Car brought from dealership which is now being scrapped by them.

DullGreyGuy

Grumpy_chap said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Grumpy_chap said:

DullGreyGuy said:

you are entitled to reject a purchase in the first month if there is any defect... it doesn't have to be a proportional response, it could be because the glovebox is squeaky when you open it. If they had to give a full refund each time you could almost certainly buy a secondhand car every month and reject it just before the end of the month thus never paying for your car. 

Here, though, it is not the consumer that is rejecting the car, but the dealer that is saying the car is beyond economical repair because of some major mechanical failure.

I'm surprised that the dealer is not being profusely apologetic and falling over themselves to make things right.

I wonder whether there could be more to this?  The OP / OP's son might not know that there is more to it, but I'm thinking along the lines of the possibility that the car was sold too cheaply (error) and this gives the dealer the retrospective opportunity to back out of the whole thing.  Although, in that case,. I'm surprised the dealer would try to claim he £400 and not be in the same profusely apologetic position as if it is a genuine scrappy time.  Very confusing.

Talk about taking something out of context! The quote is taken from a response to the Q of why automobiles are carved out of the normal 6 month exclusion in the CRA

Unless I have missed it there are big gaps in our knowledge here... are we talking a manufacturer's dealership or a backstreet garage? Did the OP do 100 miles or 10,000 miles in that month? Were any issues declared at point of sale? Did the OP ignore an engine or oil light on the dash?

It could be a small business that's bought this vehicle themselves which is now reduced to salvage value and so a significant loss for them and hence just trying to reduce that by applying a charge for usage which they are legally entitled to do. 

I realise you were just quoting the rules.
But the rules are written for the consumer rejecting.
This is the other way round - the Dealer trying to cancel the deal.  If it was all that the car really was so bad that it needs scrapping - so that would be a lot of mechanical damage for a 3 yo car - the Dealer would, surely, say what was wrong with the car and present this so that the OP's son felt they were getting out of having a lemon for the long-term.  The Dealer would give enough information so that he consumer wants to reject, which would bring the rules right into play.

The rule applies either way... in the event of a refund (rather than repair or replacement) under the CRA the merchant can discount for use

I was less quoting the rules but postulating why politicians decided to set the rules as they are which is what was Manxman's question

sheramber

HillStreetBlues said:

Grumpy_chap said:

The OP / OP's son might not know that there is more to it, but I'm thinking along the lines of the possibility that the car was sold too cheaply (error) and this gives the dealer the retrospective opportunity to back out of the whole thing.  Although, in that case,. I'm surprised the dealer would try to claim he £400 and not be in the same profusely apologetic position as if it is a genuine scrappy time.  Very confusing.

The OP  has said the dealership wouldn't give the service report or MOT, despite being asked to, that sounds fishy.


Also if  a service report was agreed to, so formed part of the contact, and  it's not provided, where would that leave the contract?

 

My car’s services were done by the dealership and recorded online. There is no service record book. MOT ‘s are also online. 

pinkshoes

Debsnewbudget said:

Sorry
my son is working away at the moment, so I am waiting for the answers to your questions.
It was bought from a main dealership. They have given him a courtesy car as he needed to get to work.  He is due back next Friday when he can have the conversations with the dealership. I am just trying to get as much information as possible to assist in that conversation.
I will get the other answers asap 

I think all he needs to decide is if the £400 is a fair reflection of the mileage he has done. 

If he has done 4000 miles then that would be OK.

I would argue that as the car has failed in such a short time he shouldn't have to pay anything as a good will gesture. 

born_again

sheramber said:

HillStreetBlues said:

Grumpy_chap said:

The OP / OP's son might not know that there is more to it, but I'm thinking along the lines of the possibility that the car was sold too cheaply (error) and this gives the dealer the retrospective opportunity to back out of the whole thing.  Although, in that case,. I'm surprised the dealer would try to claim he £400 and not be in the same profusely apologetic position as if it is a genuine scrappy time.  Very confusing.

The OP  has said the dealership wouldn't give the service report or MOT, despite being asked to, that sounds fishy.


Also if  a service report was agreed to, so formed part of the contact, and  it's not provided, where would that leave the contract?

 

My car’s services were done by the dealership and recorded online. There is no service record book. MOT ‘s are also online. 

That all depends on the brand. Some do not have online databases of services. So a stamped service book is a must have for a warranty claim.


https://www.vauxhall.co.uk/owners/insurance-and-warranty/warranty.html

Vauxhall’s new vehicle warranty ensures your peace of mind against material or manufacturing defects for three years (unlimited mileage for the first 12 months and subject to a total mileage limit of 60,000 miles from first registration). This applies to all cars and vans except Vivaro and New Movano, the additional warranty for which carries a limit of 100,000 miles from first registration.

m0bov

Deemed faulty at point if purchase, so full refund. How did you pay for it?

sheramber

born_again said:

sheramber said:

HillStreetBlues said:

Grumpy_chap said:

The OP / OP's son might not know that there is more to it, but I'm thinking along the lines of the possibility that the car was sold too cheaply (error) and this gives the dealer the retrospective opportunity to back out of the whole thing.  Although, in that case,. I'm surprised the dealer would try to claim he £400 and not be in the same profusely apologetic position as if it is a genuine scrappy time.  Very confusing.

The OP  has said the dealership wouldn't give the service report or MOT, despite being asked to, that sounds fishy.


Also if  a service report was agreed to, so formed part of the contact, and  it's not provided, where would that leave the contract?

 

My car’s services were done by the dealership and recorded online. There is no service record book. MOT ‘s are also online. 

That all depends on the brand. Some do not have online databases of services. So a stamped service book is a must have for a warranty claim.


https://www.vauxhall.co.uk/owners/insurance-and-warranty/warranty.html

Vauxhall’s new vehicle warranty ensures your peace of mind against material or manufacturing defects for three years (unlimited mileage for the first 12 months and subject to a total mileage limit of 60,000 miles from first registration). This applies to all cars and vans except Vivaro and New Movano, the additional warranty for which carries a limit of 100,000 miles from first registration.

True, but that may be why the OP's sone did not get get paperwork.

DullGreyGuy

m0bov said:

Deemed faulty at point if purchase, so full refund. How did you pay for it?

On what basis? 

I guess you are forgetting:

24 (10) No deduction may be made if the final right to reject is exercised in the first 6 months, unless—

(a) the goods consist of a motor vehicle

macman

If it's less than 3 years old, why isn't this being dealt with under the manufacturer's own 3 year (minimum) warranty?
How can a 3 year old vehicle be in such a condition that it requires scrapping, unless it's been in an accident?

Ditzy_Mitzy

Do we know for a fact that the car is to be scrapped?  This could be a case, given the description of the fault, whereby the damage is not terminal but is presently beyond the dealer's ken to repair as the result of the Ukrainian war or the Chinese chip shortage.  Supposedly lots of car spares simply cannot be got for love nor money at present, which implies that certain faults will become impossible to repair if components break on cars sold prior to the issues arising.  Perhaps the dealer intends to buy the car back and keep it in storage until such time as it can be repaired and sold on?  

m0bov

Have you tried another dealer? What is the fault? They won't scrape it, it will be back on there forecourt.