Rejected Motorhome - Part Ex Woes

Helensmith1982

Hi All, I seem to be going around in circles, we part exchanged our 1 year old motorhome for a newer larger model. It was faulty on it's first outing (water ingress and buckled floor) so we rejected within the first 30 days. The dealership accepted this proceeded to reverse the finance on the rejected motorhome. The finance on the first motorhome was settled and complete however the dealership went behind our back and reopened the finance with Blackhorse saying we had to take back the part exchanged motorhome as part of reversing the deal. Is this correct as I can't see how they can reopen finance in my name and reset up a direct debit ? We don't want the first motorhome back and would like our equity so we can go to another dealership and find something we want rather than having to take another motorhome from them which doesn't exactly meet our needs. Citizens advice, the FCA and FO all give different advice and nobody seems to be able to tell me exactly what is correct. We have missed all the bank holidays so far, a weeks holiday we have booked off from work and have ferries booked for our summer holiday, if we don't get this sorted soon we are going to miss a full year of motor homing which is a real shame. The dealership also delayed the payments back to the finance company on the faulty motorhome which put us in arrears and affected our credit, and when they opened the finance with Blackhorse it was back dated so also put us in arrears. Please help I am now getting to my wits end with it all and they are starting to be a bit nasty about it all.

AdrianC

In rejecting the vehicle you purchased, you wanted the deal reversing, as if it had never happened.

Obviously, if that's going to happen, then the PX comes back to you, if possible (but if it's not possible, then the monetary equivalent has to suffice).

By reversing the purchase, but leaving the dealer with your PX, you're having half of the deal - the sale of your old vehicle - without the whole deal. You were happy to PX the vehicle last time, why can't you do that again next time? Having your old vehicle returned to you does not in any way tie you to that dealer - you can PX it to anybody.

Although, if the faults were that specific vehicle, rather than a design issue, then why would a direct replacement of a non-faulty equivalent not be acceptable?

You say...

if we don't get this sorted soon we are going to miss a full year of motor homing which is a real shame.

...yet you're objecting to having your previous motorhome available to you, as if the whole initial deal had never happened. Why can you not take the planned holiday in that?

Helensmith1982

Thanks Adrian, I think I need to admit defeat on this one. We were going to part ex with the same company just to close this whole mess off but they came back to us with a different part ex offer which was lower stating they had made a mistake first time around. The finance rate is now also not available and we are having to pay 2% extra in APR so we are losing all round for none of this being our fault.

AdrianC

So PX with somebody else...

If you'd been happy to exchange that faulty vehicle for a non-faulty identical one, or have the faulty one repaired, could the deal have continued?

warby68

It could be that the dealership is fed up with you too (fairly or not) and once you are back to square one with your original vehicle, you may be better buying elsewhere. If the timing is now wrong for this year, couldn't you wait until next?

I don't think its reasonable to expect to undo the purchase but not undo the part-ex. It is reasonable to expect them to sort out any finance issues and not leave you looking as if you have arrears. I'd settle for battling on that score I think.

Just as an aside, is it really cost effective trading in a vehicle only one year old for a newer one and are you taking some other hit there which makes this whole thing even less palatable?

Helensmith1982

I don't believe so, I guess this will just have to be part of my negotiations. If they can get the finance company to offer a better rate due to the issues I suppose I wont be any worse off other than the £2k less in the part ex price they are offering. I have worked out the difference between the two APR rates + £2k less in part ex and I stand to be £6k worse off

Helensmith1982

I am being advised else where that, according to the Consumer Rights Act you have an entitlement to have your part exchange good return to you. However, there is no indication in the CRA that you are obliged to.


How can I clarify this ?

davidwood681

Are you serious OP?

I'm not surprised the dealer wants shut of you and your part exchange

Arklight

Helensmith1982 wrote: »

I don't believe so, I guess this will just have to be part of my negotiations. If they can get the finance company to offer a better rate due to the issues I suppose I wont be any worse off other than the £2k less in the part ex price they are offering. I have worked out the difference between the two APR rates + £2k less in part ex and I stand to be £6k worse off

If you were otherwise happy with the new motorhome why did you not just ask for a non faulty version?

I might be missing something but the substance of this seems to be that the dealer took the new faulty motorhome back fairly straightforwardly and without a fight, but you didn't want your original almost brand new motorhome back in return?

davidwood681

Arklight wrote: »

If you were otherwise happy with the new motorhome why did you not just ask for a non faulty version?

I might be missing something but the substance of this seems to be that the dealer took the new faulty motorhome back fairly straightforwardly and without a fight, but you didn't want your original almost brand new motorhome back in return?

It sounds like they wanted to stitch the dealer up with the part ex, let the dealer settle the finance, then find something to reject the new one on within 30 days hoping that the dealer would refund them the cash amount instead.

Arklight

davidwood681 wrote: »

It sounds like they wanted to stitch the dealer up with the part ex, let the dealer settle the finance, then find something to reject the new one on within 30 days hoping that the dealer would refund them the cash amount instead.

It does rather.