Bought a car..later found it has been in an accident…… HELP!

Th02msn

Will try and keep story short and on point but would like help with regards to where I stand here….

We purchased a 2018 BMW 320D in June of 2019 from Motorpoint in Glasgow.  The vehicle had been given a full inspection and we did a HPI check. No record of damage.  All was good.

However - a couple weeks ago, we decided we would like to change our car to something more suitable for family life.  We visited our local dealership who informed us upon closer inspection that our car was missing its ‘chassis stamp’ and they would not be able to proceed with purchase of our car.  They advised us to contact BMW to see if they could find it.
Upon visiting BMW we were gobsmacked to be told that our car had sustained frontal damage at some point and it was clear repairs had been made (and too a very poor standard).  Both headlights had been replaced (not BMW factory issued) heavy duty rivits had been used to fix new parts together, the bonnet had been resprayed, the roof had been resprayed (or partially resprayed) side panels had been resprayed, wiring clips were missing & sealant is used around top of suspension strutts to hide weld …. the list goes on.
We contacted Motorpoint to make them aware of our findings in the hope they could offer a solution.  They requested that we have a report done from a professional to state damage and the repairs that were evident which we did and presented it back to Motorpoint. The report was done at our expense (£100)
We then had a reply from MP saying that their inspection did not show up any defects prior to sale - they only have photographs of the outside of vehicle - which shows no evidence of damage.  

If they had taken photographs under the bonnet, where the faults and bad repairs are located, it would have been far more obvious & there would not have been anything to dispute. 

Motorpoint have now advised us that if we want to take this further, we must contact ‘ADR’ which they are a member of.

Can anyone give me some advice on where I stand?  Im aware its more than 2 years since we purchased the car but we were absolutely oblivious to all the above until we were notified  by our local dealership when we decided to change the car

Nor my wife or I are mechanically minded and would never have been able to spot these repairs unless pointed out - as has happened.

Im not looking for compensation or any special treatment - all we want to do is to be able to change our car without hassle.  I also don't want to sell it privately and not disclose what I know now.

In the mean time we have decided not to use the vehicle from a H&S point of view.

I can absolutely assure anyone reading this - the damage and repairs certainly did not take place in the time of our ownership.  How I prove this is the difficulty.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks all

Aylesbury_Duck

Th02msn said:

Will try and keep story short and on point but would like help with regards to where I stand here….

We purchased a 2018 BMW 320D in June of 2019 from Motorpoint in Glasgow.  The vehicle had been given a full inspection and we did a HPI check. No record of damage.  All was good.

However - a couple weeks ago, we decided we would like to change our car to something more suitable for family life.  We visited our local dealership who informed us upon closer inspection that our car was missing its ‘chassis stamp’ and they would not be able to proceed with purchase of our car.  They advised us to contact BMW to see if they could find it.
Upon visiting BMW we were gobsmacked to be told that our car had sustained frontal damage at some point and it was clear repairs had been made (and too a very poor standard).  Both headlights had been replaced (not BMW factory issued) heavy duty rivits had been used to fix new parts together, the bonnet had been resprayed, the roof had been resprayed (or partially resprayed) side panels had been resprayed, wiring clips were missing & sealant is used around top of suspension strutts to hide weld …. the list goes on.
We contacted Motorpoint to make them aware of our findings in the hope they could offer a solution.  They requested that we have a report done from a professional to state damage and the repairs that were evident which we did and presented it back to Motorpoint. The report was done at our expense (£100)
We then had a reply from MP saying that their inspection did not show up any defects prior to sale - they only have photographs of the outside of vehicle - which shows no evidence of damage.  

If they had taken photographs under the bonnet, where the faults and bad repairs are located, it would have been far more obvious & there would not have been anything to dispute. 

Motorpoint have now advised us that if we want to take this further, we must contact ‘ADR’ which they are a member of.

