Used Car - Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Repair Not Being Offered

strandty

Good afternoon all. 
I was hoping to get some advice as this is now starting to cause my family and I some serious stress. So here is the situation:

My mother took delivery of the subject car on January 25th 2020, after finalising a sale on December 20th 2019 via PCP. 

On February 21st, we spotted an oil leak which was reported to the dealer in question once noticed. The agent who dealt with the sale kindly mentioned that this would be covered under warranty and that we should check the booklet included with sale papers and arrange with them. This points to the first time we noticed the leak, 3 weeks after taking delivery. 

After discussions with the warranty company, they informed us that they would require a written quote to cover said work, up to the value of £535.00. 

On March 2nd (less than 6 weeks), we took the car in to a mechanic to get analysed and to provide us with a quote. To our shock, they stated that the price would be running up to £1,000 for the repairs. Following verbal conversations with the service team, they seemed confused as to why the car was even sold in its current condition at the time and that we should get a second opinion to take to the warranty company. 

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic which took hold shortly after, all local garages paused trading, meaning we could not get a secondary quote. I informed the warranty company about this, who stated that they would extend the warranty due to the global pandemic.

On May 27th 2020, we received our second quote for the car from a second mechanics and again, was quoted over £1,000 for the repairs, far surpassing the warranty limit. This mechanic mentioned and also put on the quote that work had quite clearly been 'attempted' prior to delivery and that sealant was used where the gaskets should have been. The error in question is an oil leak which is coming from the oil filter housing and the front timing cover. The mechanic quoted to replace the front crankshaft oil seal, sump gasket, timing cover gasket and the rocker cover gasket. 

Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, this car should have been of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. Taking this into consideration, my Mother's rights have been breached, because the car sold to us is classed as faulty and is not of satisfactory quality. We kindly requested that the car was repaired at the cost of the dealer as early as possible. As the issue first presented itself within 3 weeks, this was clearly present prior to taking delivery of the vehicle. 

After providing quotes and e-mails to the dealer and the warranty company (funnily enough also deal with the dealer's legal issues), they are now stating that because the car passed an MOT prior to delivery, the error was clearly not present at the time of sale and that they are now transferring the onus onto us to prove that the fault was not caused by us. After calling the garage who gave us the second quote, the mechanic stated that the oil leak in question would not lead to a failed MOT due to the leak not dripping onto the brakes etc. 

We just need some advice on where to turn to next? Are they in the right? Are we in the right? Any help would be great! 

Thank you!

AdrianC

How old a car are we talking about?

Herzlos

Used car? Approved? Franchised dealership?

Warranty companies are generally terrible for excluding almost anything, your recourse would be via the dealership., I think.

strandty

AdrianC said:

How old a car are we talking about?

Herzlos said:

Used car? Approved? Franchised dealership?

Warranty companies are generally terrible for excluding almost anything, your recourse would be via the dealership., I think.

Apologies! The car is a 2014 (14) Nissan Qashqai bought from a company called ProSportsCars in Hull, who brokered credit through Santander. 

The warranty company also provide ProSportsCars legal Advice, so dealing with them on two fronts. I contacted the dealer who then said they would be contacting the warranty company for the legal advice regards the Consumer Rights Act.

DoaM

The MOT statement is a red herring ... it has no impact on your (her) consumer rights.

Within 30 days, if you wish a full refund (Initial Right To Reject is available for 30 days) then the consumer may be required to prove that the fault was inherent (present but not apparent at the time of sale). If the consumer is willing to accept the seller's choice of remedy then the burden of proof switches to the seller (up until 6 months from purchase/delivery whereupon it switches back to the consumer). Long story short - it is for the dealer to prove it wasn't faulty, not yours to prove it was. (Albeit seems you already have such proof).

Therefore the dealer must now provide a remedy - repair, replace or refund ... their choice. (A refund can be reduced to account for reduction in value due to how many miles you've added to it - I imagine this will be negligible). This remedy must also be provided in a reasonable time frame and without causing unreasonable inconvenience.

If the dealer refuses to accept responsibility then raise a Section 75 claim against the finance company ... assuming the PCP agreement falls within the auspices of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ... as you have an equal claim against the finance provider as you do against the seller.

daveyjp

£535 warranty cover on a 6 year old car isn't worth having.  A token gesture by the supplying garage.

DoaM has set out your rights.

strandty

DoaM said:

 The MOT statement is a red herring ... it has no impact on your (her) consumer rights.

Within 30 days, if you wish a full refund (Initial Right To Reject is available for 30 days) then the consumer may be required to prove that the fault was inherent (present but not apparent at the time of sale). If the consumer is willing to accept the seller's choice of remedy then the burden of proof switches to the seller (up until 6 months from purchase/delivery whereupon it switches back to the consumer). Long story short - it is for the dealer to prove it wasn't faulty, not yours to prove it was. (Albeit seems you already have such proof).

Therefore the dealer must now provide a remedy - repair, replace or refund ... their choice. (A refund can be reduced to account for reduction in value due to how many miles you've added to it - I imagine this will be negligible). This remedy must also be provided in a reasonable time frame and without causing unreasonable inconvenience.

If the dealer refuses to accept responsibility then raise a Section 75 claim against the finance company ... assuming the PCP agreement falls within the auspices of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ... as you have an equal claim against the finance provider as you do against the seller.

That is very helpful, thank you very much! I have all correspondence from the dealer from agreement to delivery etc. 

So if you are saying that the MOT
has no impact on my mum’s Consumer Rights, but they are saying that the passed MOT proves the fault didn’t exist, how would we proceed do you believe? Like I said, the garage stated that the MOT wouldn’t have failed because of this fault regardless so the MOT is worthless as a claim I suppose? 

As mentioned, we were happy for the car to be repaired under warranty (joke of a system) and have had the car less than 6 months, so my research and your back up states it is up to the garage to PROVE it WASNT an issue at the time. 

AdrianC

The MOT can be failed for an oil leak - but it has to be pretty much monumental. 75mm diameter pool in 5 minutes.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-private-passenger-and-light-commercial-vehicles/8-nuisance#section-8-4

Ultimately, if they won't accept liability, then you need to launch a small claim - and you need to show that you've minimised the losses. So you need to use the warranty, and then you claim for the amount above what they cover.

strandty

AdrianC said:

The MOT can be failed for an oil leak - but it has to be pretty much monumental. 75mm diameter pool in 5 minutes.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-private-passenger-and-light-commercial-vehicles/8-nuisance#section-8-4

Ultimately, if they won't accept liability, then you need to launch a small claim - and you need to show that you've minimised the losses. So you need to use the warranty, and then you claim for the amount above what they cover.

Thanks for this. The warranty company (who are also providing legal advice to said dealership) have said that the repairs are not covered under the cover that we have been provided with the sale of the car. 

DoaM

Warranty is in excess of your consumer rights, so can have any (reasonable) terms they wish.

Ignore the warranty - pursue this under consumer rights. Approach the finance company first to see about a Section 75 claim.

strandty

DoaM said:

Warranty is in excess of your consumer rights, so can have any (reasonable) terms they wish.

Ignore the warranty - pursue this under consumer rights. Approach the finance company first to see about a Section 75 claim.

I have written to them again with help from your messages so thank you very much for that. I am excluding the warranty and not even taking it into consideration however, the warranty company are dealing with the issue on behalf of the dealership (being their voice) as they’re the ones who provide the legal advice to the dealership strangely enough! Let’s see what they come back with. 

Thanks for your help!