Car missold

motorguy

Jonsnowknowsnothing wrote: »

Im not entirely sure tbh. I just feel they shouldn't be able to get away this and should be held to account over it.
Selling cars not fit for purpose does not sit easy with me and then being able to get away with it just iritates me. Lying to customers about the state of the cars is just dangerous and i can't beleove there's not governing body that can hold them to account.

Firstly, you werent "mis sold" the car - unless you specifically asked for a car that had not previously been a hire car. However the dealer is obliged to tell you that its been a hire car, and they didnt do that. That however is not mis-selling.

They were held to account because they replaced the car?

The mechanical problems you have had subsequently, the dealer has resolved them?

I dont see what they are "getting away with"? If they had point blankly refused to replace the car, then yes, or if they hadnt sorted out the problems, then yes, however they didnt do either?

For the record - i bought a 9 month old Golf off a main VW dealer, and he didnt tell me it was an ex hire car, even though i know it was. I didnt query or push it as the car was immaculate - i saw it coming off the transporter when it was delivered - and it was well priced.

Subsequently - and about once every 2,000 miles - the car would cut out for no reason, most memorably when i had pulled out to pass someone at 60mph. It took them several attempts to fix it and eventually they replaced the entire engine wiring loom under warranty.

Also the car had a leaking water pump and that had to be done under warranty too.

Now, if i wanted to be hysterical about the thing, by your reckoning, i was "mis sold" the car and also i was sold a car that subsequently had a dangerous fault and the dealer should be held accountable by some governing body.

However, the reality is, it was a decent car at a decent price and the dealer fixed any issues i had.

Cars are mechanical items, they go wrong sometimes. I dont see the hire car aspect as being a big issue. Its little different to buying an "ex demonstrator" from a main dealer as these are invariably lent out to every tom !!!!!! and harry anyway.

motorguy

colino wrote: »

What's wrong with them is that they have been driven by a procession of drivers of varying degrees of skill and normally in a hurry!

So like most used cars then? Any car you buy you've no real idea how its been driven or who by or by how many drivers.

Dealer demonstrators are treated the same way.

I dont see an issue really. I got my 9 month old Golf diesel 5 door ex hire car for £12,400 when a new one has a list price of £20,000. The dealer had "demo" cars and they were asking £3,000 more. Well worth the saving.

burlington6

Don't the like of Enterprise lease vehicles now? Could be a grey area

motorguy

colino wrote: »

On one owner cars of many vehicles whose original use might adversely affect resale value, the keeper name of the first owner is often, shall we say, less direct than it should be. No excuse for a professional trader, it is their job to check and recognise the alternative names that some companies use. Does become more mired two or three RKs down the line if history is broken and provenance becomes less clear though, to categorically state what the full story of a car is.

There are vast numbers of ex hire cars out there for sale. There are also vast numbers of ex dealer demo cars too. And then you've motability cars which are projected as being driven by some old lady to the shops and back once a week when the reality is often much different.

Buy from a reputable dealer and buy on condition, service history and price.

Unless its something quite exotic the "provenance" of your average Focus or Fiesta several years and several owners down the line isnt really going to impact value.

motorguy

k3lvc wrote: »

You're sure about this ?? I'd be interested to see the response

Did you ask and they lied or did you forget to ask the question that's obviously important to you ? Takes 10secs to ask the salemans for the history and if you don't believe him then dig deeper. No point complaining after the event if you didn't ask

I'm nearly sure the dealer HAS to tell you if its ex hire, or ex driving school.

colino

It is illegal in the UK for a professional trader to omit to inform an average consumer of anything that the average consumer would otherwise make a different transactional decision on. In the OFT presentations here, (after you realise, "average consumer" and, "transactional decision" will appear in every other sentence), examples of, "misleading by omission" are failing to inform a car has ben a taxi, hire car or driving school vehicle is right up there with the car being clocked.
Just because a practice is widespread, doesn't make it any less illegal.
On the point of hire cars, you really must be joking if you think a day hire car is treated the same as a users own private car.
Apart from the fact of the use it will be pressed in to, those cars have had the adjustment phase; finding the biting point, what pressure is needed on the brakes, accelerator and other controls virtually on a daily basis, not a once every owner change experience.
If a trader sells a one owner car without directly informing the potential buyer (if a consumer) it has been in a high risk category, he has broken the law.

jimjames

Jonsnowknowsnothing wrote: »

Selling cars not fit for purpose does not sit easy with me and then being able to get away with it just iritates me.

How does the fact a car was a hire car make it not fit for purpose?

Car_54

colino wrote: »

OK, put it simply, ex-hire, ex-driving school et al have a lower retail price for a reason. I'm not going to do my price/cost/value differences presentation here.

Over the past few years I have part-exchanged four driving school cars. On each occasion the dealer has given me top book price. Doesn't that suggest they expected to get top price on re-selling?

Car_54

While there is no "governing body", the dealer may well be a member of the Retail Motor Industry Federation (RMI) or one of its affiliated organisations. If so, they have an arbitration process to address complaints.

However, as has already been said, the substantive problems seem to have been resolved. All that the OP has left is a whinge.

colino

Car 54, what relevance do you really think that the TI that a trader gave you ("top book" which book?) has anything to do with his overall profit, customer retention or vehicle disposal strategy? One thing for sure, if he retailed it and failed to positively inform the consumer buying it its history, he was breaking the law.