Advice on consumer rights

mockingbirdred

Hi all,

Just after a bit of advice really. Bought a used Renault Megane in November last year, paid £4250 on it, 2010 reg, 22,000 miles. Currently on about 26,000 miles.

Had some engine trouble with it last week, took it to a Renault garage to diagnose, and they told me it needs £2000 worth of repair work doing including three new tyres (one had already gone and I replaced it), brake fluid needing changing, all the brakes are badly corroded and need replacing, and the dephaser and cam belt need replacing.

I've had the car less than 6 months, and in the advert it specifically says "drives like new" and "good condition inside and out". The advert is here: imgur.com/a/MhvIw

I've sought advice from Trading Standards and have opened up a case with them, and written a letter to the dealership requesting they pay for the repairs on the grounds that the car isn't currently fit for purpose, safe to drive (because of the brakes and cam belt issue) and was advertised as being "as new". As well as this, I was told prior to buying it that the car had been recently serviced.

I don't want to return the car, but will if that's what it comes down to. Do I still have the right to do that if it's within 6 months? And am I correct in saying that the burden of proof is with them to prove that the car wasn't like that when bought within the same time frame?

Have I got a case, basically? If they come back and say they're not going to pay for the repairs, what's my next step? Do I have sufficient grounds to escalate it?

Also, I need the car fixing asap as I need it for my job. Can I have it repaired and then get the dealership to reimburse me for the repair work, or do I have to leave it on my drive until it's sorted?

I know that's quite a few questions. Advice greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

forgotmyname

One tyre had already gone? Gone where?

The renault garage will be quoting to bring the car to like new. Rusty brakes are not a problem unless worn below the specified limit. No mention of that so assume just a bit of surface rust. Drive the car more to clean them.

The brakes are service items anyway. Same with the brake fluid. and cambelt etc. All service items that a 7 year old car requires.

It had recently been serviced. A simple oil change is a service. Did you enquire as to what sort of service it had?

Sounds like there is nothing physically wrong with the car that general servicing wont cure.

Your problem is taking it to a Renault dealership that want to replace everything used with new items.

Can you get it fixed and ask them for the money. Not really. You must offer them a chance to repair it. But seems like there is nothing really wrong with it.

mockingbirdred

forgotmyname wrote: »

One tyre had already gone? Gone where?

The renault garage will be quoting to bring the car to like new. Rusty brakes are not a problem unless worn below the specified limit. No mention of that so assume just a bit of surface rust. Drive the car more to clean them.

The brakes are service items anyway. Same with the brake fluid. and cambelt etc. All service items that a 7 year old car requires.

It had recently been serviced. A simple oil change is a service. Did you enquire as to what sort of service it had?

Sounds like there is nothing physically wrong with the car that general servicing wont cure.

Your problem is taking it to a Renault dealership that want to replace everything used with new items.

Can you get it fixed and ask them for the money. Not really. You must offer them a chance to repair it. But seems like there is nothing really wrong with it.

Gone in the sense of it having gone flat. What did you think I meant?

The brakes are corroded to the point of it affecting performance. I have to brake early and they are not responsive enough, and have had a couple of near misses in the last couple of weeks. They are very much worn to the point of needing replacing, and I have been recommended not to drive it until they're fixed. Nothing to do with needing to be cleaned, they are corroded. I was shown this by the mechanic when he had the car up on the hydraulic lift, plus he filmed it for me to use as evidence.

The cam belt, which I was informed should have been replaced in June last year, has badly split and could go at any time, and the dephaser needs replacing altogether. When the engine starts, it sounds like it's chewing something metal up under the bonnet, which was what alerted me to the problem in the first place. That and the brake performance. These are not your average wear and tear problems. The dephaser replacement alone is £900, and the brakes on the car must have been corroded when I bought it for them to be in the state they're in now.

None of these things are conducive to the car being sold "like new". If it hadn't have been described as such in the advert, I wouldn't have bought it. Brake fluid replacement and tyres I can accept, but after 5 months, a car in an "as new" condition shouldn't be having issues like this.

bigadaj

You've effectively bought a six or seven year old car, the low mileage isn't particularly relevant, at least not in a positive way.

Fist thing you need to do is speak to the garage you bought it from and raise these issues.

It's probably a bit late to raise these as issues, but you might get some goodwil from them, until you try and see their response you won't know and that will guide any further action you think it worth to take.

Strider590

bigadaj wrote: »

You've effectively bought a six or seven year old car, the low mileage isn't particularly relevant, at least not in a positive way.

