Help - Was I Mis-sold my Car?

Joe_Horner

Quentin wrote: »

[...]
Your suggestion that the salesman should " have mentioned it" is also wrong

The way I read it, matty wasn't suggesting "shoould" in a legal sense, but in a "good customer service / business" sense and, in that way, he's got a point.

The problems of DPFs for short journeys are well known but an expert in the product (which a salesman should be) shouldn't assume that "everyone knows that".

As an analogy, if someone comes to me looking for a "water resistant" watch, I'm under no obligation to find out what sort of use they plan for it. As long as the watch is water resistant (which covers everything from "splashproof" up to technical diving) I'm not mis-selling.

BUT if I sell them something that's splashproof and they want it to go windsurfing with hen they're going to be p*ssed when it floods, so it's in my own interests to ask what they mean by "resistant". It also makes them feel that I'm interested in their needs rather than just emptying their wallet!

Not mentioning it certainly isn't a failure in a legal sense, but it is poor customer service and has obviously lost the company at least one customer who might have become a valued regular.

So, in that sense, yes he should have mentioned it but any fallout for failing to is between him and his bosses.

scaredofdebt wrote: »

Arguably a diesel may not be fit for purpose if the intended purpose is tootling along a few miles every day.

Good luck with that one though!

SOGA interprets "intended purpose" in two ways. It can either be "the usual purpose for which a similar item is used", or it can be "any specific intended purpose which the buyer has stated".

Given that the DPF problems are generally well known, you could reasonably argue that frequent, short, journeys aren't a "usual purpose" for modern diesels.

Had the OP explained his intended journeys to the salesman then it would probably be unfit under the second definition but that definition only comes into play if the seller is made aware of the purpose before the sale takes place.

Quentin

Joe_Horner wrote: »

The way I read it, matty wasn't suggesting "shoould" in a legal sense, but in a "good customer service / business" sense.....

How do you interpret this as being ambiguous:

mattyprice4004 wrote: »

..with DPFs being such a massive pain in the backside, I'd say the salesman should have at least mentioned it.

Note the use of the word "should".


The garage haven't lost a valuable customer, he chose to go! They appear to have bent over backwards to keep him happy!

iolanthe07

I have now read the page now that I am aware of it yes. Are you saying I should have read every page of the manual and I am at fault for not doing so? Does anybody actually read the full manual of their car? Every single page? I find that very hard to believe

Perhaps I am an anarok, but in 50 years of buying cars (mostly new) I have always read the manual thoroughly as soon as I take delivery. A new car is a big investment; surely you would want to know all about it. The DPF issue has been thoroughly aired over the last few years. Since the introduction of DPFs petrol is the way to go for drivers who do a low mileage with frequent short trips.

Joe_Horner

Quentin wrote: »

How do you interpret this as being ambiguous:

Note the use of the word "should".

Exactly the same as "should" is used in everday life (and the Highway Code as it happens). It designates something that's good practice but not compulsory, as opposed to "must" which designates something that is compulsory.

So, yes, as a matter of good customer servive, the salesman should have mentioned it, but he was under no obligation to do so.

Quentin wrote: »

The garage haven't lost a valuable customer, he chose to go! They appear to have bent over backwards to keep him happy!

However he's gone, they've lost him as far as future sales are concerned. Had the salesman steered him towards something more suitable then they may not have (or they may have lost the sale completely).

Whether or not he would've been valuable is, of course, open to debate.

DKLS

This looks like the most complex case of buyers remorse I have seen on here.

OP cut your losses, sell/trade into an efficient petrol engined car or learn to drive the car you have.

Johnmcl7

Quentin wrote: »

The garage haven't lost a valuable customer, he chose to go! They appear to have bent over backwards to keep him happy!

How have they bent over backwards to keep him happy when it doesn't appear they have ever fixed the original fault? The car should be indicating when it needs active regeneration, it shouldn't be going straight to limp home mode. I think the OP's frustration with the DPF are understandable because the garage are making out this is purely due to his driving habits when in reality what should be happening is the car needs more frequently active regeneration.

John

Richard53

iolanthe07 wrote: »

Perhaps I am an anarok, but in 50 years of buying cars (mostly new) I have always read the manual thoroughly as soon as I take delivery.

I have been known to take the handbook home before the car was even ready, just so I could 'read up' about my new purchase. Sad, I know.


But I am loving all this talk about the salesman having a 'duty of car'.

REDDDRAGGON

FWIW, my parents recently bought a car, the salesman pushed and pushed to sell this diesel (my mother liked the appearance of the car), they nearly bought it too, until they asked me and I told them all about DPFs.

The salesman knew what sort of driving my parents did - they are both retired, only short journeys etc, but he was insistent that a diesel would be OK for them!

They got a petrol in the end, but if they hadn't asked me, god knows how much trouble they would have got into eventually.

force_ten

REDDDRAGGON wrote: »

FWIW, my parents recently bought a car, the salesman pushed and pushed to sell this diesel (my mother liked the appearance of the car), they nearly bought it too, until they asked me and I told them all about DPFs.

The salesman knew what sort of driving my parents did - they are both retired, only short journeys etc, but he was insistent that a diesel would be OK for them!

They got a petrol in the end, but if they hadn't asked me, god knows how much trouble they would have got into eventually.

if the salesman really knew they were buying a town car and was still pushing them towards a modern diesel with a DPF fitted then that really is shocking, in that case if you could prove that you told the salesman you want a town car and he put you in a diesel then that could be classed as miss selling

glad you got the chance to point them in the right direction

Buellguy

force_ten wrote: »

if the salesman really knew they were buying a town car and was still pushing them towards a modern diesel with a DPF fitted then that really is shocking, in that case if you could prove that you told the salesman you want a town car and he put you in a diesel then that could be classed as miss selling

glad you got the chance to point them in the right direction

But, a very good argument for doing all your research BEFORE you go in to buy what could be a purchase of anywhere between (e.g.) £5000 to £500,000.
After all, apart from a house it is reckoned that a car is the next most expensive thing a household buys. Seriously, wouldn't you research a purchase of that much first?