Help regarding car I bought on finance, that’s modified.

AdrianC

So you went looking for a very specific car, without ever having seen one in the flesh before, and bought the very first one you saw...?

Mikej92 said:
Based on correspondence via me and the dealership prior to sale, this car was un touched, I have proof of these chats luckily.

What does that even mean?

There's simply no way a used-car sales place can say any such thing as it's never been modified (if that's what you presume "untouched" means - it could as easily be taken to mean it's never been serviced). Same as they can't say with any certainty it's never been bent or stolen or clocked or owned by a rental company. All they can say for sure is that there's no history recorded, and they've not found any issues on their own checks.

You yourself have said that the only way a dealer could tell the DPF had been removed was to remove the exhaust and to interrogate the ECU. Do you expect that to be a normal part of a used-car sales place's prep? It certainly isn't part of an MOT.

ontheroad1970

So you bought the very first one you saw, was presented with a piece of paper that effectively changed your contract of sale, and you didn't walk away.  An ST is hardly an exotic car.  Had in been a Model T then perhaps I would understand reluctance to walk away.  

Mikej92

AdrianC said:

So you went looking for a very specific car, without ever having seen one in the flesh before, and bought the very first one you saw...?

Mikej92 said:
Based on correspondence via me and the dealership prior to sale, this car was un touched, I have proof of these chats luckily.

What does that even mean?

There's simply no way a used-car sales place can say any such thing as it's never been modified (if that's what you presume "untouched" means - it could as easily be taken to mean it's never been serviced). Same as they can't say with any certainty it's never been bent or stolen or clocked or owned by a rental company. All they can say for sure is that there's no history recorded, and they've not found any issues on their own checks.

You yourself have said that the only way a dealer could tell the DPF had been removed was to remove the exhaust and to interrogate the ECU. Do you expect that to be a normal part of a used-car sales place's prep? It certainly isn't part of an MOT.

AdrianC said:

So you went looking for a very specific car, without ever having seen one in the flesh before, and bought the very first one you saw...?

Mikej92 said:
Based on correspondence via me and the dealership prior to sale, this car was un touched, I have proof of these chats luckily.

What does that even mean?

There's simply no way a used-car sales place can say any such thing as it's never been modified (if that's what you presume "untouched" means - it could as easily be taken to mean it's never been serviced). Same as they can't say with any certainty it's never been bent or stolen or clocked or owned by a rental company. All they can say for sure is that there's no history recorded, and they've not found any issues on their own checks.

You yourself have said that the only way a dealer could tell the DPF had been removed was to remove the exhaust and to interrogate the ECU. Do you expect that to be a normal part of a used-car sales place's prep? It certainly isn't part of an MOT.

Yes I bought the first one.
I'm unsure whether its part of an MOT or not, But it is definitely and MOT failure. They looked into the ECU because I asked if they could prove that, after I was told that to have had the DPF removed, it was absolute that the ECU would need to be tuned some way to stop any warnings on my dashboard.

Regardless of the situation, the car isn't road legal is it?, I've asked the dealership to resolve it, which they are not willing to do.
I'm 3 weeks into my finance agreement, so I have every right for the first 6 months of ownership to request for the car to be put back to a roadworthy standard, HE IS NOT WILLING.

Had he been willing, I would not be seeking this advice, nor having to go down the route of contacting my finance, would I?

The warranty provided includes engine repairs (Due to my DPF not being there, this is a engine modification) deeming them completely invalid, and voiding my warranty.

Based off my above statement alone, the dealership should at least offer to resolve that, or I have not only purchased a car with no DPF deeming it technically illegal to use on public roads, but also provided a completely invalid warranty product.

Had anything happened during my 3 week of ownership, I would potentially have to foot a bill of over £4000 + VAT and Labour charges, worst case scenario (Engine replacement - DPF replacement - and getting my ECU put back standard) , due to the lack of validity of my warranty ,< Is that deemed reasonable given I've had the car 3 weeks? IF IT HAPPENED?

Mikej92

I feel I'm forever repeating myself, and its becoming confusing (Head over to the main thread - This is duplicated). There is much more information on the other thread. can this potentially be merged?

ontheroad1970

Ask a forum helper - Soolin is one...this is  the correct forum for it IMO

Mikej92

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6228430/car-i-bought-on-finance-turns-out-to-be-heavily-modified-wasn-t-told-before-sale-help#latest this is the main thread.

AdrianC

Mikej92 said:

I'm unsure whether its part of an MOT or not, But it is definitely and MOT failure.

No, it is nowhere near that simple.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-private-passenger-and-light-commercial-vehicles/8-nuisance#section-8-2-2-1
"8.2.2.1. Exhaust emission control equipment
You only need to check components that are visible and identifiable, such as diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters, exhaust gas recirculation valves and selective catalytic reduction valves.
If a diesel particulate filter has clearly been cut open and rewelded, you should reject it unless the vehicle presenter can show evidence that there was a valid reason to cut it open, such as for filter cleaning.
(a) Emission control equipment fitted by the manufacturer missing, obviously modified or obviously defective - Major"

I'm 3 weeks into my finance agreement, so I have every right for the first 6 months of ownership to request for the car to be put back to a roadworthy standard, HE IS NOT WILLING.

Again, nowhere near that simple.
Within the first 30 days, you have an absolute right to reject the car for faults that are not reasonable to expect of used goods of that type, age, and apparent condition.

