Car battery issue

cazandco1

We bought a car on Thursday from a secondhand car garage. 
We looked at the car, but were unable to drive it when we viewed as it had no drivers window, it was being repaired. 
We had to make an appointment to view and travelled 75 miles. 
We agreed a deal based on a clear MOT and service, which is what the garage says they offer. 
It was agreed, due to work.commitments that the car would be delivered. 
The carbwas driven to our home and my husband checked around the car and accepted it. 
4 hours later when I went to look at the car we tried to start it up. The battery was dead. We had to charge the car overnight to get the car to start. 
We informed the garage that morning and he said it worked fine when it left him, and that maybe a light had been left on and drained the battery. (I made sure we only had discussion via text message).
I told him we would get the battery tested and he asked to be made aware of the outcome. 
My husband took it to Halfords today. He got there. The guy at Halfords began checking the car over and was about to checknthe tyre pressure using an incar tyre pressure gauge. The gauge didn't work, so he tried to start the engine. The battery was flat.
The guy at Halfords checked the battery and he said 1) The battery had a Fiat 400w battery in it, and the car needed a 800w battery...its a 2 litre diesel. And 2) the battery was clearly a secondhand battery as it was a Fiat battery, and the car is a Renault. 
As the batterybwas dead, with no way of moving my husband had to buy a battery there and then. 
He also said that when the tyre pressure was checked, the pressure in each tyre was wrong and they all had different pressures. Some being over inflated and some under. .
There is also a crack in the windscreen under the wipers that can't be repaired, yet this car passed its MOT on 1/7/20. It was driven to us by the garage, and driven to Halfords 1.5 miles away to get the checks done. There was also a headlight out.
We have booked the car in for an independent MOT on Monday.
We have informed the seller who refuses to pay for the battery and said he wants the car back. He has told my husband he will not pay for the battery or bulbs. He thinks my husband is a doctor as we work for the NHS and told my husband he can afford to lose a few hundred pounds. 
We will be contacting trading standards on Monday as the car is not sold fit for purpose with a dead battery. 
He doesnt seen to want us to get an independent MOT.
We have spent the last 2 months trying to get a car and really like the car. 
He knows we've been messed about and it has affected my ability to work the shifts I need to as we both need a car. 
He promised the car would be in good working order and he would make sure we would not have to spend any money in it  for some time. 
Hes lied. Its a 10 plate car and we didn't expect it to be perfect but we expected to drive it. 
Where do we stand?
Is he responsible for paying for the battery and bulb? 
Other than this the car seems OK so we don't really want it to go back 

Scrapit

He wants the car back. Give him the car back. You bought a minger, check much, much more carefully next time.

macman

There is no law against fitting a 'Fiat' battery in a Renault, used or not. They are just branded. Nor can you prove that the headlight did not fail between MOT and Halfords, unlikely though that might be. It's a consumable, there is no warranty. If the crack is under the wiper then it's not safety related, as probably not in the driver's line of vision, so, unless larger than 40mm, it's not a failure item.
An MOT will only check the safety-related issues on the car, not the other mechanical or electrical issues which, I strongly suspect, you will find the car has, and which are more important than a bulb and battery. It's possible the alternator is dead, for starters.
You were offered a refund and you declined it. You really don't have a leg to stand on, and TS are not going to help you, unless he is the subject of other complaints. You had the right to reject it under CRA 2015, but you went ahead and commissioned your own repairs and denied the dealer the opportunity to remedy the faults.
Why would you travel 75 miles to buy a used Renault without checking first that you could test drive it? And, then, finding that you couldn't, why would you go ahead and buy it? They're not exactly rare.
Your only possible remedy is if he lied about the car's condition, either in the ad, or verbally. Which, if he's as dodgy as he sounds, he probably took care not to do.

macman

PS: who did the MOT? Your friendly dealer, or his mate down the pub?

