Bought car with faulty engine - dealer refuses to return money!

matttye

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/54






I see no words such as seller MUST be given the opportunity to repair.


I see the buyer can request not the seller.


acceptance is also another thing to look at.


offer of repair can be refused if its disproportionate such as unknown second hand engine with unknown origin and unknown history and unknown miles completed at a unknown garage.

It says the buyer may require repair or replacement. The reason it says "may" and not "must" is because the buyer is entitled to keep the damaged goods as they are and not require a repair or a replacement.

There is no obligation on the seller to refund UNLESS the seller cannot repair nor replace the goods, or if the seller has agreed to repair/replace the goods but breaches that agreement by not doing so within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the buyer.

Sections 48A/B/C SoGA are applicable here.

motorguy

matttye wrote: »

It says the buyer may require repair or replacement. The reason it says "may" and not "must" is because the buyer is entitled to keep the damaged goods as they are and not require a repair or a replacement.

There is no obligation on the seller to refund UNLESS the seller cannot repair nor replace the goods, or if the seller has agreed to repair/replace the goods but breaches that agreement by not doing so within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the buyer.

Sections 48A/B/C SoGA are applicable here.

The caveat to that is rejecting the car before you have been deemed to "accept" it. Typically you are not deemed to have accepted the car until roughly 3 ish to 4 weeks (maybe) have passed. If you are rejecting the car for a valid reason then the seller is obliged to refund.

Probably past that point now in this particular situation.

matttye

motorguy wrote: »

The caveat to that is rejecting the car before you have been deemed to "accept" it. Typically you are not deemed to have accepted the car until roughly 3 ish to 4 weeks (maybe) have passed. If you are rejecting the car for a valid reason then the seller is obliged to refund.

Probably past that point now in this particular situation.

I wasn't aware of that, I would assume that you'd accepted the car once you've paid and driven it off the forecourt.

Do you know which section of SoGA says this about cars?

atrixblue.-MFR-.

matttye wrote: »

I wasn't aware of that, I would assume that you'd accepted the car once you've paid and driven it off the forecourt.

Do you know which section of SoGA says this about cars?

soga doesn't simplicity state VEHICLES<


part 4 performance of contract para35 acceptance explains this issue.

matttye

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

soga doesn't simplicity state VEHICLES<


part 4 performance of contract para35 acceptance explains this issue.

"(1)The buyer is deemed to have accepted the goods [F35subject to subsection (2) below—
(a)when he intimates to the seller that he has accepted them, or
(b)when the goods have been delivered to him and he does any act in relation to them which is inconsistent with the ownership of the seller."

Paying and driving the car off the forecourt absolutely MUST indicate acceptance of the goods.

The 'reasonable time' part of Section 35 is for goods that have been delivered - i.e. where the buyer has had no opportunity of inspecting the goods prior to payment.

When you go to a car dealer, you look at the car before paying so the reasonable time provisions don't apply. Had the car been delivered without the buyer being able to inspect it first, then the reasonable time provisions WOULD apply.

That's my understanding of it.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

You also have to take into account the right to inspect to go along with acceptance.


the word delivery is not subject to just things that have been dropped to your door for e.g I take delivery of my new vehicle on DD/MM/YY when I go to collect it from the dealer.
This is an area of soga that is so grey it should be black, this is why there is a need for a complete transparent version.


you would have to indicate your acceptance to the dealer, I.E not through actions but a clear line of acceptance "I accept this vehicle" or a period of time where no contact with dealer has been established you can safely say someone has accepted something when they don't comeback to them 3-4 weeks after purchase.
dealers always say "any problems come back" this can be indicative to say hey have fun with your purchase, inspect it, came back if you have any issues" this is indicative to say that they acknowledge that its early days and you need to inspect it.

Joe_Horner

matttye wrote: »

"(1)The buyer is deemed to have accepted the goods [F35subject to subsection (2) below—
(a)when he intimates to the seller that he has accepted them, or
(b)when the goods have been delivered to him and he does any act in relation to them which is inconsistent with the ownership of the seller."

Paying and driving the car off the forecourt absolutely MUST indicate acceptance of the goods.

The 'reasonable time' part of Section 35 is for goods that have been delivered - i.e. where the buyer has had no opportunity of inspecting the goods prior to payment.

When you go to a car dealer, you look at the car before paying so the reasonable time provisions don't apply. Had the car been delivered without the buyer being able to inspect it first, then the reasonable time provisions WOULD apply.

That's my understanding of it.

