Section 75 Loophole

Ergates

MartinH67 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

MartinH67 said:

Will try and keep this simple 
Bought a van engine (described as BRAND NEW)
Only way to get working, on advice of supplier, was to borrow parts from old engine.
Section 75 submitted as goods weren't as described.
Bank now saying having "adapted" the original "NEW" item, Consumer Rights are no longer valid, but are offering a 50% goodwill payment.

Having the van off the road for any length of time, longer than absolutely necessary, was impossible as needed for work.

Anyone had any joy in successfully arguing ?

I do not see it as a loophole.

What makes you think your claim is valid as a Section 75 claim when they have stated the reasoning why it is not a valid claim. Why do you feel the goods were not as described? Why are you not claiming against the supplier if you think that they are at fault?

Also if this was a business transaction you do not have Consumer Rights, you have different and far less wide ranging rights.

Engine was described as BRAND NEW and bought as such. My mechanic and also a Main Dealer pointed out numerous issues that indicated it was a refurbished block e.g. Area where Engine Number should be stamped on a new engine had a metal plate welded over it, various leaking parts that would have been factory sealed on a new unit.

Tried getting assistance from supplier and there reaction was purely to advise my mechanic to use parts from the original engine and wouldn't enter into any further discussion.

The Business transaction is a good point - My Limited Company / My Personal Credit Card (in the hope of ensuring protection)

If, in the opinion of your mechanic, the engine was not fit for purpose (i.e. would never work), then you have a case against the supplier.  You'll have to raise this case yourself however, as this was a business transaction to not backed up by consumer rights legislation.