Can anyone give me some advice on where I stand?  Im aware its more than 2 years since we purchased the car but we were absolutely oblivious to all the above until we were notified  by our local dealership when we decided to change the car

Nor my wife or I are mechanically minded and would never have been able to spot these repairs unless pointed out - as has happened.

Im not looking for compensation or any special treatment - all we want to do is to be able to change our car without hassle.  I also don't want to sell it privately and not disclose what I know now.

In the mean time we have decided not to use the vehicle from a H&S point of view.

I can absolutely assure anyone reading this - the damage and repairs certainly did not take place in the time of our ownership.  How I prove this is the difficulty.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks all

The short answer is that I think you're stuck.  The full inspection carried out prior to your purchase didn't document any of that damage and repair work, and you can't prove a negative: that it didn't all happen under your ownership.  Where did you get it serviced in the last two years?  Did the garage not remark on any of these matters, especially if some are a safety concern?

What solution do you want?  The dealer isn't going to be able to ignore the problem at trade-in, so perhaps your best bet is to accept what they offer you, or sell it privately, being upfront about the history rather than be the subject of a potential legal claim yourself further down the line.

You should at least pursue the route they've offered as your next step.

MalMonroe

Look at this link here -

https://www.moneyhelper.org.uk/en/getting-help-and-advice/consumer-rights/consumer-rights-what-you-need-to-know

Scroll down to 'used cars'.

There's also info here - 
https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act-aKJYx8n5KiSl

You have been sold a dangerous car which has been in an accident and you were not told of these things in the first instance, which means that you were not in any position to make an informed decision at the time of purchase.

When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.  

One of the very first things I'd be doing is sending MP a bill for £100. They have absolutely no right to charge for a report that proves that the car they sold you was not fit for purpose.

A car registered in 2018 should last longer than three years. 

I know it sounds like a faff but you could do worse than contact Citizens Advice who also have some info -

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/our-work/citizens-advice-consumer-work/the-consumer-rights-act-2015/

The ADR to which MP refer is the motoring ombudsman - who are impartial. 

https://www.themotorombudsman.org/consumers/make-a-complaint

I'd definitely make a complaint. And tell them you want your £100 back too. MP have a cheek! You can have one too.

You say you and your wife are not mechanically minded. Well, who is? That's why we rely on the 'professionals' to be honest and open with us when they sell us cars. I thought a lot of dirty dealing when it came to vehicle sales had been stopped but it appears not.

I recommend Toyota! I have driven them for many years now, go through Toyota dealers and haven't had any trouble whatsoever. My neighbour's BMW is always having to have things mended . . .  it cost them a fortune initially and is the gift that keeps on taking, as far as I can see. They're always moaning about it but they've spent so much on it they feel they can't now get rid of it.

I hope that's helpful info, though. Sorry it's a bit lengthy!

CardinalWolsey

MalMonroe said:

Look at this link here -

https://www.moneyhelper.org.uk/en/getting-help-and-advice/consumer-rights/consumer-rights-what-you-need-to-know

Scroll down to 'used cars'.

There's also info here - 
https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act-aKJYx8n5KiSl

You have been sold a dangerous car which has been in an accident and you were not told of these things in the first instance, which means that you were not in any position to make an informed decision at the time of purchase.

When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.  

One of the very first things I'd be doing is sending MP a bill for £100. They have absolutely no right to charge for a report that proves that the car they sold you was not fit for purpose.

A car registered in 2018 should last longer than three years. 

I know it sounds like a faff but you could do worse than contact Citizens Advice who also have some info -

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/our-work/citizens-advice-consumer-work/the-consumer-rights-act-2015/

The ADR to which MP refer is the motoring ombudsman - who are impartial. 

https://www.themotorombudsman.org/consumers/make-a-complaint

I'd definitely make a complaint. And tell them you want your £100 back too. MP have a cheek! You can have one too.

You say you and your wife are not mechanically minded. Well, who is? That's why we rely on the 'professionals' to be honest and open with us when they sell us cars. I thought a lot of dirty dealing when it came to vehicle sales had been stopped but it appears not.

