What is reasonable deduction when faulty car is being bought back?

MEM62

DoaM wrote: »

We can argue (discuss in a friendly manner ) what a reasonable reduction may be, and whether the timeline matters (I believe it does, as faults were reported within 3 months), but the quoted bit above is the crux of the matter - OP's friend needs to raise this with the dealer else start court proceedings on the basis of CRA 2015.

The timeline absolutely matters. The issue will be that the purchaser did not reject the car within the 3-month window an I expect that the dealer will argue that (a) the earlier repairs have been accepted and (b) the latter ones are new issues that are being dealt with under warranty. (Assuming the he is not being charged)

k3lvc

OP - were the issues related or are they expected faults on an 8yo car that the dealer has rectified throughout the year i.e. you'll struggle to claim that a fuel pump, a dodgy rear window heater and a brake issue which occurred during the course of a year were connected and therefore whether the dealer's correct in offering to 'buy the car back' rather then 'refund'

fred246

The problem is that when you take a car to a garage for a repair they will normally not put it back together properly or damage something else. A car that has been to a garage 8 times stands no chance. Garages must have bins where they put all the parts that the mechanic can't be bothered to put back on reassembly. I would take the money they offer and then issue a small claims court summons so you only lose 10%.

motorguy

DoaM wrote: »

We can argue (discuss in a friendly manner ) what a reasonable reduction may be, and whether the timeline matters (I believe it does, as faults were reported within 3 months), but the quoted bit above is the crux of the matter - OP's friend needs to raise this with the dealer else start court proceedings on the basis of CRA 2015.

Indeed.

Though i read the following "As one issue is resolved, another develops" as meaning there were different issues throughout the year. Some of these could have been faults, some wear and tear related to the cars age.

If the O/P's friend is determined, i'd issue an LBA, then follow it up with a claim for the full amount and see what happens. Maybe the full amount - 10% to demonstrate acceptance that there is a loss involved.

I wouldnt like to be where it land in court though, given its an 8 year old car and a year has passed. There are lots of ways the dealer's lawyers could spin it.

And then theres the other issue - if they are "rejecting it", can they continue to drive about in it?

motorguy

Artegal wrote: »

Yes, it does sound like a trade price. And yes it is almost a year, but my friend raised the issues very early after the purchase. I believe under the CRA the dealer has one opportunity to rectify the issue. Through my friend’s goodwill they’ve had 7 or 8 opportunities. Each time an issue is sorted, another one crops up. That’s why 11 months has elapsed. I believe they should have it back under CRA but how much are they allowed to withhold from the original price?

Where is the car currently?

Has it currently any significant faults?

Artegal

Thank you all for your replies - very useful. The car’s issues are all related, they are predominantly around engine management messages coming up on the dashboard and the car losing all power. It’s an intermittent fault that comes and goes. Every time the dealer has said they’ve fixed it, it’s returned in a different guise, but with the same effect - the car loses power and, at best, limps along.

The car is currently with the owner, who is waiting for the dealer to find a comparable model to swap it out. They have upped their cash offer to £6,000 which being a 27% reduction for wear and tear is still, I think, unacceptable. Other than the engine faults, the car is in pristine condition.

foxy-stoat

Artegal wrote: »

The car is currently with the owner, who is waiting for the dealer to find a comparable model to swap it out. They have upped their cash offer to £6,000 which being a 27% reduction for wear and tear is still, I think, unacceptable. Other than the engine faults, the car is in pristine condition.

Tell him it is a gift, take the money and hand the car back.