Used car scandal

jackh123

Hi everyone,

So it transpires that car dealers should tell customers if the car they're interested in, is a previous lease/rental car.
In the news:
bristolpost.co.uk/news/motoring/drivers-second-hand-car-could-1016479
and they have a dedicated website:
usedcarscandal.co.uk/

Both mine and my dads car's are former lease cars, which we didn't know until we got the log book. I'm wanting to make a claim on this, but I don't trust the website; the FAQ's refer to the 'terms and conditions', but does not publish them.

Does anyone know of a best way to pursue a claim without having to use these?

Thanks,
Jack

wgl2014

Did you ask if you were buying an ex-lease or rental car?

Also bear in mind a private lease car will have been with one owner and serviced to spec, I get something like an ex-hire car from Hertz or similar may not appeal and is more likely to have been abused.

Some people who have been deliberately misled or lied to may have a case somewhere down the line, lots of people have suffered no financial loss and will on a hiding to nothing.

Samsung_Note2

What did that Buffoon Clarkson say once "Hire cars are the fastest cars on the planet" or something similar.

Id imagine it would have been abused to with in an inch of its life and would throw its self of a very high cliff given half the chance,of course assuming the car had a soul...which is highly doubtful unless its called Christine..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJ5M11m9vI0:eek:

Lorian

Where do people think the massive stocks of nearly new low miles cars come from....

House_Martin

Samsung_Note2 wrote: »

What did that Buffoon Clarkson say once "Hire cars are the fastest cars on the planet" or something similar.

Id imagine it would have been abused to with in an inch of its life and would throw its self of a very high cliff given half the chance,of course assuming the car had a soul...which is highly doubtful unless its called Christine..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJ5M11m9vI0:eek:

Not a buffoon, just someone who knows the motoring trade.
Our 3year old ex lease cars are certainly the most hammered cars in existence. We use them as meter reading cars stopping and starting every 100 yds for 5 days a week or thrashed down the motorway.
Servicing consists of an oil change and ticking a lot of boxes once a year. Pity the poor punter who buys one of those three year old Skoda Citigo s or Citroen C1 s. They may only have 30k miles on the clock but they are 30k hard miles when they go to auction
We use them for 3 years on non stop stop/start/thrash/crunch. Everything gets fully tested to the limit, steering,brakes,gears, engine . None of us check oil/water levels.
.Around 8000 got to auction every 3 years from my company, G4S, now MDS who took over last year.
It is a good law to make it obligatory to let people know where the cars have been for the 3 years since they left the factory.

chrisw

On the other hand, anyone buying my ex lease cars and those of most of my colleagues would get a bargain. Driven hard now and again but never outright abused and any repairs carried out immediately with no expense spared.

Because they have to be returned in tip top condition to avoid severe financial penalties, mine is hand washed regularly and always parked at the empty end of the car park. Dents and scratches I’d probably just live with on my own car are avoided or repaired. Kerbing of the alloys is a big no-no.

I would guess the the vast majority of family sized vehicles and above were lease vehicles initially.

Crabman

Lorian wrote: »

Where do people think the massive stocks of nearly new low miles cars come from....

It's obvious to those who are familiar with the sector but ex-hire cars are often explained away by salespeople as managers' cars, ex-demo cars, etc.

Look at Motorpoint's or Motordepot's site - despite selling a significant number of ex-rentals, do they actually disclose this information? At least Motorpoint will reply honestly when you ask a salesperson who the previous owners were.

Herzlos

Do they need to? Any car could have had a hard life. If you're looking at a 6-12 month old car in a car supermarket it's almost certainly an ex rental.

But with the punitive rates for damage and handling fines/tickets, I drive rental cars far more carefully than my own. It may have witnessed some poor gear changes and revving but you could say the same about any other car you haven't owned from new.

I dare say that a decade or 2 ago it was a different story.

motorguy

jackh123 wrote: »

Hi everyone,

So it transpires that car dealers should tell customers if the car they're interested in, is a previous lease/rental car.
In the news:
bristolpost.co.uk/news/motoring/drivers-second-hand-car-could-1016479
and they have a dedicated website:
usedcarscandal.co.uk/

Both mine and my dads car's are former lease cars, which we didn't know until we got the log book. I'm wanting to make a claim on this, but I don't trust the website; the FAQ's refer to the 'terms and conditions', but does not publish them.

Does anyone know of a best way to pursue a claim without having to use these?

Thanks,
Jack

Genuinely and seriously - get over yourself.

Theres no "scandal", and all your doing is trying to jump on the com-pen-say-shun bandwagon.

For there to be a claim there needs to be a defined loss - whats your or your fathers financial loss?

Did you ask and did you get it in writing that it WASNT an ex hire car BEFORE you bought the car?

My Passat is an ex hire car. I bought it from a main VW dealer and because of the sheer amount of them available and competitiveness on price i got a fantastic deal on it.

I'd a Golf previously bought the same way from the same dealer - fantastic saving compared to new, great little car.

This is yet another attempt to drum up outrage and a scandal by the tabloids (it was "reported" in The Sun a few days ago) and is being jumped upon by ambulance chasing law firms who have ran out of things to do now that PPI claims are drying up and the "holiday sickness scandal" has been scuppered.

motorguy

Lorian wrote: »

Where do people think the massive stocks of nearly new low miles cars come from....

Exactly.

The newspapers mention the word "scandal" and all the vultures then circle hoping to get a few quid.

Its genuinely shameful the way this country has got so claim obsessed.

motorguy

House_Martin wrote: »

Not a buffoon, just someone who knows the motoring trade.
Our 3year old ex lease cars are certainly the most hammered cars in existence. We use them as meter reading cars stopping and starting every 100 yds for 5 days a week or thrashed down the motorway.
Servicing consists of an oil change and ticking a lot of boxes once a year. Pity the poor punter who buys one of those three year old Skoda Citigo s or Citroen C1 s. They may only have 30k miles on the clock but they are 30k hard miles when they go to auction
We use them for 3 years on non stop stop/start/thrash/crunch. Everything gets fully tested to the limit, steering,brakes,gears, engine . None of us check oil/water levels.
.Around 8000 got to auction every 3 years from my company, G4S, now MDS who took over last year.
It is a good law to make it obligatory to let people know where the cars have been for the 3 years since they left the factory.

This is NOT the situation being discussed here. This is the discussion of ex hire cars on a forecourt at a year old.

It shouldnt be law - people should do simple due diligence when they buy a car. Check its history, see who owned it previously. Its as simple as asking to see the V5C.

NOT doing your own simple due diligence does give people the right to subsequently claim.

Thats the big problem these days - noone accepts responsibility for their own actions - theres always someone else to blame.