Grumpy_chap

It sounds to me like you have been sold a 'dud'
The garage has offered to take the car back and give you a refund.  That will leave you out of pocket by the value of a bulb and battery.  
I would not throw any more good money into this car for another MOT, nor effort to go through trading standards, but accept the offer to get the refund and move on.  There are plenty of other cars out there.  The fact the dealer has offered the refund will be enough to satisfy trading standards that he is not a rogue.
You may think the garage is rogue, and the fact the car was not available to drive when you attended with an appointment plus the state of the car suggests that is the case, but you need to chalk this one up to experience.  Just make sure you do get the full refund and that is not where the scam lies (return the car and keep your money).

chrisw

Put it in for the MOT on Monday as it's already booked in. If it all checks out and you're happy with the car, I would let it go for the sake of the cost of a battery. Any 10 year old car could show up similar issues or worse. Get the windscreen repaired or replaced under insurance - you'll have to pay some excess but it won't affect your no claims.

tberry6686

chrisw said:

Get the windscreen repaired or replaced under insurance - you'll have to pay some excess but it won't affect your no claims.

Wouldn't that be fraud ?

m0bov

Get the refund and then MCOL for the battery 

Grumpy_chap

chrisw said:

Put it in for the MOT on Monday as it's already booked in. If it all checks out and you're happy with the car, I would let it go for the sake of the cost of a battery. Any 10 year old car could show up similar issues or worse. 

I would not go ahead with the MOT as it could go either way.

• If the car is all fine, then happy days
• BUT, if the car fails the MOT and the test centre says the car is dangerous (major fault), they may not allow you to have the car back and the OP is lumbered with a large bill to get the car repaired and released.  This leaves the OP with few options, digging themselves deeper, and reducing the likelihood of a refund still being possible and, in any event, the seller's liability is probably limited to the purchase price.

I am trying to understand what is so special about this car.  I have read this in the context of the car being a fairly regular diesel Renault family car, but don't then understand how the OP came to choose this car over any of the many other diesel Renault family cars available.  Perhaps, this car is one of the quirky models such as the Renault Wind, which are in shorter supply?

Can the OP let us know what model this car is, price paid, mileage and number of previous keepers?  Even better, if it is still available, post a link to the online ad?

AdrianC

2010 2.0d Renault? It's going to be a Scenic, perhaps a Megane or Laguna, outside chance of being an Espace.

So the windscreen wasn't broken when you viewed or collected the car, but was when you got it to Halfords.
For the price of a battery, decide whether you want to keep it or not.
If you do, chalk it up to experience and make a mental note never to buy from him again.
If you don't, chalk it up to experience and accept his offer of a full refund.
Move on with life.

Grumpy_chap

AdrianC said:

2010 2.0d Renault? It's going to be a Scenic, perhaps a Megane or Laguna, outside chance of being an Espace.

This is what I don't understand.

• What was so "special" about this car, or was it "too good (cheap) to be true" that meant it was worth the OP travelling 75 miles to view?
• When the OP arrived for the appointment to view, they could not drive the car because the driver's window was being repaired, but did not walk away?
• Did the garage even allow the OP to start the car at the viewing?  May have revealed the battery issue.
• Did the OP walk round the car and do a basic visual check?  Would have seen the broken windscreen if it was present.  OR, maybe that genuinely cracked either being driven to the OP or between the OP's house and Halfords.
• Did the OP do basic check such as lights working, tyres, etc.  Maybe the blown bulb was a coincidence after that check - can happen at any time and will happen at some time.
• Did the OP look under the bonnet - may have seen the very small battery rattling about in the large battery bay.

There seem to be so many points at which I would have walked away by now, but the OP carried on with the purchase.
Despite the OP's misgivings, the garage has offered a full refund, yet the OP does not want this:

cazandco1 said:

We have spent the last 2 months trying to get a car and really like the car. 
He knows we've been messed about and it has affected my ability to work the shifts I need to as we both need a car. 
He promised the car would be in good working order and he would make sure we would not have to spend any money in it  for some time. 
Hes lied. Its a 10 plate car and we didn't expect it to be perfect but we expected to drive it. 
Where do we stand?
Is he responsible for paying for the battery and bulb? 
Other than this the car seems OK so we don't really want it to go back 

How is this Dealer related to the 2 months trying to get a car?  Given the OP's reliance on a car, having a car that the OP does not have faith in is not a suitable outcome so I totally fail to understand why the refund is not acceptable to the OP.  There are plenty of other cars available that the OP can buy and have quickly and with greater peace-of-mind.

I could understand if it was an Avantime or something, but I am fairly sure that model was stopped long before 2010.  Is there another 'special' Renault that dates from 2010?
Perhaps a Laguna Coupe - they are a rather special and rare?