I recommend Toyota! I have driven them for many years now, go through Toyota dealers and haven't had any trouble whatsoever. My neighbour's BMW is always having to have things mended . . .  it cost them a fortune initially and is the gift that keeps on taking, as far as I can see. They're always moaning about it but they've spent so much on it they feel they can't now get rid of it.

I hope that's helpful info, though. Sorry it's a bit lengthy!

There's so much wrong in this post it's baffling.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

There is one point from MalMonroe's post which is correct, that When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.  

An omission is classed as misleading if it would alter the economic activity of the average consumer (a car being in an accident would certainly fall under this) and is prohibited. 

As Aylesbury says the issue is burden of proof due to the timeframes. 

In any case you'd be required to mitigate (lessen) your losses so following the ADR process would be the first step, if the result isn't satisfactory you'd be looking to calculate your losses which would likely be the difference in price in it's current value due to the accident and possibly poor standard of work carried out (plus the £100 costs incurred). 

Anything you can gather to show the work was carried out prior to your ownership would certainly be beneficial. 

There's no time limit to claim with a retailer that the goods do not conform to the contract and whilst the retailer at this stage can choose to repair or replace this can't be forced by the consumer if disproportionately expensive or impossible, equally the remedy shouldn't cause significant inconvenience to the consumer.  

There is the right to a price reduction and retaining the goods (with the defects as they are) which is what a request for the difference in value would effectively be, demonstrating that figure would also be beneficial. This may be best all round as a new owner gets the car with damage disclosed, you would have your losses covered and the trader has a quick resolve and hopefully relatively small hit to their bottom line. 

Did you pay with any credit? Judging by the situation I assume you didn't take their Motorpoint Protect policy? 

Might be worth a post on the motoring board to see if anyone can advise what to expect from the ADR process and how this issue will affect the saleability and price of the car:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/categories/motoring 

neilmcl

MalMonroe said:

Look at this link here -

https://www.moneyhelper.org.uk/en/getting-help-and-advice/consumer-rights/consumer-rights-what-you-need-to-know

Scroll down to 'used cars'.

There's also info here - 
https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act-aKJYx8n5KiSl

You have been sold a dangerous car which has been in an accident and you were not told of these things in the first instance, which means that you were not in any position to make an informed decision at the time of purchase.

When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.  

One of the very first things I'd be doing is sending MP a bill for £100. They have absolutely no right to charge for a report that proves that the car they sold you was not fit for purpose.

A car registered in 2018 should last longer than three years. 

I know it sounds like a faff but you could do worse than contact Citizens Advice who also have some info -

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/our-work/citizens-advice-consumer-work/the-consumer-rights-act-2015/

The ADR to which MP refer is the motoring ombudsman - who are impartial. 

https://www.themotorombudsman.org/consumers/make-a-complaint

I'd definitely make a complaint. And tell them you want your £100 back too. MP have a cheek! You can have one too.

You say you and your wife are not mechanically minded. Well, who is? That's why we rely on the 'professionals' to be honest and open with us when they sell us cars. I thought a lot of dirty dealing when it came to vehicle sales had been stopped but it appears not.

I recommend Toyota! I have driven them for many years now, go through Toyota dealers and haven't had any trouble whatsoever. My neighbour's BMW is always having to have things mended . . .  it cost them a fortune initially and is the gift that keeps on taking, as far as I can see. They're always moaning about it but they've spent so much on it they feel they can't now get rid of it.

I hope that's helpful info, though. Sorry it's a bit lengthy!

It's not only totally NOT helpful it's also completely wrong. Please stop posting this kind of stuff, it helps no one.

Sandtree

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

There is one point from MalMonroe's post which is correct, that When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.  

An omission is classed as misleading if it would alter the economic activity of the average consumer (a car being in an accident would certainly fall under this) and is prohibited. 

What level of investigation must they do to discover if its ever been in an accident though? 

Assuming its not a total loss then there is no national register of accidents and the private seller it probably came from isnt under the same level of obligation (plus some will lie). 