Yes it is, I wouldn't touch a car that age which had that sort of low mileage, not unless it was an exotic, classic or kitcar.

It's probably had just interim services it's entire life (if serviced at all) and a car that sits more than it drives, rots. Unless like my 2nd car, it's in a dehumidified+heated workshop/garage.

I do think the garage have done some up selling though, dealerships are all about sales and most dealership sales people are snakes.
You'd think the service manager had worked his way up from being a lowly technician, but no they're usually ex-salesmen.

angrycrow

With just 26000 on it the brakes pads and discs are probably the factory originals so no wonder they need replacing due to normal wear and tear.

The cambelt is also a service item and unless renault have changed their intervals is overdue for a change. In my experience Renault cambelts have always been a weak point of their engines and are normally end of life by the change interval which us odd given Ford and PSA can produce cambelts that last 10 years and have no issues with premature failure. Make sure the cambelt change includes the tensioners as they will be worn out and best to get the water pump done.

The problem you have is that tyres cambelt and brakes are service wear and tear items.if the car had a fresh mot at point of sale you have no argument that the brakes were not fit for purpose.

When buying a car you need to confirm the status of tyre and brake wear and then either budget for maintenance or negotiate for new brakes and tyres on the purchase price. Also worth doing some research on when things like cambelts are due and check service history to see if it has been done.

Previous owner probably traded it because it needed new brakes all round, new tyres and major service including cambelt.

facade

Talk to the garage that sold it to you about the dephaser, they will likely want you to pay for the cambelt and pulleys, and inflate the price by the dephaser- so watch for this.

A Renault quality one is about £75 , a Japanese quality one is around £200 retail, not trade. It is literally a 2 minute job to fit at the same time as the cambelt.

Other than that, I'm afraid that you bought a 6 year old Renault, you are lucky that it just needs a cambelt, dephaser and new discs & pads, all of which are consumable items.

motorguy

mockingbirdred wrote: »

Hi all,

Just after a bit of advice really. Bought a used Renault Megane in November last year, paid £4250 on it, 2010 reg, 22,000 miles. Currently on about 26,000 miles.

Had some engine trouble with it last week, took it to a Renault garage to diagnose, and they told me it needs £2000 worth of repair work doing including three new tyres (one had already gone and I replaced it), brake fluid needing changing, all the brakes are badly corroded and need replacing, and the dephaser and cam belt need replacing.

I've had the car less than 6 months, and in the advert it specifically says "drives like new" and "good condition inside and out". The advert is here: imgur.com/a/MhvIw

I've sought advice from Trading Standards and have opened up a case with them, and written a letter to the dealership requesting they pay for the repairs on the grounds that the car isn't currently fit for purpose, safe to drive (because of the brakes and cam belt issue) and was advertised as being "as new". As well as this, I was told prior to buying it that the car had been recently serviced.

I don't want to return the car, but will if that's what it comes down to. Do I still have the right to do that if it's within 6 months? And am I correct in saying that the burden of proof is with them to prove that the car wasn't like that when bought within the same time frame?

Have I got a case, basically? If they come back and say they're not going to pay for the repairs, what's my next step? Do I have sufficient grounds to escalate it?

Also, I need the car fixing asap as I need it for my job. Can I have it repaired and then get the dealership to reimburse me for the repair work, or do I have to leave it on my drive until it's sorted?

I know that's quite a few questions. Advice greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

Where do i start??

Firstly, you've chosen the most expensive Renault mechanics in the country to look at your car. A main Renault dealer is the worst place to take an outside of warranty Renault in terms of VFM.

• 3 new tyres - tyres wear out. Consumable items. I would also check if they are still legal. Your Renault dealer will be keen to replace them for you in advance of this. Also, they'll charge you premium prices. I would say - get yourself a tyre tread checker (about £1 on ebay or a few £ in Halfords). I would almost guarantee the tyres are still legal. Also, check https://www.blackcircles.com for prices. Again your Renault dealer will be adding probably 25% on to the prices as their markup.
• Brake fluid needs changing - is a maintenance function which Renault will want to do for you as its cheap for them to do, but they can charge you a lot. Whilst it may be prudent to change the brake fluid, it is not a necessity.
• All the brakes are corroded and need replacing - another nice one for Renault - they'll point you to corrosion around the discs as "evidence". Again, unless they have a heavy lip around them (indicating they are badly worn) or are making grinding noises, i'd be surprised if they are all needing replaced. Nice little earner for Renault. Again, if you MUST replace them, check out the prices of the parts on somewhere like Euro Car Parts, and budget maybe another £30 a corner for fitting by a local independent mechanic. Then compare that to what your new "friends" at Renault are proposing.
• Timing Belt and Dephaser pulley. If it is noisy at startup, yes, get the pulley, tensioners and belt done. Not by Renault though. They'll be charging you a fortune. I would probably poke the supplying dealer about this - timing belt overdue, now making a noise, etc.

