Cambelt snapped within 7 days from purchase

kozlikha

I have a very strong case according to previous cases prior to 2015, subsequently consumer rights have been improved.

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/faq/consumer-rights/

Abstract:

A new law called the Consumer Rights Act 2015 came into effect on 1st October 2015, giving car buyers the right to reject a faulty car within 30 days and ask for a full refund. This differs from the previous protection afforded to consumers under the Sale of Goods Act, which the Consumer Righrs Act replaces.

My car was faulty within 30 days, repairs will be too costly, hence the reasonable demand for a full reimbursement. Older cars and sold for less money have been refunded, this isn't a valid defence for a car dealer any longer.

DUTR

kozlikha wrote: »

It is reasonable to expect that damage to have happened to a £1000 car, not to a £3500+ one and it happened on day 7 of ownership. As it happened so quickly, this makes it not fit for purpose (30 day period). As far as I'm concerned I have a case, of this was reasonable to happen to happen to car of this age/mileage then it wouldn't be priced at £3500, think about it, market prices in these sort of things and £3.5k car should have lasted longer than 7 days, that is the paramount factor in all of this.

And to answer the poster who suggests I don't listen to advice I state again I am not here for advice based on what you think, but what people experience was taking car dealers to small claims based on similar experiences. Why would I want YOUR opinion? Who are you? Lol

kozlikha wrote: »

I have a very strong case according to previous cases prior to 2015, subsequently consumer rights have been improved.

https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/faq/consumer-rights/

Abstract:

A new law called the Consumer Rights Act 2015 came into effect on 1st October 2015, giving car buyers the right to reject a faulty car within 30 days and ask for a full refund. This differs from the previous protection afforded to consumers under the Sale of Goods Act, which the Consumer Righrs Act replaces.

My car was faulty within 30 days, repairs will be too costly, hence the reasonable demand for a full reimbursement. Older cars and sold for less money have been refunded, this isn't a valid defence for a car dealer any longer.

In your opening post you did ask, if you are so sure then there is no need for the thread.

kozlikha

DUTR wrote: »

In your opening post you did ask, if you are so sure then there is no need for the thread.

I am not sure, I strongly believe.

DUTR

kozlikha wrote: »

I am not sure, I strongly believe.

Of course you strongly believe and that is natural, I'm sure the dealer strongly believed they were trading on a fairly priced condition vehicle, they too take a risk when trading.

I may have missed it through the thread or not remembered, but have you actually contacted the dealer?

kozlikha

DUTR wrote: »

Of course you strongly believe and that is natural, I'm sure the dealer strongly believed they were trading on a fairly priced condition vehicle, they too take a risk when trading.

I may have missed it through the thread or not remembered, but have you actually contacted the dealer?

Yes. I acted on Which advice and sent them a letter via email advising of what has happened and that I seek a refund (consumer act 2015, faulty goods, not fit for purpose, etc.) giving the dealer 14 days to respond.

We run a small business and supply goods and services to general public, if we supply a faulty product or product develops a fault within 30 days, then we MUST issue a refund, like it or not, doesn't matter what our intentions were. I'm not accusing dealer of deceit, I just want a refund if that's what I have the right to.

AdrianC

kozlikha wrote: »

We run a small business and supply goods and services to general public, if we supply a faulty product or product develops a fault within 30 days, then we MUST issue a refund

Does your business supply used goods that are a good chunk of the way through their typical life, and about 15-20% of their new cost?

kozlikha

AdrianC wrote: »

Does your business supply used goods that are a good chunk of the way through their typical life, and about 15-20% of their new cost?

No. But whether you supply new or used, main point is that if you supply, the goods supplied must be fit for purpose. We discussed all this already. Nobody on this board would consider a major breakdown of a £3.5k Audi a3 with full service history to be a reasonable outcome within 7 days of purchase. We buy from businesses because one of the main reasons is that we don't have to be tied into 'sold as seen' as with private sales. A recovery driver and another mechanic from a separate garage that came to inspect the damage, both said that dealer has to give me my money back, as this is an unreasonable breakdown within 30 days. It's not meant to be an old banger of a car.

wgl2014

I think the relevant legislation and points to prove have been covered pretty comprehensively, one thing I would say to the OP is that if the dealer refuses you a refund you have been given a decent list of factors to include in the subsequent claim. It's always worth hearing other people's points of view even if you may not agree.

I wouldn't be happy if a car purchased from a dealer had a major faliure only a week into my ownership and would expect them to sort it without protest.

lincroft1710

Cambelt 42K miles old isn't a recent replacement.

141K miles is high mileage for 8 yr old car.

Usually no indication cambelt is nearing the end of its life.

Full Service History is no guarantee of there not being any problems. At 8 yrs old/141K miles some cars will start having problems.

I don't think the dealer purposely sold you a vehicle not fit for purpose, it was just bad luck the cambelt failed. But I don't know what the practical solution will be.

kozlikha

wgl2014 wrote: »

I think the relevant legislation and points to prove have been covered pretty comprehensively, one thing I would say to the OP is that if the dealer refuses you a refund you have been given a decent list of factors to include in the subsequent claim. It's always worth hearing other people's points of view even if you may not agree.

I wouldn't be happy if a car purchased from a dealer had a major faliure only a week into my ownership and would expect them to sort it without protest.

I agree. Thanks for the understanding.