Used Car Section 75 protection

rhadagast

Hi Everyone,

Hopefuly someone can offer some advise on my current position.

Less than 2 months ago my wife and I bought a used car from an independent dealership. The test drive went well and the car looked in good condition.

The salesman was very friendly and lulled us into a false sense of security - he said the car had a full service history and although this was only half documented on the service book, was an audi electronic SH (I know it was a mistake to believe / trust, so please dont flame)

After paying for the car with £12,000 on bank transfer, £2000 part-exchange and £3000 on credit card we parted ways.

To cut to the chase on the journey home some issues arose - the parking were sensors not working correctly, the air conditioning was not working, a light bulb was out and the sat nav did not work.

We also realised that a number of the options advertised do not exist - i.e Xenon lights, Bose sound system, memory seats, Audi AMI, adaptive cruise control and lane assist

Also the next day I checked with the manufacturer and no service history was found, so I phoned the dealer and asked to reject the car. To which he turned hostile and suggested I could not have my old car back and would not be welcome at the garage.

An inspection from our local approved garage also showed the handbrake was badly frayed and had been bodged to stop the light coming on. Similar patch ups or attempts had been made on the parking sensors and sat nav.

After starting a section 75 / chargeback claim with my credit card company, I have been offered the cost of the complete repair of the mentioned defects totalling £1660.

My query is should I take this offer with both hands and put the misrepresented Full service History and falsely advertised extras down as my consumer stupidity

or

Should I expect some partial recompense against the lost value due to no FSH and missing extras that were mis-represented. I guess the next step would be to go to the financial ombudsman service.

Many Thanks for any advice anyone can offer,
SH

cono1717

I'm not sure if I'd trust them with a repair if they botched your handbreak light...

In any event the car is not what was described (the missing features) do you have any documents with the advert that states all these features - you would be well within your right to get a complete refund and (in my opinion the best move) take your business elsewhere.

bingo_bango

Contact your local TSS and make a complaint. They can investigate on the basis of a number of possible offences here (including the garage owner's snotty attitude when trying to reject/return) and might be a simpler solution for you. The fact that you have an independent report from another garage will help a lot, so don't lose that.

Check for your local service HERE.

burlington6

bingo_bango wrote: »

Contact your local TSS and make a complaint. They can investigate on the basis of a number of possible offences here (including the garage owner's snotty attitude when trying to reject/return) and might be a simpler solution for you. The fact that you have an independent report from another garage will help a lot, so don't lose that.

Check for your local service HERE.

Hahahahah.................good one

Snotty attitude is now an offence :rotfl:

bingo_bango

burlington6 wrote: »

Hahahahah.................good one

Snotty attitude is now an offence :rotfl:

No, but leading the consumer to the conclusion that they have no rights or redress IS an offence.

philatio

How did you test drive the car but not notice that the Xenon lights, Bose sound system, Memory seats weren't there and that the aircon doesn't work ??

And if you noticed all this on the journey home from picking the car up.. why are we now "two months ago". Why didn't you turn around and drive straight back?

Just curious.

macman

Ditto. Are you in the habit of paying £17K for a car without even checking that the advertised spec matches the actual? Or checking the full service history (if it's electronic, you ask them to supply a print out-it's not rocket science).
If the features that were missing were clearly described as being present, and you can prove that, then you had a clear case for rejecting the vehicle at the time as misrepresented. The other faults are irrelevant in this case. But by waiting 2 months, you've greatly weakened your case for rejection now.
Of course you won't get your old car back, it will have been sold or sent for auction.
Did not the car come with some form of warranty, given what you paid for it? How old is the vehicle and what mileage?

burlington6

bingo_bango wrote: »

No, but leading the consumer to the conclusion that they have no rights or redress IS an offence.

Trading standards won't do a thing. They have as much bite as a toothless man

rhadagast

Thanks for the replies, Obviously I have condensed the timeline of events to simplify the post here.

I entered into attempting to reject the car on day 1, but was met with a hostile response from the dealer and prevented at this point from expecting my old car back.

We made a mistake and went there after numerous other garage visits, so it was late in the day. There were numberous other specifications that the car did check out as having, but missed the 3 noted elements above due to simple oversight and expected the advert not to outright lie - surely there should be some kind of law in place to protect the innocent (and stupid) from unscrupulous sellers ... hhmm

I cannot excuse the FSH issue as this was a serious lack of judgement. No ifs or buts..

The car came with a bog standard warrentywise bronze cover, none of which covers the faults. I do have both a screenshot of the sellers internet advert and a copy from autotrader of the original advert text and dishonest content. Vehicle is an Audi Q7 2008, with 95k miles

The distance between the seller and home is greater than 1.5 hours drive, so there was no option to return the same day especially with the late time of day.
I tried to immediately go through rejection of the car from DAY 1, and recorded all conversations with the seller except the first one after I realised what I was dealing with. After intimidation and non cooperation with the dealer I went to the credit card company to seek recompense under section 75.

I now have the car repaired completely, but a lack of complete service history and a few missing extras.

The section 75 complaint has resulted in an offer of complete recompense for the defects, but does not account for any mis-selling with regard to the sale of goods act 1979, misrepresentation act 1976 and consumer protection from unfair trading regulations 2008.

Would it be best to accept the offer and take the mis-selling on the 'chin' after making mistakes in the buying process or take the credit card offer to the financial ombudsment to push for some compensation for the misrepresented items

tykesi

In order to 'reject' a car you need to stop using it, you clearly haven't done this so had no chance to reject anyway.

Would it be best to accept the offer and take the mis-selling on the 'chin' after making mistakes in the buying process or take the credit card offer to the financial ombudsment to push for some compensation for the misrepresented items

Where is your loss from 'misselling', how much has this misselling cost you on top of the reapirs you've paid for?

rhadagast

In case it is not obvious, the loss from the mis-selling is the artificially inflated price for functionality that is not available. In adition the lack of a full service history will adversely affect the future resale value directly.