Faulty car part, can I reclaim the Garage Labour fees?

Mtipples

Hi all, 2 questions here I could do with some help on please.
I've got a situation where I have purchased a new part from a large automotive distributor and upon my garage fitting the part it is faulty.
I've contacted the distributor who say that they can not provide a replacement as the part needs to go back to the manufacturer for assessment before a warranty refund can be processed. They say that the new part I require needs to be paid for in full before it leaves their store. I can't see that this is right for a part that hasn't even rolled off the ramp and was faulty in box. I would appreciate that this could be a process if say the part was 6 months old.
Is this correct in consumer law?

My second question is around the Labour Cost me garage is needing to charge me for replacing the faulty part, the distributor is saying that I need to be a VAT registered business to be able to claim for the Garage Labour costs. Surely this can't be correct in consumer law as surely a private consumer should have the same rights as a business and then the turnover of a business needing to be over the VAT threshold surely doesn't impact on the distributors legal obligation?

I've found some info on here about Section 23 of the consumer rights act but that seems to point me towards a situation where the trader is supplying the parts and fitting them.

Thanks in advance of your help   

Aylesbury_Duck

As I understand it, a retailer can be liable for consequential losses arising from a faulty product, but the pertinent question here might be your status and the status of the purchase.  Who did you buy from and are you a consumer or have you posed as a trade customer, for example?  I ask because of the bit about the distributor  saying that you need to be a VAT registered business to claim.  A private consumer doesn't have the same rights as a business.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Assuming you are a consumer you have 2 options regarding the faulty part, to reject the goods outright within 30 days for a full refund, in this instance it is not taken that the goods did not conform to the contract and so the retailer can request you demonstrate the issue. 

Otherwise within 6 months it is taken that the goods did not conform and the retailer can offer to repair, replace or refund at their choice. Asking you to pay for the new part being offered as a replacement may be poor practice but the time and effort of forcing them to do so without payment might not be worth the aggravation. Assuming the refund for the returned part you are eventually back where you started, i.e 1 payment for 1 part.

Regarding the 2nd question the Consumer Rights Act does not restrict you from claiming claiming damages that arise, the retailers terms do not override this. 

If the trader is trade only but accepted your order as a consumer they must abide by your consumer rights, I'm not suggesting you did but just to clarify should you have acted in a way that suggested you were a business in order to placed the order (for example making up a company name on the order) that will likely muddy the waters. 

Mtipples

Aylesbury_Duck said:

As I understand it, a retailer can be liable for consequential losses arising from a faulty product, but the pertinent question here might be your status and the status of the purchase.  Who did you buy from and are you a consumer or have you posed as a trade customer, for example?  I ask because of the bit about the distributor  saying that you need to be a VAT registered business to claim.  A private consumer doesn't have the same rights as a business.

Ok thanks for your prompt reply, I just ordered online for Click and Collect due to todays situation, however I wasn't asked if I was Trade or not, I have 3 businesses, one of which is VAT registered but as its an IT company I'd rather not be putting invoices for a car repair through it TBH. When I went there I was clearly wearing work clothes (branded jacket etc) so I'm happy that they had the opportunity to ask if this was a trade purchase or not. It's a pity that a private consumer doesn't have the same rights as a business but if thats the case then so be it  

Mtipples

Sorry I should have said I bought from Euro Car parts who deal with public and Trade.

Mtipples

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Assuming you are a consumer you have 2 options regarding the faulty part, to reject the goods outright within 30 days for a full refund, in this instance it is not taken that the goods did not conform to the contract and so the retailer can request you demonstrate the issue. 

Otherwise within 6 months it is taken that the goods did not conform and the retailer can offer to repair, replace or refund at their choice. Asking you to pay for the new part being offered as a replacement may be poor practice but the time and effort of forcing them to do so without payment might not be worth the aggravation. Assuming the refund for the returned part you are eventually back where you started, i.e 1 payment for 1 part.

Regarding the 2nd question the Consumer Rights Act does not restrict you from claiming claiming damages that arise, the retailers terms do not override this. 

