second hand car purchased less than a week has died...

LauraLeah1684

good evening, on wednesday of last week (11 march 2015) my husband collected a second hand car which he has purchased from a garage.
It was paid for in full by debit card after a quick test drive drive and inspection and an agreement betwen my husband and the garage owner that he would put it through a MOT at cost to the garage on the previous saturday (7th March 2015)
My husband noticed there was alot of oil around the inards of the engine and mentioned it to the owner of the garage.
The owner replied "honestly mate, you should have seen it, it was shocking, but its sorted now."
The car is a 52 reg renualt laguna, and he paid £1000 for.
Today (tuesday 17 march 2015) he has had to have been towed home as the car has suffered a monumental oil leak which has sprayed all over the engine,brakes, pavement and road, and caused the engine to fail, needing a jump start.
He has just spoke to the guy who owns the garage, explained what has happened and they guy wasnt bothered.
He said the sale of good acts doesnt count because the car was a 'knock down price'.
We have checked online with trading standings and they say differently,:
(Quote) :When you buy a car from a trader you are making a legally binding contract. You have legal rights against the trader under the Sale of Goods Act 1979.
a). The vehicle should be, of a satisfactory quality, free from minor defeats, safe and durable for a reasonable length of time.
b). Fit for is intended purpose or a purpose that you make known to the trader, (fit to be driven on the road)
c). As described.

If the vehicle is faulty, you are legally entitled to request one of the following remedies,
a full refund
compensation (damages)
repair or replacement
rescission or reduction in price" (end quote)

can anyone please confirm how we got about getting this sorted. We would be happy to accept the car to be fixed, but the guy was rather adamant that he was washing his hands of the matter.
He did say he will speak to his mechanic tomorrow and instructed my husband to ring him at lunch time tomorrow.

Thanks so much for taking the time to read this, and for any replies we may get.
Laura and Dan

AdrianC

SOGA does apply, and your rights are as TS's website suggests. BUT there's an important caveat - and that's that those rights, when it comes to used goods, are tempered by "reasonable expectations", given age/condition/price.

You bought a £1,000 13yo car with obvious signs of a serious oil leak, which you admit that you knew about before purchase.

LauraLeah1684

Sorry i thought thats what he had done, but he was towed home. Yes we purchased the car, but the dealer had given verbal assurance that the problem had been fixed.
We do appreciate that a car of that age will have its minor defects, which is does, and we have accepted that, but we were told it had had a problem, but it had been fixed, and its blantant that the owner was lying because otherwise the car would not have spilled the entire oil capacity over my husbands works car park and our road when its currently parked up.
Will speak to trading standards tomorrow.

its a sad world we live in when people cant be honest and act with common courtesy.
thanks for yours comments

LauraLeah1684

shoryuken wrote: »

Also you bought a 13 year old banger for £1000 and fully knew about the leaked oil. A person with common sense would walk away.

I love it how people who buy bangers are so strung up on their legal 'rights' and then expect full refund and repair by the dealer

well firstly, we were advsied it had a PREVIOUS oil leak, (when you take your car to the garage to have a tyre replaced, you expect them to do it,) as if they charge you and dont do the work, you could suffer a blow out and end up in a serious car accident so whats the difference between this and our situation.
There is no need to be rude, but its obvious what has happened here, we are happy for them to fix the problem, which is only what he had said he had previously had done in the first place, so if he had been true to his word this wouldn't have happened originally.

AdrianC

LauraLeah1684 wrote: »

well firstly, we were advsied it had a PREVIOUS oil leak, (when you take your car to the garage to have a tyre replaced, you expect them to do it,)

And, for a week, there was no leak, right?

LauraLeah1684

there was no signs of the leak, i.e no oil on the ground.

Marktheshark

£300 car will be a £300 car regardless of how much you paid for it.
However the dealer is responsible to make sure it is fit for purpose.
The only recourse is demand in writing he repairs it and sue for the £1000 back if he refuses.

arcon5

Where's the oil leaked from?
What actually happened and was it run afterwards?

AdrianC

LauraLeah1684 wrote: »

there was no signs of the leak, i.e no oil on the ground.

Right. So the previous leak was fixed.

Whether that fix was short-lived, or whether this is a different leak entirely, we're guessing. But suggesting the leak was never fixed and you were lied to? No. You know that's not the case.

LauraLeah1684

We cannot tell where the leak has happened as it has sprayed oil all over the timing belt side of the engine. Also it has been during operating the car so the engine has been running, but has not been running since the detection of the leak as it looks like oil may have drowned the alternator and was not charging the battery, so it was flat. This was what alerted us to the big issue.

MysteryMe

You've been given good advice in post 10 OP. Good luck, I hope the matter is resolved to your satisfaction.