Audi e-Tron Owners: It's Time to Start Rejecting Your Vehicles! (Audi Recall: 93U9 – Faulty Battery)

born_again

Alderbank said:

Where does Volkswagen Financial Services come into the picture?

Audi is part of VW group.

sheramber

Did you buy it on finance through VW Finance?

PHK

Alderbank said:

Where does Volkswagen Financial Services come into the picture?

Possibly the OP purchased on finance paying a 4K deposit. In which case, the dealer would refund the OP £4K and the finance company the balance. 

If done properly this (4K plus payment to finance company) would represent the partial refund so the OP has only paid what they have paid the finance company i.e.theyve paid off the finance.  

SyedJafri01

Alderbank said:

Where does Volkswagen Financial Services come into the picture?

Financed through VWFS, they are the legal owner of the vehicle. However, they are unwilling to uphold the Consumer Rights Act, likely due to their interest-earning motives

born_again

Might also help if OP said which e-tron, given the 
Q4, 6, 8 & GT & their sub variant's..

SyedJafri01

born_again said:

Might also help if OP said which e-tron, given the 
Q4, 6, 8 & GT & their sub variant's..

its the e-tron SUV 55 Quattro

Grumpy_chap

SyedJafri01 said:

The retailer (Audi Portsmouth) has accepted the rejection of the vehicle but is only offering to refund the deposit instead of the full amount paid. 

the full purchase price should be refunded, minus a fair usage deduction. 

Is the Dealer refunding the deposit (£4k) plus negating remaining finance balance, so you will only have paid whatever the monthlies have been thus far?
That might be a fair representation of fair usage deduction.

There are multiple ways that the fair usage deduction can be assessed - your formula is not the only way.

Do you have to pursue the rejection? 
You want rid of the car - what can you get selling via other routes, WBAC, Motorway or similar?  
How far from your calculation of fair usage deduction would that approach leave you?
Sometimes, a pragmatic outcome can be just simpler than forcing a specific line, unless pursuing the "principle" is strongly important to you.

SyedJafri01

Grumpy_chap said:

SyedJafri01 said:

The retailer (Audi Portsmouth) has accepted the rejection of the vehicle but is only offering to refund the deposit instead of the full amount paid. 

the full purchase price should be refunded, minus a fair usage deduction. 

Is the Dealer refunding the deposit (£4k) plus negating remaining finance balance, so you will only have paid whatever the monthlies have been thus far?
That might be a fair representation of fair usage deduction.

There are multiple ways that the fair usage deduction can be assessed - your formula is not the only way.

Do you have to pursue the rejection? 
You want rid of the car - what can you get selling via other routes, WBAC, Motorway or similar?  
How far from your calculation of fair usage deduction would that approach leave you?
Sometimes, a pragmatic outcome can be just simpler than forcing a specific line, unless pursuing the "principle" is strongly important to you.

Thank you for your perspective. I agree, it's not fair that only the deposit is refunded. Given the significant depreciation and the car's inability to meet its intended purpose, simply refunding the deposit does not adequately address the issue.

The recall has severely impacted the car's value and usability, particularly for long-range journeys, which was a primary reason for choosing this vehicle in the first place. Additionally, the fact that the car is incompatible with the fast/rapid chargers available at most motorway services further limits its practicality, especially for the kind of travel it was meant to support.

In light of these factors, a more equitable solution would involve not just refunding the deposit, but also addressing the monthly payments made thus far. The total amount paid should be considered in any resolution, given that the car has depreciated more than expected and can no longer serve its intended purpose.

Ergates

SyedJafri01 said:
The retailer (Audi Portsmouth) has accepted the rejection of the vehicle but is only offering to refund the deposit instead of the full amount paid. However, under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, it is clear that when a vehicle is rejected after six months, the full purchase price should be refunded, minus a fair usage deduction. The fair usage charge can be calculated using the following formula:

Alderbank said:

Where does Volkswagen Financial Services come into the picture?

Financed through VWFS, they are the legal owner of the vehicle. However, they are unwilling to uphold the Consumer Rights Act, likely due to their interest-earning motives

The full price for one of those is (apparently) in the range of £59,185 to £83,045 - which is significantly more than you've paid, so clearly they're not going to offer you a *full* refund.  Presmably you want the full amount you've paid *so far*

However, you're not the legal owner of the vehicle and other than the deposit, you've not paid *any* money to the retailer - therefore they've got nothing to refund to you.   You've been paying the finance company, so any claim would be against them.

Wonka_2

There’s a fair bit missing from the story to be able to help you (and there don’t seem to be loads of supporters jumping out to generate a class action or similar) 

When did you buy ?
On what basis - PCP/loan ?
Personal or business ? 

How long ago ?
How many miles ? 

When was ‘fault’ first registered ? 

Given the car presumably still belongs to the finance company then what’s their formal response been to your request to reject ? You’ll need their agreement (and insinuating that they’re biased as they’re part of VW isn’t likely to help your cause)