Second hand car rights with dodgy invoice

AdrianC

Please feel free to point to which sections of that 42 page document you think disagree with what I've said.

(BTW, you'll note that I made mention of "or any trading standard interpretations" - might I have, perhaps, meant precisely that apparently-withdrawn guidance document...?)

motorguy

barrab wrote: »

A vehicle from a reputable manufacturer with full service history should have been good to go for at least another few months - which even considering fuel, insurance and road tax is still cheaper than my local public transport provider... It isn't unreasonable to expect BMW's/Mercedes to go round the clock; provided they have received adequate maintenance that this particular model was advertised as having.

As the car is unfit for purpose in such a short space of time after purchase, am I right in thinking my statutory rights should still be intact regardless of what wording was put on the invoice? Car was advertised and sold without any fault listed; subsequently discovered otherwise.

Thank-you.

Summarising - the temperature sensor started leaking - possibly after you bought the car - and at some point whilst driving the car you cooked the engine because it was running without water?

Hmmmm.

On your side however, is the fact that the dealer MUST NOT put "sold as seen" and "trailer away" on an invoice when it was sold as a roadworthy vehicle.

I would say you would probably have a good case in court simply because of what he wrote on the invoice - judges really hate that sort of stuff.

As a learn - in future dont buy a tired old german car on a tight budget. You'd have been better off - and got a younger and less miles - in a focus or vectra, particularly given parts are so cheap.

Also, buy privately at that price. You've bought a £300 car that the dealer has stuck profit on. Buying privately - and carefully - will net you a much better value car, rather than try to enforce "your rights" and causing yourself a world of pain and effort.

motorguy

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

It's a 15 year old car with 155k up it, a headgasket is a wear part, so bit pointless demanding a free repair.

I'd have though £200 all in would be a more reasonable sum for getting it repaired assuming it is just the gasket.

You can't really expect a new car warranty on a cheap banger.

Realistically - the temp gauge leaking caused the engine to overheat, which cooked the head gasket.

A head gasket failure is usually a result of a problem, not the cause of it

motorguy

Tilt wrote: »

No you can't!

You can only sell a "spares or repair" to another trader because it would be likely illegal for it to be driven away.

You can sell it as spares or repair to a private individual too, however it MUST be for spares or repair. Being able to drive it away would indicate otherwise.

motorguy

Everyone seems to believe the head gasket failure makes the car potentially not fit for purpose.

In pretty much all cases i've seen of HGF the failure is a result of a problem, not the problem itself.

This is backed up in this case by the O/P saying that when the car was inspected there was a water leak, and also that the car had driven "smoothly" before hand.

And if thats the case, other than the dodgy wording of the invoice, the O/P doesnt have much of a leg to stand on - 155k mile car driven without water because a temperature sensor failed due to old age.

Brooker_Dave

motorguy wrote: »

Realistically - the temp gauge leaking caused the engine to overheat, which cooked the head gasket.

A head gasket failure is usually a result of a problem, not the cause of it

At over 166k whats not to say that the gasket was simply rotten away?

motorguy

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

At over 166k whats not to say that the gasket was simply rotten away?

True, though i've seen cars with a lot more miles like that on their original gaskets - and running an engine without water didnt help it.

AdrianC

Head gaskets don't "simply rot away".

Tilt

Any news on this Barrab?

chrisyboy

maninthestreet wrote: »

A 15 year old car with 155k on the clock is very near the end of its useful service life. I assume you didn't have the opportunity to take it for a test drive?

I beg to differ, I brought an old 1995 Golf 1.9 TDI, she had 200k on the clock, I run it to 300k over the course of 3 years, not a single thing went wrong with it