in the chassis.

We then said we would have the work done by our body shop but you preferred to purchase the vehicle at a lower price and get the work done at a friends garage.

Our bodyshop knew all four corners needed strengthening with the correct plates from bmw and we were not going to be charged anything like that amount to fix it.

As for Coopers etc.. not having any record of the vehicle why did they take the car in from us free of charge and carry out an assessment. We got them to do this as they were the last bmw dealer to service the vehicle.

Regards



There are several issues with this, in that not only did I never mention taking it to a friends, I specified a specialist. In addition, BMW UK do not strengthen the corners or plate the damage, they replace the whole panel, which is likely to have been explained to the dealer when they took it there.

He's also entirely glossed over the fact of the badly corroded spring and the floor being badly damaged to the point of being dangerous.

I've been unable to contact VOSA as wasn't near a phone at all yesterday, so will ring them first thing Monday morning. I've also taken some legal advice, as I have free legal cover and they are looking into it further.

So, not over yet.

harveybobbles

This bit is interesting:

Dafne wrote: »

When the vehicle was in our possession we took the vehicle to Cooper BMW Croydon for assessment and they confirmed it would need the recall carrying out.

So why wasn't this done by Cooper?

Also, the fact that the car is an import seemes to have been glossed over. Was you (OP) aware at the time of purchase that this was the case? Verbally told? Mentioned in advert/invoice etc?

Dafne

Because its over 10 years old. BMW will still inspect the car and confirm whether or not it needs the repair, but won't repair it.

In addition, I am under the impression that they will also refuse to repair if there isn't a FSH......

harveybobbles

Dafne wrote: »

Because its over 10 years old. BMW will still inspect the car and confirm whether or not it needs the repair, but won't repair it.

In addition, I am under the impression that they will also refuse to repair if there isn't a FSH......

I know that, but the reply you had from the garage (was it letter or email?) states that "When the vehicle was in our possession we took the vehicle to Cooper BMW confirmed it would need the recall carrying out.."

Using the word "recall" suggests that their assessment at the time was ok.

Joe_Horner

So they've effectively admitted that they were aware of structural cracking at the time their in-house MOT facility issued a new certificate on it. VOSA should like that

Dafne

It was an email reply I had from them. One of the MD's.

I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at

Are you suggesting that they knew the severity of the damage and knew it needed proper repair/replacement, rather than the plating repair and welding?

Edit - This was in reply to Harvey, Joe explained what you were getting at.

Dafne

Thanks Joe, that explains what Harvey was saying.

Joe_Horner

No problem, Dafne.

It's also worth noting that S.75 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 makes it an offence to "supply a motor vehicle or trailer in an unroadworthy condition" where "supply" is defined as:

(a)sell,

(b)offer to sell or supply, and

(c)expose for sale.

The only defence available for the seller is

that he had reasonable cause to believe that the vehicle or trailer would not be used on a road in Great Britain, or would not be so used until it had been put into a condition in which it might lawfully be so used

and even that defence is NOT available to a trader unless he:

also proves that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that any prospective purchaser would be aware that its use in its current condition on a road in Great Britain would be unlawful

In other words, even by advertising the car for sale in the first place, the dealer was committing an offence unless the advertisment made it clear that the car was not in roadworthy condition

That means that what he did (or didn't) tell you at the time of sale is immaterial as to whether or not he broke the law in having the car for sale in the first place.

He also broke the law by agreeing to the sale, even with a discount, on the basis that you were going to drive it away and get it fixed later because he couldn't claim the defence of having reasonable belief that you wouldn't drive it on the road in that case.

Dafne

Yeah, I've still got a copy of the original advert too, which makes no mention of the cracks or any other issues. He also knew that it was going to be driven away and booked in to be repaired, not collected.