Car issues - refund only after fair usage charge

Polish72

Another point to note is that the dealership has ultimately offered to take the car back; however having spoken to CAB they state that the finance company own the vehicle and as such I should be claiming my refund from them and in fact they sent me a template to use to that effect. Is there any difference as to whether I seek my refund from one or the other? 

HillStreetBlues

Polish72 said:

Any help or advice please. 

I bought a car in April with a £3000 credit card deposit and the rest on a PCP. Within a few weeks the car developed a number of faults (one of which was 'fixed' prior to purchase by the dealership). Since then the car has been in various approved garages a number of times for the issues to be rectified but so far there's no solution so I requested a refund from the dealership. They agreed that they would refund me but took the Motor Ombudsman's calculation for the vehicle and then took off a 'fair usage charge'. This results in a loss for me of around £2000.

As, there are two forms of transaction (credit card and finance) I'm not sure where I stand legally or if I should (or able to) claim the deposit back using Section 75 and the car not being fit for purpose. This would seem difficult to arrange around selling the car back to the dealership.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. 

The short term right to reject is paused until a repair is completed then it starts again to see if you happy with the repair.
What you should be looking at is has short term reject actually expired, as if not you would be due a full refund,

Polish72

HillStreetBlues said:

Polish72 said:

Any help or advice please. 

I bought a car in April with a £3000 credit card deposit and the rest on a PCP. Within a few weeks the car developed a number of faults (one of which was 'fixed' prior to purchase by the dealership). Since then the car has been in various approved garages a number of times for the issues to be rectified but so far there's no solution so I requested a refund from the dealership. They agreed that they would refund me but took the Motor Ombudsman's calculation for the vehicle and then took off a 'fair usage charge'. This results in a loss for me of around £2000.

As, there are two forms of transaction (credit card and finance) I'm not sure where I stand legally or if I should (or able to) claim the deposit back using Section 75 and the car not being fit for purpose. This would seem difficult to arrange around selling the car back to the dealership.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. 

The short term right to reject is paused until a repair is completed then it starts again to see if you happy with the repair.
What you should be looking at is has short term reject actually expired, as if not you would be due a full refund,

Could you elaborate on this point please HSB? Is there precedent for not having this fair usage charge applied? If there is a caveat where I can argue that it shouldn't apply I'd like to use it. To be specific, the car had an issue within weeks and the dealership had 'repaired' this under warranty. The same issue has also been attempted to be repaired again since to no avail. Under consumer law, if an issue occurs within 6 months it's deemed to have existed when it was bought but would that be justification in law or common practice to argue the usage charge should not be applied? Regards. 

DullGreyGuy

Polish72 said:

HillStreetBlues said:

Polish72 said:

Any help or advice please. 

I bought a car in April with a £3000 credit card deposit and the rest on a PCP. Within a few weeks the car developed a number of faults (one of which was 'fixed' prior to purchase by the dealership). Since then the car has been in various approved garages a number of times for the issues to be rectified but so far there's no solution so I requested a refund from the dealership. They agreed that they would refund me but took the Motor Ombudsman's calculation for the vehicle and then took off a 'fair usage charge'. This results in a loss for me of around £2000.

As, there are two forms of transaction (credit card and finance) I'm not sure where I stand legally or if I should (or able to) claim the deposit back using Section 75 and the car not being fit for purpose. This would seem difficult to arrange around selling the car back to the dealership.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. 

The short term right to reject is paused until a repair is completed then it starts again to see if you happy with the repair.
What you should be looking at is has short term reject actually expired, as if not you would be due a full refund,

Could you elaborate on this point please HSB? Is there precedent for not having this fair usage charge applied? If there is a caveat where I can argue that it shouldn't apply I'd like to use it. To be specific, the car had an issue within weeks and the dealership had 'repaired' this under warranty. The same issue has also been attempted to be repaired again since to no avail. Under consumer law, if an issue occurs within 6 months it's deemed to have existed when it was bought but would that be justification in law or common practice to argue the usage charge should not be applied? Regards. 

If you exercise your short term right to reject there is no provision for them to discount the refund. Normally the short term right to reject has to be exercised within 30 days of receipt of the goods. If however you allow the business an attempt to repair first then the clock stops on the date you agree to the repair and restarts on the date the goods are returned to you.

So you need to go through the diary of the different dates and calculate if the short term right to reject has expired or not. Assuming it has then yes they can deduct used from day 1, if it hasn't then you need to be clear that your exercising the short term right to reject and as such charges cannot apply. 

Section 22 of the Consumer Rights Act covers short term rights