Obviously this vehicle seems to have been in a fairly significant accident and the repairs were probably obvious but a minor fender bender where the dent was pulled and resprayed? You can find it by measuring the paint thickness but its supposition if the respray was due to a road traffic collision, being keyed or some minor paint damage/defect

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

There is one point from MalMonroe's post which is correct, that When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.  

An omission is classed as misleading if it would alter the economic activity of the average consumer (a car being in an accident would certainly fall under this) and is prohibited. 

What level of investigation must they do to discover if its ever been in an accident though? 

Assuming its not a total loss then there is no national register of accidents and the private seller it probably came from isnt under the same level of obligation (plus some will lie). 

Obviously this vehicle seems to have been in a fairly significant accident and the repairs were probably obvious but a minor fender bender where the dent was pulled and resprayed? You can find it by measuring the paint thickness but its supposition if the respray was due to a road traffic collision, being keyed or some minor paint damage/defect

I guess it would come down to the balance of probability, the Motorpoint website says

Every car meets our high standards and undergoes a comprehensive check to ensure it is roadworthy before reaching our showrooms

Whilst the car may not be unroadworthy you could argue with comprehensive checks being carried out you'd think something (like the headlights or sealant around the suspension) would have been noticed.

mattyprice4004

You'll be hard pushed to prove it didn't happen in your ownership and you're just trying to get them to foot the bill - 2 years is a long time in terms of car ownership. 

Sandtree

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

There is one point from MalMonroe's post which is correct, that When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.  

An omission is classed as misleading if it would alter the economic activity of the average consumer (a car being in an accident would certainly fall under this) and is prohibited. 

What level of investigation must they do to discover if its ever been in an accident though? 

Assuming its not a total loss then there is no national register of accidents and the private seller it probably came from isnt under the same level of obligation (plus some will lie). 

Obviously this vehicle seems to have been in a fairly significant accident and the repairs were probably obvious but a minor fender bender where the dent was pulled and resprayed? You can find it by measuring the paint thickness but its supposition if the respray was due to a road traffic collision, being keyed or some minor paint damage/defect

I guess it would come down to the balance of probability, the Motorpoint website says

Every car meets our high standards and undergoes a comprehensive check to ensure it is roadworthy before reaching our showrooms

Whilst the car may not be unroadworthy you could argue with comprehensive checks being carried out you'd think something (like the headlights or sealant around the suspension) would have been noticed.

So the statement of:
When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.

Really needs to be tempered to accident damage they are aware of or reasonable should be aware of.  IE they dont have to strip the car or measure all the paint thicknesses etc to try and find evidence of accident repair. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Sandtree said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

There is one point from MalMonroe's post which is correct, that When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.  

An omission is classed as misleading if it would alter the economic activity of the average consumer (a car being in an accident would certainly fall under this) and is prohibited. 

What level of investigation must they do to discover if its ever been in an accident though? 

Assuming its not a total loss then there is no national register of accidents and the private seller it probably came from isnt under the same level of obligation (plus some will lie). 

Obviously this vehicle seems to have been in a fairly significant accident and the repairs were probably obvious but a minor fender bender where the dent was pulled and resprayed? You can find it by measuring the paint thickness but its supposition if the respray was due to a road traffic collision, being keyed or some minor paint damage/defect

I guess it would come down to the balance of probability, the Motorpoint website says

Every car meets our high standards and undergoes a comprehensive check to ensure it is roadworthy before reaching our showrooms

Whilst the car may not be unroadworthy you could argue with comprehensive checks being carried out you'd think something (like the headlights or sealant around the suspension) would have been noticed.

So the statement of:
When selling a car, traders are not allowed to mislead you by failing to disclose that the vehicle was previously damaged in an accident.

Really needs to be tempered to accident damage they are aware of or reasonable should be aware of.  IE they dont have to strip the car or measure all the paint thicknesses etc to try and find evidence of accident repair. 

That would be correct