Feeling conned by Peugeot

JamesN

Hi all

Really frustrated with Peugeot. Think it’s best to summarise the story.

Bought a 308 from them in October last year. It was from Robins and day. It was an approved used vehicle and so came with extended warranty, a 30 day no fault guarantee and a couple of other bits.

Within the first couple of days I picked up on some niggles. The brakes were squeaking, parcel shelf clip was damaged, wipers smeared rather than cleared and a few other bits.

I booked the car in and they fixed some bits under warranty. Unfortunately, they refused to do the brakes, wipers and parcel shelf. To me, that is a fault and an approved car shouldn’t have worn brakes. It turns out the discs were lipped and scored. Surely that’s a breach of the 30 day no fault guarantee?

Fast forward to now, I didn’t change the brakes, haven’t done mega mileage but it had it’s mot this week and it passed. The health check confirms the brake issue.

I also identified a fault about the rear axle creaking which is a known issue. Yet the extended warranty guys won’t pay up and Peugeot have offered a discounted fix of £70. Just for putting some foam in a rear axle... extended warranty say this is a mod rather than a repair so won’t cover it.

Safe to say I won’t be buying a Peugeot again. Some of the worst customer service I have endured. They only seem to care about not spending money.

I called customer service who just said they couldn’t do anything and were totally disinterested.

What would you do? I’m tempted to go to trading standards or the ombudsman.

baza52

sorry but i see these problems as wear n tear rather than faults.

JamesN

baza52 wrote: »

sorry but i see these problems as wear n tear rather than faults.

But it was sold like that, surely as an approved used vehicle, their extensive check should have highlighted and replaced it.

I've not seen anything that says excludes wear and tear. It says no fault guarantee. Wear and tear are still faults...

Would you be happy about it?

MataNui

Sadly 'Approved Used' doesnt mean anything like what people expect. I am with the OP on this one in terms of expectation. If its an 'Approved Used' then it should be in excellent condition with no faults at all. You can say its 'wear and tear' and technically some of it is (though not the parcel shelf), but the point of an 'Approved' car is that it has been checked and should be totally fault free and that includes no obvious signs of wear and tear (Like the issues reported with the brakes). In fact some brands advertise the 'Approved Used' scheme by saying you wouldnt know its used etc


Unfortunately i know from experience that the premium payed for an 'Approved Used' isnt worth it. Its unlikely they even did half of the checks on the list and even less likely they would spend money correcting anything they found. Dont think premium brands are any better either. They can be some of the worst.

m0bov

Check the small print, you could just reject it and take the car back and hand over the keys.

neilmcl

m0bov wrote: »

Check the small print, you could just reject it and take the car back and hand over the keys.

Not after nearly a year he can't.

neilmcl

JamesN wrote: »

But it was sold like that, surely as an approved used vehicle, their extensive check should have highlighted and replaced it.

I've not seen anything that says excludes wear and tear. It says no fault guarantee. Wear and tear are still faults...

Would you be happy about it?

So why didn't you exercise the 30 day return guarantee rather than wait another year to moan about it.

JamesN

neilmcl wrote: »

So why didn't you exercise the 30 day return guarantee rather than wait another year to moan about it.

I don't believe there is a return guarantee, just a no fault one. I took it in within 30 days and they refused to fix it.

shaun_from_Africa

If the brakes and wipers were good enough to pass the MOT then they weren't faulty, just worn, something that is to be expected from any used vehicle.
Worn brakes and wiper blades are no different to having tyres that are worn but still more than good enough to legally take that vehicle on the road.

Where would you draw the line?
If dealers were held liable for worn items, they would have to fit 4 new tyres (and maybe a new spare as well), new brake pads/shoes/disks/drums, new wiper blades, a new clutch etc to every car they sold.

neilmcl

JamesN wrote: »

I don't believe there is a return guarantee, just a no fault one. I took it in within 30 days and they refused to fix it.

Fair enough, but the time to do something about worn brakes and wipers was surely when you got the car, not a year later after you've been happily driving around in it.

societys_child

I bought a used car and expected everything to be new . .