So reject the car. Physically return it to his premises. Launch a court claim for your money from the financier and the vendor.

After 30 days, the vendor has a right to replace, repair or refund at their discretion.
The only thing that changes at 6mo is the balance of proof - from a presumption the fault was present at sale that they must disprove, to a presumption that it wasn't and you have to prove it was.

DPFs are a consumable that need replacing periodically. I have no idea where you're getting £4k +vat for parts + labour from.

Mikej92

AdrianC said:

Mikej92 said:

I'm unsure whether its part of an MOT or not, But it is definitely and MOT failure.

No, it is nowhere near that simple.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-private-passenger-and-light-commercial-vehicles/8-nuisance#section-8-2-2-1
"8.2.2.1. Exhaust emission control equipment
You only need to check components that are visible and identifiable, such as diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters, exhaust gas recirculation valves and selective catalytic reduction valves.
If a diesel particulate filter has clearly been cut open and rewelded, you should reject it unless the vehicle presenter can show evidence that there was a valid reason to cut it open, such as for filter cleaning.
(a) Emission control equipment fitted by the manufacturer missing, obviously modified or obviously defective - Major"

I'm 3 weeks into my finance agreement, so I have every right for the first 6 months of ownership to request for the car to be put back to a roadworthy standard, HE IS NOT WILLING.

Again, nowhere near that simple.
Within the first 30 days, you have an absolute right to reject the car for faults that are not reasonable to expect of used goods of that type, age, and apparent condition.

So reject the car. Physically return it to his premises. Launch a court claim for your money from the financier and the vendor.

After 30 days, the vendor has a right to replace, repair or refund at their discretion.
The only thing that changes at 6mo is the balance of proof - from a presumption the fault was present at sale that they must disprove, to a presumption that it wasn't and you have to prove it was.

DPFs are a consumable that need replacing periodically. I have no idea where you're getting £4k +vat for parts + labour from.

RE-READ what I said.

Had anything happened during my 3 week of ownership, I would potentially have to foot a bill of over £4000 + VAT and Labour charges, worst case scenario (Engine replacement - DPF replacement - and getting my ECU put back standard) , due to the lack of validity of my warranty ,< Is that deemed reasonable given I've had the car 3 weeks? IF IT HAPPENED?

williamgriffin

AdrianC said:

Mikej92 said:

I'm unsure whether its part of an MOT or not, But it is definitely and MOT failure.

No, it is nowhere near that simple.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-private-passenger-and-light-commercial-vehicles/8-nuisance#section-8-2-2-1
"8.2.2.1. Exhaust emission control equipment
You only need to check components that are visible and identifiable, such as diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters, exhaust gas recirculation valves and selective catalytic reduction valves.
If a diesel particulate filter has clearly been cut open and rewelded, you should reject it unless the vehicle presenter can show evidence that there was a valid reason to cut it open, such as for filter cleaning.
(a) Emission control equipment fitted by the manufacturer missing, obviously modified or obviously defective - Major"

I'm 3 weeks into my finance agreement, so I have every right for the first 6 months of ownership to request for the car to be put back to a roadworthy standard, HE IS NOT WILLING.

Again, nowhere near that simple.
Within the first 30 days, you have an absolute right to reject the car for faults that are not reasonable to expect of used goods of that type, age, and apparent condition.

So reject the car. Physically return it to his premises. Launch a court claim for your money from the financier and the vendor.

After 30 days, the vendor has a right to replace, repair or refund at their discretion.
The only thing that changes at 6mo is the balance of proof - from a presumption the fault was present at sale that they must disprove, to a presumption that it wasn't and you have to prove it was.

DPFs are a consumable that need replacing periodically. I have no idea where you're getting £4k +vat for parts + labour from.

I think he referred to 5k for a new engine in one of the three threads he has running on this car. 

Mikej92

williamgriffin said:

AdrianC said:

Mikej92 said:

I'm unsure whether its part of an MOT or not, But it is definitely and MOT failure.

No, it is nowhere near that simple.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mot-inspection-manual-for-private-passenger-and-light-commercial-vehicles/8-nuisance#section-8-2-2-1
"8.2.2.1. Exhaust emission control equipment
You only need to check components that are visible and identifiable, such as diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters, exhaust gas recirculation valves and selective catalytic reduction valves.
If a diesel particulate filter has clearly been cut open and rewelded, you should reject it unless the vehicle presenter can show evidence that there was a valid reason to cut it open, such as for filter cleaning.
(a) Emission control equipment fitted by the manufacturer missing, obviously modified or obviously defective - Major"

I'm 3 weeks into my finance agreement, so I have every right for the first 6 months of ownership to request for the car to be put back to a roadworthy standard, HE IS NOT WILLING.

Again, nowhere near that simple.
Within the first 30 days, you have an absolute right to reject the car for faults that are not reasonable to expect of used goods of that type, age, and apparent condition.

So reject the car. Physically return it to his premises. Launch a court claim for your money from the financier and the vendor.

After 30 days, the vendor has a right to replace, repair or refund at their discretion.
The only thing that changes at 6mo is the balance of proof - from a presumption the fault was present at sale that they must disprove, to a presumption that it wasn't and you have to prove it was.

DPFs are a consumable that need replacing periodically. I have no idea where you're getting £4k +vat for parts + labour from.

I think he referred to 5k for a new engine in one of the three threads he has running on this car. 

Yes, Annoyingly they wont merge them. It's actually two now