Consumer Rights Act 2015

waamo

fred246 wrote: »

It's like your loved one going in for an Xray and getting a phone call to say they are in the mortuary. "Well they couldn't have been very well anyway if they were having an Xray".

Indeed. People can die unexpectedly whilst undergoing diagnostic tests. In your scenario the two events would probably be unrelated. I fail to see the relevance of this to the ops issue.

fred246

waamo wrote: »

Indeed. People can die unexpectedly whilst undergoing diagnostic tests. In your scenario the two events would probably be unrelated. I fail to see the relevance of this to the ops issue.

Well they started operating without consent and the patient died.

waamo

fred246 wrote: »

Well they started operating without consent and the patient died.

He took it in and asked for a diagnosis. Unfortunately it was in such poor condition the diagnostic test killed it. It happens. If they hadn't done it then it would have died anyway. A car that cuts out randomly after 2-3 miles isn't safe and shouldn't be on the road.

usedtoname

Thanks for the heads up fred246.

Bogof
Every car can cut out at any time. I learned with mine that it ran as normal upto roughly 50mph, so I avoided that, and rush hour times just in case.

Shaun_of_the_Dead

fred246 wrote: »

Well they certainly made it worse. Your car is supposed to be better after a visit to a garage. I personally expect garages to wreck cars which is why I keep mine well away, however the generally accepted view is that garages are supposed to make cars better.

You're missing the point, the op wouldn't let them work on it.

BoGoF

usedtoname wrote: »

Thanks for the heads up fred246.

Bogof
Every car can cut out at any time. I learned with mine that it ran as normal upto roughly 50mph, so I avoided that, and rush hour times just in case.

There is a difference driving a car that has a 1 in 10,000 (probably more) of cutting out and driving one you know is going to cut out. The fact you had to limit your speed and avoid rush hour shows how much of a danger you were. It was an accident waiting to happen and I'm glad it's off the road.

Your car was unroadworthy before anybody touched it.

AdrianC

waamo wrote: »

He took it in and asked for a diagnosis. Unfortunately it was in such poor condition the diagnostic test killed it.

No, what's "killed" it is the OP deciding it's not worth repairing.

Not repairing "damage", but repairing the faults that the garage were diagnosing.

waamo

AdrianC wrote: »

No, what's "killed" it is the OP deciding it's not worth repairing.

Not repairing "damage", but repairing the faults that the garage were diagnosing.

Indeed I could have phrased that better. The garage was specifically asked to perform a diagnostic test. It wasn't done without consent, it's what the were asked to do.

Any car is fixable. It's about how much time, effort and money you are prepared to invest in it.

usedtoname

This thread may as well be closed down as the key question (s) is not being addressed.

Should the garage:
A, have known in advance what the diagnosis would result in?
B, if so, let me know to offer me the choice to withdraw?
Take it from me that they have VAST experience in the make n model of my car.

waamo

usedtoname wrote: »

This thread may as well be closed down as the key question (s) is not being addressed.

Should the garage:
A, have known in advance what the diagnosis would result in?
B, if so, let me know to offer me the choice to withdraw?
Take it from me that they have VAST experience in the make n model of my car.

A. Without knowing what was wrong with it nobody can say.
B. Who knows? See A.