Been sold a dud car!

motorguy

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Be careful on this forum. Many of the people here think that if it's even just 1 plate old (so in this case an 18 plate) or if it's done more than 10 miles then it's just old & battered and if there's any faults with it then you should expect them ... all of them.


And they're all your fault too, supposedly.



There are however some members here who live in the real world. Good luck.

So whats your advice, supported by the CRA 2015?

Because the way i'm seeing it, the O/P bought a 9 year old car and the fault wasnt present at the time of sale, some three months ago which is going to make any sort of a claim an up hill struggle.

Happy to hear your take on why thats wrong?

JustAnotherSaver

motorguy wrote: »

So whats your advice, supported by the CRA 2015?

Because the way i'm seeing it, the O/P bought a 9 year old car and the fault wasnt present at the time of sale, some three months ago which is going to make any sort of a claim an up hill struggle.

Happy to hear your take on why thats wrong?

What's my point?


My point is to not instantly swallow the first thing that someone on here tells you. Take time and keep asking, even if people get upset that you've not listened to the first guy (because the first guy isn't always right!)


If i listened to the first guy i'd have told my brother that he had no right to a claim on his car because it was old.

Turns out he did have right, as stated in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
Some people on a forum can't tell the difference between what they think your rights 'should' be and what your rights 'are'.


So take in all views and look in to them all is my view because SOME people will be talking nonsense

motorguy

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

What's my point?


My point is to not instantly swallow the first thing that someone on here tells you. Take time and keep asking, even if people get upset that you've not listened to the first guy (because the first guy isn't always right!)


If i listened to the first guy i'd have told my brother that he had no right to a claim on his car because it was old.

Turns out he did have right, as stated in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
Some people on a forum can't tell the difference between what they think your rights 'should' be and what your rights 'are'.


So take in all views and look in to them all is my view because SOME people will be talking nonsense

That doesnt make what people are saying wrong .

And saying as you've quoted the CRA 2015, where would you see an opportunity for the O/P to have a claim under it?

And likewise, given the seller doesnt seem inclined to offer any goodwill gesture, how would you suggest the O/P enforces that right?

JustAnotherSaver

motorguy wrote: »

That doesnt make what people are saying wrong .

And why not?


If CRA2015 states that you have a right to refuse and a right to a refund
and then some people online say you have no right because a car is old (despite the fact the CRA2015 doesn't say you have a right ... depending on age of car)


then how are they not wrong??

motorguy

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

And why not?


If CRA2015 states that you have a right to refuse and a right to a refund
and then some people online say you have no right because a car is old (despite the fact the CRA2015 doesn't say you have a right ... depending on age of car)


then how are they not wrong??

So enlighten us, if it doesnt say you have a refund, how has the O/P a right to a refund?

JustAnotherSaver

motorguy wrote: »

So enlighten us, if it doesnt say you have a refund, how has the O/P a right to a refund?

So you're saying that you can't tell me why that doesn't make people wrong?

AdrianC

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Be careful on this forum. Many of the people here think that if it's even just 1 plate old (so in this case an 18 plate) or if it's done more than 10 miles then it's just old & battered and if there's any faults with it then you should expect them ... all of them.

And they're all your fault too, supposedly.

There are however some members here who live in the real world. Good luck.

If you're including me in that, then it might be worth you knowing that my most recent car is R-reg. And I don't mean Reading area.

mcpitman

Beryltheperyl wrote: »

The garage the car was taken to when the engine seized said that it was a camchain, not a cambelt, and the oil was full, so that hadn't caused the engine to seize.

Take it to a new garage, if they are knowledgeable they will know that the insignia is a cam-belt. Not a cam chain.

LiGhTfasT wrote: »

Common fault on the insignia, a bit of research before purchasing and you'd soon see you'd be mad to buy one. Its to do with a oil pickup seal failing usually along with "low oil pressure - stop engine" on the display.
.

Not a common fault, and I wasn't mad to buy mine (110k miles in 4 years and no issues apart from consumables and servicing).

LiGhTfasT

mcpitman wrote: »

Not a common fault, and I wasn't mad to buy mine (110k miles in 4 years and no issues apart from consumables and servicing).

You might want to google "oil pickup seal" no need to mention insignia it will know

Its mainly the prefacelift like the OP.

david_a

Take it to a new garage, if they are knowledgeable they will know that the insignia is a cam-belt. Not a cam chain.

I must admit that was what I thought. But fortunately I googled it before posting and some are cambelt and some camchain