Rejecting used car

Stephenrjy87

Hi, new to the forum so hello everyone, and hope I've posted this in the right section. I'll try keep this is short as I can -

Bought a BMW 318ci se coupe from a dealer for £2290 108000k miles.Day after the car developed a knocking/heavy squeaking sound from the rear. Bought on 2nd June then broke down on 4th June with coolant leak. Tried to contact dealer but couldn't get through so I booked the car at my local indy for a full inspection - faults were -

Front track control arm bushes soft
Front anti roll bar bushes worn
Rear discs corroded (brakes juddering)
Rear metal brake pipes corroded
Engine oil leaks
Coolant leak
Intake bellows poorly repaired
Front gearbox support broken
Exhaust front pipe flange bolts corroded

Been in touch with CAB and trading standards, who have been ok. But pretty much told its down to the dealer. Anyway eventually got Intouch with dealer by email and sent him the list and he doesn't have a good attitude at all and all he if offering is to look at the coolant leak and possibly repair it, anything else he said is wear and tear and is to be expected. But I think the faults are excessive. To me this doesn't seem enough and I'd rather go down the lines of rejection however he is refusing a refund. Also the car did come with a full mot.

Would the list of faults be enough to request a refund by small claims? I'm at a loss as what to do next and left high and dry with a car that I can't drive, and struggling to get to work

bris

Probably not, you have to take into account wear and tear when buying a used car, age mileage is all taken into consideration. Whilst the timing is pretty marginal regarding the faults your own due diligence should still be an important factor when buying.


You could try the small claims court for recovery but your chances are not cut and dried as you might think.


The reason CAB and trading standards are saying it's down to the dealer is because they know your chances are slim again knowing the age and mileage of the car.


The other thing you can do is look at the sales evidence of the car, how was it advertised? was any promises made to the condition of the car, is it not as described, proof on this is a good thing to have in court.

Stephenrjy87

Well I do understand to an extent but surely the car should last more than a couple of days before breaking down.

I still have the original auto trader ad and description where the car was described as "superb condition all round and a real credit to former owners"

marliepanda

Was the MOT recent? Are any of those things (except the coolant leak and the knocking which you say yourself developed after purchase) things which would fail an MOT?

Stephenrjy87

The car was mot'd 6th may then sat on the forecourt until I bought it on 2nd June. The dealer said with the car being sat a while the brakes would need a quick clear by driving/braking. But within days of buying it the brake judder got a lot worse, and when I had the inspection done I was told the discs would need replacing

Johno100

Stephenrjy87 wrote: »

The car was mot'd 6th may then sat on the forecourt until I bought it on 2nd June. The dealer said with the car being sat a while the brakes would need a quick clear by driving/braking. But within days of buying it the brake judder got a lot worse, and when I had the inspection done I was told the discs would need replacing

Were any of the items subsequently identified by your local garage the subject of advisories on the MOT?

Stephenrjy87

The only things on the advisory were one rear tyre near legal limit - although my garage pointed out that both were near legal limit, forgot to include that in original post but didn't see this as much of an issue.And that the front bushes were soft. All the other faults on the list from my inspection were not on the advisory check list.

unholyangel

Whats the mileage on the MOT compared to when you bought it?

Are the faults that are present now the type that would fail a car or be advisory?

Is the car in a roadworthy condition? Not everything makes a car unroadworthy but I'm sure brakes is one of the things that does. It is illegal to sell a car that is not roadworthy.

How did you pay for it? Did you pay any amount (even a nominal deposit) by credit card?

usefulmale

Why didn't you arrange for an AA or RAC inspection BEFORE you bought it? Starts from £142 for the AA.

Better than paying out over 2 grand and then having the hassle of rejecting it etc.

https://www.theaa.com/vehicle-inspections/

arcon5

So worn components? Or failed components? The former doesn't necessarily mean they need immediate attention. Any garage can produce a list of prroblems with an old used car that don't necessarily need work yet

Stephenrjy87

The car had covered approx 200miles since the mot, around 150 were done by myself before the breakdown.

The inspection was from a trusted garage I've used for many years. i made it clear to the garage I only want things included on the list if they Need doing now. Obviously the brakes, coolant and oil leak he said need repairing. The rest as soon as possible. And I didn't get a pre inspection because I read a lot of bad reviews on them, maybe I should have now. The dealer also included a 1 year warranty with warranty wise so I assumed he was being straight about the car and it's condition. Just did not expect this within a few days of getting it