Rejecting a used car within 60 days

sihall22

Hi all - I purchased a used 2018 VW Tiguan from Arnold Clark on the 28/4/22. While driving home I noticed a damp smell, I assumed this was due to the car being recently valeted/washed out so thought no more. 2 Weeks later the car still smelled so I checked into my local Arnold Clark garage. This was my 15th day of owning the car. They identified a water leak in the rear footwells and told me the car would need stripping and the source of ingress would need to be resolved. The car went into the garage on the 6th of June for a week and I was assured the leak had been sorted. A few days later I noticed the rear footwells were again damp and booked the gar into the garage again. The car has again been stripped but the source of water has not been identified. My local garage has been excellent however have been unable to rectify the problem. As I spotted the fault and had the car in the garage within 30 days what are my rights? Can I still reject the car? The selling branch to date have not addressed my concerns nor given me any guidance. Thanks in advance.

shiraz99

Yes, your 30 day, short term right to reject is effectively on pause whilst an agreed remedy can be found, as they've not been able to do this then you are still able to exercise this right for a full refund.

Jenni_D

Actually in this case (as they allowed AC to effect a repair) it will be their Final right to reject that they will be invoking. Be aware that the seller can (not will) reduce the amount of refund for loss of value to the vehicle - but this should be unlikely unless the OP has added thousands of miles in this short period.

Sandtree

Jenni_D said:

Actually in this case (as they allowed AC to effect a repair) it will be their Final right to reject that they will be invoking. Be aware that the seller can (not will) reduce the amount of refund for loss of value to the vehicle - but this should be unlikely unless the OP has added thousands of miles in this short period.

They cannot reduce it for loss of value, they can reduce it for the use received by the OP

Jenni_D

Same difference 🙄

sihall22

Thank you - I have done approx 2k miles on the car as my work involves a lot of driving. I have no issues with the refund amount reflecting this, my preference is that the car is rejected and swapped for a like for like vehicle, I am happy to pay the difference if it is slightly newer. At the moment they are unwilling to do anything to resolve.

Sandtree

Jenni_D said:

Same difference 🙄

Very different things... buy some very expensive thing from Coco de Mer and return it when it breaks 6 months and 2 days later... its loss of value would be almost its full price, underwear/toys etc dont have any real secondhand value. For deductions for use though it would be a much smaller proportion of its price because these things should last years not months.... using JL's methodology it'd be 1/12th of its value removed. 

shiraz99

Jenni_D said:

Actually in this case (as they allowed AC to effect a repair) it will be their Final right to reject that they will be invoking. Be aware that the seller can (not will) reduce the amount of refund for loss of value to the vehicle - but this should be unlikely unless the OP has added thousands of miles in this short period.

That's incorrect. CRA specifically states that if the consumer agrees to a repair during the 30 day period, the period stops running until the repairs have taken place.

Section 22 (6): If the consumer requests or agrees to the repair or replacement of goods, the period mentioned in subsection (3) or (4) stops running for the length of the waiting period.

Jenni_D

Sandtree said:

Jenni_D said:

Same difference 🙄

Very different things... buy some very expensive thing from Coco de Mer and return it when it breaks 6 months and 2 days later... its loss of value would be almost its full price, underwear/toys etc dont have any real secondhand value. For deductions for use though it would be a much smaller proportion of its price because these things should last years not months.... using JL's methodology it'd be 1/12th of its value removed. 

Strawman argument ... the post was in respect of vehicles, and the 6 month burden limit is not a factor (in this case). My point was that the seller can reduce the amount of refund in respect of a vehicle (regardless of if it was 1 month or 5 months) based on the use the consumer has had from the vehicle ... this deduction does not apply to other products (including the perfume and other irrelevant comparisons you're trying to make) where the 6 month burden doesn't apply. 🙄

Please stop trying to point-score ... it doesn't help the OP.

Jenni_D

shiraz99 said:

Jenni_D said:

Actually in this case (as they allowed AC to effect a repair) it will be their Final right to reject that they will be invoking. Be aware that the seller can (not will) reduce the amount of refund for loss of value to the vehicle - but this should be unlikely unless the OP has added thousands of miles in this short period.

That's incorrect. CRA specifically states that if the consumer agrees to a repair during the 30 day period, the period stops running until the repairs have taken place.

Section 22 (6): If the consumer requests or agrees to the repair or replacement of goods, the period mentioned in subsection (3) or (4) stops running for the length of the waiting period.

Thanks. I'd always believed that by effecting a repair the short term right ended. Happy to be corrected.  

shiraz99

Jenni_D said:

shiraz99 said:

Jenni_D said:

Actually in this case (as they allowed AC to effect a repair) it will be their Final right to reject that they will be invoking. Be aware that the seller can (not will) reduce the amount of refund for loss of value to the vehicle - but this should be unlikely unless the OP has added thousands of miles in this short period.

That's incorrect. CRA specifically states that if the consumer agrees to a repair during the 30 day period, the period stops running until the repairs have taken place.

Section 22 (6): If the consumer requests or agrees to the repair or replacement of goods, the period mentioned in subsection (3) or (4) stops running for the length of the waiting period.

Thanks. I'd always believed that by effecting a repair the short term right ended. Happy to be corrected.  

The OP's 30 day period may well have ran out, all depends on how long they took to get back to the dealer after receiving the car back from the first repair.