If you really wanted a car "like new" or "as new", then i suggest you buy a new one from your Renault dealer - at probably 3 or 4 times what you paid for your 6 year old one of course.

You bought a 6 year old car, thats now 7 years old. I'm not hearing anything there - other than the dephaser pulley - thats (a) not usual maintenance (the tyres) or (b) isnt your Renault dealer attempting to take you for a ride.

Renault brakes are softer than say the brakes on a Toyota. The suspension tends to be a bit softer too. Having to adjust your driving style to another car is NOT the same as brakes being that badly worn you have to brake earlier and have "near misses".

Soooo glad to be out of motor trading.....

motorguy

mockingbirdred wrote: »

Gone in the sense of it having gone flat. What did you think I meant?

You replaced a tyre because it had gone flat?

mockingbirdred wrote: »

The brakes are corroded to the point of it affecting performance. I have to brake early and they are not responsive enough, and have had a couple of near misses in the last couple of weeks. They are very much worn to the point of needing replacing, and I have been recommended not to drive it until they're fixed. Nothing to do with needing to be cleaned, they are corroded. I was shown this by the mechanic when he had the car up on the hydraulic lift, plus he filmed it for me to use as evidence.

Discs can be corroded around the outer edge and around the central hub without affecting performance. You should instead be looking for heavy scoring on the disc surface, or a thick lip around the edge which would point to heavy wear.

Even at that, they could be showing "some" of the above and pass an MOT.

mockingbirdred wrote: »

The cam belt, which I was informed should have been replaced in June last year, has badly split and could go at any time, and the dephaser needs replacing altogether. When the engine starts, it sounds like it's chewing something metal up under the bonnet, which was what alerted me to the problem in the first place. That and the brake performance. These are not your average wear and tear problems. The dephaser replacement alone is £900

Yes they are and no its not.

Heres a full genuine dephaser pulley and timing belt kit supplied by Vospers Renault -

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Genuine-Clio-Laguna-Megane-Scenic-1-6-16V-Dephaser-Pulley-Cambelt-Kit-Waterpump-/152008296826?hash=item236466897a:g:65gAAOxyNDhSZn-g

£286 delivered, probably 5 hours labour tops @ £30 an hour from an independent.

mockingbirdred wrote: »

and the brakes on the car must have been corroded when I bought it for them to be in the state they're in now.

Frankly it doesnt matter what they look like, if they passed an MOT at the time, thats the indicator as to their roadworthiness.

mockingbirdred wrote: »

None of these things are conducive to the car being sold "like new". If it hadn't have been described as such in the advert, I wouldn't have bought it. Brake fluid replacement and tyres I can accept, but after 5 months, a car in an "as new" condition shouldn't be having issues like this.

"As new" is a subjective term. Your hanging everything on that to support your argument. Its a 7 year old car. Its not ever going to be "as new".

motorguy

mockingbirdred wrote: »

And am I correct in saying that the burden of proof is with them to prove that the car wasn't like that when bought within the same time frame?

Yes, thats correct.

The supplying dealer is responsible for faults that were present at the time of sale.

And heres your simple test - was the dephaser pulley making that noise when you were sold the car? If it wasnt, then the fault wasnt present at the time of sale, so not in their remit to resolve.

Brakes corroded? Was the car supplied with a years MOT OR if not, do the supplying dealer have for example, a checklist showing they checked or tested the brakes? If YES, then the wear and tear / "fault" with the brakes was not present at the time of sale.

Tyres worn? Was the car supplied with a years MOT OR if not, do the supplying dealer have for example, a checklist showing they checked the tyres? If YES, then the wear and tear with the tyres was not present at the time of sale.

Tiddlywinks

mockingbirdred wrote: »

I've had the car less than 6 months, and in the advert it specifically says "drives like new" and "good condition inside and out". The advert is here: imgur.com/a/

...............

I've sought advice from Trading Standards and have opened up a case with them.........

Two things:

'DRIVES like new' does not mean 'as new' condition - it just means it feels 'normal' to drive with no unusual squeaks or thunks. It's referring to the 'driver experience' and NOT the mechanical condition of the vehicle.

Secondly, you've started a case with Tradng Standards so trust their advice and let that play out.