sold as a 4x4 but missing propshaft do i have a claim?

Gloomendoom

AdrianC wrote: »

Four driven wheels can get you INTO trouble in poor conditions. All the extra two driven wheels add is to get you moving in conditions where you wouldn't otherwise be moving. They don't help with changing direction or with slowing/stopping.

You might want to research the effect of tractive force on tyre slip angles.

bartelbe

Sophsters1982 wrote: »

Another update, so the dealer has said what we thought he would say, its over 6 months, they knew nothing about the prop not being there, so i told them ill be complaining formally via letter asking for a discount due to having bought a 4x4 that isnt a 4x4 and that we will be taking legal advice.

MOT history unfortunately shows nothing relating to the prop or transfer box.

Have also fired off a nice letter to the previous owner asking them if they removed the prop shaft or had bought it that way. We are looking for a prop shaft to fit so that we can then determine what else if anything is wrong i.e. transfer box etc and i will consider taking it further should there be a lot more repairs needed and not just the simple case of putting a prop back on

we bought the car for its space and look but the overall factor was the 4x4 capability which living in the highlands of scotland we hoped would help us in the harsh winters we can get, having only had the car 6 months we obviously havent tested that yet

The reason the rules around car dealers are stricter than private sellers is because it is assumed a person in the trade will have expertise about cars. Therefore it is not valid for the dealer to claim they did not know about the fault.

Dealers should have enough knowledge about the cars they are selling, to sell them in a road worthy condition and know that the vehicle is as describe.

He sold you a 4x4 which is not a 4x4. Worse it is now rear wheel drive, which makes it far more difficult to drive in snow and ice conditions. Imagine what would happen if you took it out in winter conditions, thinking it was all wheel drive and then lost control, because it is not?

I doubt this car was ever designed to run rear wheel drive, it will have been designed as front or all wheel drive.

Dealers oversight, dealers problem. The dealers union on here will disagree, but it is their job to properly check their stock before sale.

Tilt

bartelbe wrote: »

The reason the rules around car dealers are stricter than private sellers is because it is assumed a person in the trade will have expertise about cars. Therefore it is not valid for the dealer to claim they did not know about the fault.

Dealers should have enough knowledge about the cars they are selling, to sell them in a road worthy condition and know that the vehicle is as describe.

He sold you a 4x4 which is not a 4x4. Worse it is now rear wheel drive, which makes it far more difficult to drive in snow and ice conditions. Imagine what would happen if you took it out in winter conditions, thinking it was all wheel drive and then lost control, because it is not?

I doubt this car was ever designed to run rear wheel drive, it will have been designed as front or all wheel drive.

Dealers oversight, dealers problem. The dealers union on here will disagree, but it is their job to properly check their stock before sale.

Best comment so far. I'm sure a district judge would agree.

Herzlos

bartelbe wrote: »

Dealers should have enough knowledge about the cars they are selling, to sell them in a road worthy condition and know that the vehicle is as describe.

How do they prove it was sold without the propshaft?

Tilt

Herzlos wrote: »

How do they prove it was sold without the propshaft?

That's the OP's only problem. As I said in post #4, after 6 months the onus shifts to the consumer to prove the fault existed at the point of sale. The OP has apparently sent a letter to the prvious owner. That might clinch it.

burlington6

bartelbe wrote: »

The reason the rules around car dealers are stricter than private sellers is because it is assumed a person in the trade will have expertise about cars. Therefore it is not valid for the dealer to claim they did not know about the fault.

Dealers should have enough knowledge about the cars they are selling, to sell them in a road worthy condition and know that the vehicle is as describe.

He sold you a 4x4 which is not a 4x4. Worse it is now rear wheel drive, which makes it far more difficult to drive in snow and ice conditions. Imagine what would happen if you took it out in winter conditions, thinking it was all wheel drive and then lost control, because it is not?

I doubt this car was ever designed to run rear wheel drive, it will have been designed as front or all wheel drive.

Dealers oversight, dealers problem. The dealers union on here will disagree, but it is their job to properly check their stock before sale.

With the time frame of this problem, you are wrong.

burlington6

I have been in business for over 40 years and nobody is as dishonest and conniving as the general public.

For every bad business out there, there are tens of thousands of bad customers

Tilt

burlington6 wrote: »

With the time frame of this problem, you are wrong.

Of course you would say that. But the fact is that it isn't necessarily wrong. IF the OP can prove the fault existed at the point of sale then the SOGA may apply.

dannyrst

burlington6 wrote: »

I have been in business for over 40 years and nobody is as dishonest and conniving as the general public.

For every bad business out there, there are tens of thousands of bad customers

Given there are far more customers than businesses, that makes sense, doesn't it?

Tilt

burlington6 wrote: »

I have been in business for over 40 years and nobody is as dishonest and conniving as the general public.

For every bad business out there, there are tens of thousands of bad customers

Is this just your experience or is there actual evidence of this available? Or could it be that your'e in the wrong business?