I've bought a clocked car, help HELP!!?

Stoke

Hello,

I bought a car from a local dealer about 2 months ago (30th August to be precise).

Immediately, I began to have problems with a very strong fuel smell. I took it back and was told "the car was sold without a warranty" but he did take a look. They spent about 3 hours but told me they weren't willing to spend anymore time on it.

I took it away, took it elsewhere and it was diagnosed that a dodgy aftermarket fuel filter had been installed and collapsed. Replaced, all good for a few days. Then an oil leak appeared, which my garage has been trying to diagnose, they think it's probably a rocker gasket or camshaft seal but it could be a breather. They told me not to rush to fixing it until the breathers were replaced first. Obviously I've sucked up to the fact there's no warranty.

HOWEVER, now it's gotten a bit more weird, as today I spotted on the MOT History that my car has some strange odometer readings:

Test date: 9 October 2013
Expiry date: 15 October 2014
Test Result: Pass Odometer reading: 69,040 miles
MOT test number3591 8298 3215

Test date: 15 October 2012
Expiry date: 15 October 2013
Test Result: Pass
Odometer reading: 77,823 miles
MOT test number 5769 9918 2266

So in 12 months, the clock has gone back 8k miles?????

This is very worrying. I actually like the car and I've already spent money getting some of the issues fixed.

What would be your advice? I am aware it's possible the dealer himself didn't notice it was clocked (he told me it was a part ex) however the fact it has been clocked means that it's been sold at an incorrect price to me, almost certainly?

Help?

Johno100

Was the 2012 MOT the cars first? If not it is hard to pass judgement if we don't know the previous odometer reading, it could be that the 2012 figure was erroneously recorded.

And did it come with a service book covering that period and if so how do the service mileage figures match up to the MOT figures?

droopsnoot

I am no expert, I am sure there will be one along soon, but I didn't think it was possible for a dealer to sell a car to a member of the public without a warranty of any kind?

Also, what are the other MOT mileage readings? Is it possible that the higher one is a mis-type, or that the one that appears to have reduced is a mis-type, and maybe should have read 89xxx rather than 69xxx?

Herzlos

How olds the car and what's the mileage history for the rest of it? Be it service log or older MOTs?

Most likely it's a misprint somewhere; no-one would bother clocking that little.

AdrianC

Did you not look at the MOT when you bought the car? The certificate has the mileage at the last five or so tests printed on it.

What value difference do you think an additional 8,000 miles would have made?

shaun_from_Africa

droopsnoot wrote: »

I am no expert, I am sure there will be one along soon, but I didn't think it was possible for a dealer to sell a car to a member of the public without a warranty of any kind

There is no legal requirement for a car dealer or any other seller to provide a warranty of any sort.
This is because whether or not a warranty is given, when buying from business sellers, consumers still have certain legal rights which cover amongst other things the condition and durability of the purchased good and a warranty is simply something that may be provided and which is excess of your legally mandated rights.

shaun_from_Africa

AdrianC wrote: »

What value difference do you think an additional 8,000 miles would have made?

If the vehicle has been clocked, the actual figure could well be far in excess of the 8,000 difference between the two MOT dated figures depending on the mileage the car drove that year.

droopsnoot

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

This is because whether or not a warranty is given, when buying from business sellers, consumers still have certain legal rights which cover amongst other things the condition and durability of the purchased good and a warranty is simply something that may be provided and which is excess of your legally mandated rights.

That's the kind of thing I meant, cheers.

mcjordi

tester could of read it as 69 when it was 89? maybe a dead pixel in the display?

AdrianC

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

If the vehicle has been clocked, the actual figure could well be far in excess of the 8,000 difference between the two MOT dated figures depending on the mileage the car drove that year.

Yes, it could. But if it had been clocked more subtly, nobody would ever have noticed. So...

Rain_Shadow

My younger son's car is 9 years old and every scrap of paperwork (and we have a lot, including all service invoices, support its mileage of 68k except one MoT from about four years ago that is clearly a data entry error with the mileage being about 30k over what you might expect and falling back in line with everything else the following year.