Faulty Car Purchased Feb 2022, What Are My Rights?

born_again

MakingLifeMine said:

molerat said:

I did not notice whether it was using more water than usual

More water than usual means any water !

If the 1.5 the classic symptom is misfiring on 1&2 and using water.  Takes 5 minutes to confirm the fault by looking into No1 cylinder with a probe to see if it is clean, steam cleaned by the water.  Next stop is engine failure.  In USA, after they were taken to court,  Ford replace either the full or short engine depending on how bad the failure is, I believe Australia are the same. Ford Europe deny there is any problem but can be persuaded to offer a large contribution.  Caused by a design flaw in the wall between 1 & 2 cylinders.

In my case, it's cylinder 3. Always cylinder 3.

On Jan 22 - this was prior to me purchasing. It was cylinder 3 (spark plugs changed). They accidentally revealed this to me.

On June 22 - it was cylinders 2&3 (spark plugs changed). This was 4 months after the purchase

On October 22 - it was cylinder 3 (fuel system changed), The car was not used between November and to beginning of Feb as it was in repairs all this time

On May 23 - it was cylinder 3 (spark plugs changed), and it wasn't used between May - September. I was told I had to pick up the car from the dealership so drove it back home in September.

November 23 - misfire cylinder 3. It has not been repaired as I am going through the rejection process. Car has only been moved around for parking purposes.

Yet the dealership insists there are no inherent faults and the finance company insists it's wear and tear

TBH. Changing spark plugs does not point to inherent issue. As they are a consumable part.

molerat

born_again said:

MakingLifeMine said:

molerat said:

I did not notice whether it was using more water than usual

More water than usual means any water !

If the 1.5 the classic symptom is misfiring on 1&2 and using water.  Takes 5 minutes to confirm the fault by looking into No1 cylinder with a probe to see if it is clean, steam cleaned by the water.  Next stop is engine failure.  In USA, after they were taken to court,  Ford replace either the full or short engine depending on how bad the failure is, I believe Australia are the same. Ford Europe deny there is any problem but can be persuaded to offer a large contribution.  Caused by a design flaw in the wall between 1 & 2 cylinders.

In my case, it's cylinder 3. Always cylinder 3.

On Jan 22 - this was prior to me purchasing. It was cylinder 3 (spark plugs changed). They accidentally revealed this to me.

On June 22 - it was cylinders 2&3 (spark plugs changed). This was 4 months after the purchase

On October 22 - it was cylinder 3 (fuel system changed), The car was not used between November and to beginning of Feb as it was in repairs all this time

On May 23 - it was cylinder 3 (spark plugs changed), and it wasn't used between May - September. I was told I had to pick up the car from the dealership so drove it back home in September.

November 23 - misfire cylinder 3. It has not been repaired as I am going through the rejection process. Car has only been moved around for parking purposes.

Yet the dealership insists there are no inherent faults and the finance company insists it's wear and tear

TBH. Changing spark plugs does not point to inherent issue. As they are a consumable part.

Changing spark plugs is to try and fix the mis-fire.

MakingLifeMine

Final update, and now I have peace (kinda);

I came on here in November to say that I had referred my case to the Financial Ombudsman Service.  A caseworker who had been allocated my case had requested that;

• The finance be unwound
• My credit file was rectified, with any negative entries removed
• My initial deposit returned 
• Refund of additional travel costs + 8% simple interest
• Collection of the car at no inconvenience to me

There were some nuances about unwinding the agreement. I thought this meant putting me back in the same financial position that I was in, but the caseworker said that she could not ask the finance company to refund payments as I have had use of the car.

The best she could do was request that there was nothing further to pay and that my expenses for additional transport be reimbursed.

The finance company intentionally tried to delay things by responding late with absurd questions/remarks, so my case was then referred to an Ombudsman in January this year. The case was allocated last month, and the Ombudsman actually gave me a better outcome.

She requested that the finance company refund 90% of my payments instead of refunding my costs for making alternative travel arrangements. She said that she could not ask for both payments for alternative arrangements and a refund of my monthly payments, as this would mean double payments for the finance company.

This is a much smaller financial loss for me, and to be honest, I don't think I could ask for a better outcome.

I spoke to the finance company on Friday, and they said they are working on getting everything sorted as soon as they can. Granted, I know that they can say anything, and while they are meant to do what the Financial Ombudsman says, I know that not all companies do so in a timely manner.

The most important thing for me is that the Financial Ombudsman gave me a conclusion when the finance company made me feel crazy. I was somewhat scared that the Ombudsman would get the case and sign with the finance company, so I felt like I was in limbo for a bit.

Now, I am battling the dealership, as during all of this, it 'accidentally' came out that this misfiring issue was present on the car before I purchased the car. The customer service assistant that I was dealing with all this time knew, which was frustrating for me as I had asked if the car had a history of doing this, and via email, the dealership said it did not. This was prior to them accidentally sending me the records of the car repairs prior to my purchase.

I filed a complaint against them because they did not meet the service standard they are meant to uphold set by the motor services code of conduct they signed up to and because they knowingly sold me an extended car warranty on a car with a fault. The extended car warranty was an agreement between the dealership and me and had nothing to do with the finance company.

They were ready to give me financial compensation, but when they heard that the FOS had settled the case in my favor, they were now trying to say that their settlement for my complaint would be included in the financial ombudsman settlement. I told them I did not take out my extended warranty with my finance; I signed the extended warranty with them directly, and the FOS complaint had nothing to do with their service.

They are saying this is how it has to be dealt with, so needless to say, if they do try to say they can't cancel the extended warranty, I will also be taking that complaint to the financial ombudsman. They will probably try to say that their service complaint settlement will form part of their settlement for the FOS complaint, too.

It's annoying, to say the least, but I am halfway there.