£7,500 out of pocket thanks to Hatfields Pickering – are they hiding behind the law?

Matilda123

Hi, 

I’m posting here to get some advice (and maybe warn others) about an appalling experience I’ve had with Hatfield's Pickering (Land Rover).

In July 2024, I bought a “hand-picked” Range Rover Sport from them for £26,900 — part-exchanging my Velar and adding £6,500 cash. Within weeks, the Sport developed major, dangerous faults that made it unsafe to drive. After weeks in their workshop, it was returned — only for the same serious issues to come straight back.

With no trust left in the vehicle, I had no choice but to return it. Instead of offering a fair resolution, Hatfield's forced me to buy another car — almost identical to my original Velar — and charged me another £1,000 for the privilege.

In the end, I’m £7,500 down for trusting their so-called "premium" dealership.

Despite multiple attempts to sort this out amicably, Hatfield's have washed their hands of the situation. They’re hiding behind the bare minimum protections of the Consumer Rights Act (CRA) 2015 and refusing to acknowledge the financial loss I suffered.

This is after being a loyal customer who has bought five cars from them!

I’ve escalated to the Motor Ombudsman and I’m seeking legal advice, but I’d really appreciate views from others here.

I understand that the CRA doesn’t automatically cover additional financial losses like part-exchange differences or extra purchase costs — but that I may have a case for consequential loss if I pursue a legal claim (through the courts). Additionally, with regard to their Duty of Care and Misrepresentation, I believe that if they if they misrepresented the car as “hand-picked” and “in excellent condition,” I could also have a claim under Misrepresentation Act 1967.

👉 Has anyone dealt with a similar situation?

👉 Do you think their response is acceptable under the Consumer Rights Act?

👉 Any tips on how best to approach this next.

Honestly, I would never recommend Hatfield's Pickering after this. Any advice or shared experiences would be a huge help!

Thanks so much.

DullGreyGuy

When did you first contact them about the vehicle;s problem and when did you say you wanted to reject the goods?

The CRA has three resolutions, a repair, replacement or refund. The former is self explanatory, the second is intended to be with the identical item so is hard to work in the secondhand market and the third for motor vehicles allows them to reduce the refund for the use received from the goods before it was rejected assuming the rejection was after 30 days from obtaining the vehicle. 

Whilst those are your statutory rights you are free to negotiate another settlement if preferred, like using it as a PX undiscounted against another vehicle in their stock. 

Ultimately you are paying for legal advice so thats what you should follow but having agreed to PX inc an additional payment it feels too late to decide you've changed your mind and wished you'd gone for a different resolution. 

littleboo

When you say "they forced me to buy another car", what do you mean?

Aylesbury_Duck

littleboo said:

When you say "they forced me to buy another car", what do you mean?

That was going to be my first question.

OP, what does your legal advisor say about you being "forced" to buy another car?

If you weren't actually forced to buy another car, what were the other options made available to you?

You say you "had no choice but to return [the original car]".  Is that true?  What other options were available?

Hopefully your legal advisor has asked you these questions, because the answers to them seem to me to be central to any claim you may have.

Do I think their response is acceptable under the Consumer Rights Act?   You yourself imply that they're complying with the Act.  I see nothing in your account that would make me disagree, but that all changes if you were forced to return the faulty car and forced to buy a replacement. 

pinkshoes

Matilda123 said:

Hi, 

I’m posting here to get some advice (and maybe warn others) about an appalling experience I’ve had with Hatfield's Pickering (Land Rover).

In July 2024, I bought a “hand-picked” Range Rover Sport from them for £26,900 — part-exchanging my Velar and adding £6,500 cash. Within weeks, the Sport developed major, dangerous faults that made it unsafe to drive. After weeks in their workshop, it was returned — only for the same serious issues to come straight back.

With no trust left in the vehicle, I had no choice but to return it. Instead of offering a fair resolution, Hatfield's forced me to buy another car — almost identical to my original Velar — and charged me another £1,000 for the privilege.

In the end, I’m £7,500 down for trusting their so-called "premium" dealership.

Despite multiple attempts to sort this out amicably, Hatfield's have washed their hands of the situation. They’re hiding behind the bare minimum protections of the Consumer Rights Act (CRA) 2015 and refusing to acknowledge the financial loss I suffered.

This is after being a loyal customer who has bought five cars from them!

I’ve escalated to the Motor Ombudsman and I’m seeking legal advice, but I’d really appreciate views from others here.

I understand that the CRA doesn’t automatically cover additional financial losses like part-exchange differences or extra purchase costs — but that I may have a case for consequential loss if I pursue a legal claim (through the courts). Additionally, with regard to their Duty of Care and Misrepresentation, I believe that if they if they misrepresented the car as “hand-picked” and “in excellent condition,” I could also have a claim under Misrepresentation Act 1967.

👉 Has anyone dealt with a similar situation?

👉 Do you think their response is acceptable under the Consumer Rights Act?

👉 Any tips on how best to approach this next.