It's not quite that simple. You couldn't reasonably "inspect" a car fully before driving it off the forecourt. How will you pick up issues like:

• It burns a litre of oil every 500 miles (which won't always give visible smoke)
• It overheats when stopped in traffic for 10 minutes (likely won't apply on a test drive)
• The air-con cuts out in hot weather, but you bought it on a rainy day in April.
• It has paperwork for a recent timing belt change, but they didn't change the tensioners and it shreds the belt the day after you buy it.

All of the above are things that would (presumably) have prevented you from buying the car if you could have known about them beforehand, and so are valid grounds to reject it if they become apparent in a "reasonable" time.

matttye

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

You also have to take into account the right to inspect to go along with acceptance.


the word delivery is not subject to just things that have been dropped to your door for e.g I take delivery of my new vehicle on DD/MM/YY when I go to collect it from the dealer.
This is an area of soga that is so grey it should be black, this is why there is a need for a complete transparent version.

The next section covers such "deliveries" though:

"(2)Where goods are delivered to the buyer, and he has not previously examined them, he is not deemed to have accepted them under subsection (1) above until he has had a reasonable opportunity of examining them for the purpose—
(a)of ascertaining whether they are in conformity with the contract, and
(b)in the case of a contract for sale by sample, of comparing the bulk with the sample."

When you purchase a used car from a dealer you have already examined the goods by the time that you purchase them so that part does not apply.

I think that you are deemed to have accepted the goods when you pay for and drive off the forecourt with a used car. That said, if the goods are not as described (i.e. there are all sorts of problems that rear their ugly heads after a few days), you are still entitled to require a repair or replacement, but it is too late to reject the goods.

Joe_Horner wrote: »

It's not quite that simple. You couldn't reasonably "inspect" a car fully before driving it off the forecourt. How will you pick up issues like:

• It burns a litre of oil every 500 miles (which won't always give visible smoke)
• It overheats when stopped in traffic for 10 minutes (likely won't apply on a test drive)
• The air-con cuts out in hot weather, but you bought it on a rainy day in April.
• It has paperwork for a recent timing belt change, but they didn't change the tensioners and it shreds the belt the day after you buy it.

All of the above are things that would (presumably) have prevented you from buying the car if you could have known about them beforehand, and so are valid grounds to reject it if they become apparent in a "reasonable" time.

The law only says "previous examined" but does not specify the level of detail. If you've been given the opportunity to look at the goods before buying them, and still choose to buy them, then you have "accepted" them. You are still protected by the provisions in relation to goods being fit for purpose, as described, etc., and can require a repair or replacement, but you can no longer reject the goods.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

matttye wrote: »

The next section covers such "deliveries" though:

"(2)Where goods are delivered to the buyer, and he has not previously examined them, he is not deemed to have accepted them under subsection (1) above until he has had a reasonable opportunity of examining them for the purpose—
(a)of ascertaining whether they are in conformity with the contract, and
(b)in the case of a contract for sale by sample, of comparing the bulk with the sample."

When you purchase a used car from a dealer you have already examined the goods by the time that you purchase them so that part does not apply.

I think that you are deemed to have accepted the goods when you pay for and drive off the forecourt with a used car. That said, if the goods are not as described (i.e. there are all sorts of problems that rear their ugly heads after a few days), you are still entitled to require a repair or replacement, but it is too late to reject the goods.



The law only says "previous examined" but does not specify the level of detail. If you've been given the opportunity to look at the goods before buying them, and still choose to buy them, then you have "accepted" them. You are still protected by the provisions in relation to goods being fit for purpose, as described, etc., and can require a repair or replacement, but you can no longer reject the goods.

if it specified the level of detail and granted that not everyone is mechanic the SOGA would be an indefinite list of details that should be covered, this is improbable and impossible. hence why your are given a reasonable amount of time to inspect your goods. I thinks this aspect was brought up in a court case, and judge agreed that a single test drive, didn't give the buyer the fullest time and opportunity to inspect. Especially if theres a fault that not apparent the first look around, don't forget you don't get to see the car when you depsit laid down as they are doing the agree'd works that you did see on first inspection then you take delivery and the inspection starts more thoroughly.


PS its not LAW its legislation, I have a gripe (not personally aimed at you don't take it wrong) when people say its the law when infact its legal/illegal.

matttye

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

if it specified the level of detail and granted that not everyone is mechanic the SOGA would be an indefinite list of details that should be covered, this is improbable and impossible. hence why your are given a reasonable amount of time to inspect your goods. I thinks this aspect was brought up in a court case, and judge agreed that a single test drive, didn't give the buyer the fullest time and opportunity to inspect. Especially if theres a fault that not apparent the first look around, don't forget you don't get to see the car when you depsit laid down as they are doing the agree'd works that you did see on first inspection then you take delivery and the inspection starts more thoroughly.

Makes sense - didn't think of it that way.

Cheers