If the trader is trade only but accepted your order as a consumer they must abide by your consumer rights, I'm not suggesting you did but just to clarify should you have acted in a way that suggested you were a business in order to placed the order (for example making up a company name on the order) that will likely muddy the waters. 

So I purchased this as a Consumer as I had no benefit or intention to put this through one of my businesses but I the only route to claiming the Labour Costs back is through a company then luckily I do have that option. 
The only other thing to mention (perhaps I should have before) is that the part is / has been fitted to the car to discover the fact that it is faulty. The Distributor (Euro Car Parts) has spoken to the garage (who they know and trade with) and they accept the garages advice that the part is actually faulty.
So are you saying that as a Consumer (non Trade) that I would be able to seek reimbursement for the Labour Costs ?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Mtipples said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Assuming you are a consumer you have 2 options regarding the faulty part, to reject the goods outright within 30 days for a full refund, in this instance it is not taken that the goods did not conform to the contract and so the retailer can request you demonstrate the issue. 

Otherwise within 6 months it is taken that the goods did not conform and the retailer can offer to repair, replace or refund at their choice. Asking you to pay for the new part being offered as a replacement may be poor practice but the time and effort of forcing them to do so without payment might not be worth the aggravation. Assuming the refund for the returned part you are eventually back where you started, i.e 1 payment for 1 part.

Regarding the 2nd question the Consumer Rights Act does not restrict you from claiming claiming damages that arise, the retailers terms do not override this. 

If the trader is trade only but accepted your order as a consumer they must abide by your consumer rights, I'm not suggesting you did but just to clarify should you have acted in a way that suggested you were a business in order to placed the order (for example making up a company name on the order) that will likely muddy the waters. 

So I purchased this as a Consumer as I had no benefit or intention to put this through one of my businesses but I the only route to claiming the Labour Costs back is through a company then luckily I do have that option. 
The only other thing to mention (perhaps I should have before) is that the part is / has been fitted to the car to discover the fact that it is faulty. The Distributor (Euro Car Parts) has spoken to the garage (who they know and trade with) and they accept the garages advice that the part is actually faulty.
So are you saying that as a Consumer (non Trade) that I would be able to seek reimbursement for the Labour Costs ?

My understanding is that as you have suffered a loss due to the goods not conforming to the contract you would be able to seek to reclaim that loss. 

Ultimately if the retailer doesn't agree you would have to fill through small claims, I'm assuming the bill isn't thousands so I doubt Euro Car Parts would contest the claim in court as the time and expense to them would outweigh the loss. 

Should it come to this be sure to send a letter before action before filing (templates on Google) and they may well pay at this stage without you having to actually file. 

Should you have to file I believe in a consumer to business transaction you would be able to apply to the court to have the case heard in your local area which is another disadvantage to the retailer unless you happen to live in the same place as their Head Office. 

This is just my advice from reading these boards over the years. 

peter_the_piper

Pity the garage did not buy and fit the part, it would have been down to them to sort it out.

born_again

Is it not going to depend on what you agreed with the garage about fitting the part & any costs if it was faulty.

bris

born_again said:

Is it not going to depend on what you agreed with the garage about fitting the part & any costs if it was faulty.

No, it's a consequential loss for faulty goods, a consumers right.

The OP states it wasn't put through any of his businesses so it was bought as a consumer. If the part was also fitted as a consumer and nor billed to any of his businesses then there is consequential rights here.

born_again

bris said:

born_again said:

Is it not going to depend on what you agreed with the garage about fitting the part & any costs if it was faulty.

No, it's a consequential loss for faulty goods, a consumers right.

The OP states it wasn't put through any of his businesses so it was bought as a consumer. If the part was also fitted as a consumer and nor billed to any of his businesses then there is consequential rights here.

Thats crazy.
Makes you wonder why anyone would even entertain fitting a customers part when they could end up out of pocket if the part is faulty/wrong. Not only from the profit on selling the part, but also all the labour costs.

But surely if the OP had agreed with the garage that it was fit only, then it would not be covered if faulty?