2nd hand car purchased in July 07 has failed MOT

Poppycat

I dont dispute that, they could also be passed legally by either a dodgy MOT garage and you do get them or someone not being vigilant and checking for faults. What I find disturbing are what the mechanic words were "excessive corrosion", rather than they failed as they have some corrosion.

Iamthesmartestmanalive wrote: »

No but they can go from being legal to being excessivly in 3 months

They can do that overnight

As long as they werent dangerous/MOT failures at that time he didnt have any duty to fix them

3 months even in the mildest conditions are long enough for brake components to reach MOT failure stage

Iamthesmartestmanalive

Poppycat wrote: »

I dont dispute that, they could also be passed legally by either a dodgy MOT garage and you do get them or someone not being vigilant and checking for faults. What I find disturbing are what the mechanic words were "excessive corrosion", rather than they failed as they have some corrosion.

Thats mechanic speak though

Excessive for an MOT
Some corrosion would have passed an MOT

Excessive just means there well on the way and need replaced now, it doesnt mean they are necessary been that way for long or that the car has been dangerous to drive for a substantial period

For example a car might fail an MOT on excessivly worn pads or discs but still drive safely for some time

Excessive in MOT terms doesnt necessary mean to me its a death trap, just that they are worn and near the end of life

Poppycat

Thanks I am trying to be reasonable here, I did state that " Fair enough the problem would be different if its been 9 months or so", so my expectations are that I expect a car having paid 3.5k for it to be road worthy much longer than 3 months, its only now I found the fault because MOT was due, I am sure the fault was there all the time.

I did ring Consumer advice centre it was only after I seek advice did I post this, and after I spoke to the garage who sold me the car. I have instructed the MOT garage to do the work as I need the car for Thursday, if I can get proof I may pursue this. The garage who is doing the work I haven't spoken to, only the mechanic friend who takes the car in and picks it up, he is a very experienced and honest mechanic

It was due to my freind who suggested approaching the garage as I may have a case. I rang them up no one answered I then rang Consumer advice line and the the garage who sold me the car again

Crabman wrote: »

Hey Poppycat, I too would be very annoyed if a car failed on me 3 months following purchase. I can't see any sense in spending £3,500 for 3 months motoring. I would have thought the sale of goods act would cover, after all, if this (hypothetically) ended up in the small claims court, I would expect them to say a car costing £3,500 should remain roadworthy for much more than three months. As a guide, my mother purchased a 3-year old vehicle for £4,500, it's still going strong 7 years later, needing only replacement brake pads since purchase (and tyres, obviously, must be all those donuts she does in tescos).

Have a look at Honest John's FAQ: Rejecting a duff car / getting compensation (link from Motoring A-Z) - there he clearly states that within 6 months of sale it is up to the retailer to prove that the faults were not present at time of sale, otherwise he has to repair, replace or give you a partial refund.

Something I found useful when an garage repairer cracked my offside indicator was Consumer Direct - find your local call centre number on SayNoTo0870 - they told me exactly what my rights were and what to say in the letter - go back to them if they didn't help properly the first time. I didn't actually pursue my case as it was only a little crack, but I hope you find them useful, please keep us updated and good luck

robnye

my previous car had excessive rust/corrosion for the last 3 years - it was highlighted on the mot listing, but not enough to fail the mot.
i drove the car every 75 miles to work and back every day for 3 years, before it finally gave up the ghost at its last mot, but not on the brake pipes.

i think your best bet - is the consumer direct line, as mentioned by 'crabman'

Poppycat

Thanks I have previous stated although its appreciated the advice that I did contact them, its there view based on what I said that I may have a case under SOGA.

I just posted because I dont have any experienced of them and I want to demonstrate that I am being reasonable, I have given the garage opportunity for redress and assuming I can get proof I may pursue the garage for redress, I will give them another chance if I get some evidence in writing from the garage who is doing the MOT

photome

Just a couple of points from me.

I think you paid way over the top for a 7 year old focus.

The car WAS fit for purpose when you bought it, the brake pipes havent corroded in 3 months they have corroded in 12 months since the last MOT.

For the price you paid I would have expected a new MOT but you didnt get one, but I fail to see how the garage is now at fault.

Poppycat

I researched for a focus of up to 3.5k on Auto express and nearby garages and they came round that price on autoexpress for that age, mileage and 5k in local Ford garage, Polar.

satan666wayne

make sure you keep the old pipes

custardy

problem with corrosion on an mot is a lot is down to that testers opinion.
so in real terms you would have needed(IMO) to get a 2nd opinion to back that up.
the very fact its done low mileage could have been the killer.
i must admit on a 3k+ car i would have stipulated a new mot as a buying condition

Poppycat

I have asked the friend to keep the old pipes