Honestly, I would never recommend Hatfield's Pickering after this. Any advice or shared experiences would be a huge help!

Thanks so much.

Under the CRA, assuming your first rejection was after 30 days, they then had ONE opportunity to repair it, which they did. The car then failed again, so at this point you had the option to reject it under the CRA.

I also don't understand the "forced" bit. No one can force you to buy a car. You say "no thank you, I'm rejecting the car under the 2015 CRA for a full refund". If they don't play ball, you write to them giving them 7 days to refund. If they still don't play ball you take them to court for the money they owe you.

(full refund will depend on mileage driven - they can make a reasonable deduction)

In what way did they force you? Gun to head? Threats of violence? Have you now driven and accepted this new car?

MeteredOut

I think people are focussing too much on the "forced to buy another car" piece of the post (although I hope the OP has learned that using overtly emotional language when asking for help just confuses things).

We all know they were not forced to do anything. What did happen was the OP was told that they could not get a refund and would instead have to buy another car from the dealer.

By accepting that, rather than first highlighting their rights under the CRA, I suspect the have made it very difficult for any redress over and above the £1K.

Penguin_

Matilda123 said:

Hi, 

I’m posting here to get some advice (and maybe warn others) about an appalling experience I’ve had with Hatfield's Pickering (Land Rover).

In July 2024, I bought a “hand-picked” Range Rover Sport from them for £26,900 — part-exchanging my Velar and adding £6,500 cash. Within weeks, the Sport developed major, dangerous faults that made it unsafe to drive. After weeks in their workshop, it was returned — only for the same serious issues to come straight back.

With no trust left in the vehicle, I had no choice but to return it. Instead of offering a fair resolution, Hatfield's forced me to buy another car — almost identical to my original Velar — and charged me another £1,000 for the privilege.

In the end, I’m £7,500 down for trusting their so-called "premium" dealership.

Despite multiple attempts to sort this out amicably, Hatfield's have washed their hands of the situation. They’re hiding behind the bare minimum protections of the Consumer Rights Act (CRA) 2015 and refusing to acknowledge the financial loss I suffered.

This is after being a loyal customer who has bought five cars from them!

I’ve escalated to the Motor Ombudsman and I’m seeking legal advice, but I’d really appreciate views from others here.

I understand that the CRA doesn’t automatically cover additional financial losses like part-exchange differences or extra purchase costs — but that I may have a case for consequential loss if I pursue a legal claim (through the courts). Additionally, with regard to their Duty of Care and Misrepresentation, I believe that if they if they misrepresented the car as “hand-picked” and “in excellent condition,” I could also have a claim under Misrepresentation Act 1967.

👉 Has anyone dealt with a similar situation?

👉 Do you think their response is acceptable under the Consumer Rights Act?

👉 Any tips on how best to approach this next.

Honestly, I would never recommend Hatfield's Pickering after this. Any advice or shared experiences would be a huge help!

Thanks so much.

Was this car priced at £1000 more than the car you bought originally?

eskbanker

MeteredOut said:

We all know they were not forced to do anything. What did happen was the OP was told that they could not get a refund and would instead have the only resolution offered by the dealer was to buy another car from the dealer.

Pretty sure everyone's on the same page, as you say, but believe that the above is a more accurate representation, rather than paraphrasing 'forced'!

saajan_12

MeteredOut said:

I think people are focussing too much on the "forced to buy another car" piece of the post (although I hope the OP has learned that using overtly emotional language when asking for help just confuses things).

We all know they were not forced to do anything. What did happen was the OP was told that they could not get a refund and would instead have to buy another car from the dealer.

By accepting that, rather than first highlighting their rights under the CRA, I suspect the have made it very difficult for any redress over and above the £1K.

Well reason is that's the basis for the OP's 7.5k claim. Presumably the new Velar car is working fine, so as an agreed settlement, OP now has a new working car for the listed price with part exchange. However as a 'forced' deal landing OP with the same as the part ex'd car, then OP has effectively lost the £6.5k + £1k. 

MeteredOut

saajan_12 said:

MeteredOut said:

I think people are focussing too much on the "forced to buy another car" piece of the post (although I hope the OP has learned that using overtly emotional language when asking for help just confuses things).

We all know they were not forced to do anything. What did happen was the OP was told that they could not get a refund and would instead have to buy another car from the dealer.

By accepting that, rather than first highlighting their rights under the CRA, I suspect the have made it very difficult for any redress over and above the £1K.

Well reason is that's the basis for the OP's 7.5k claim. Presumably the new Velar car is working fine, so as an agreed settlement, OP now has a new working car for the listed price with part exchange. However as a 'forced' deal landing OP with the same as the part ex'd car, then OP has effectively lost the £6.5k + £1k. 

But it wasn't forced. The OP was most likely misled as to their rights (was the onus on the dealership to explain those rights?), and only given the option to purchase an alternative car, but does that provide a basis of a claim now?

sheramber

you  paid £6500  plus your trade in for your £26,900 car.

You accepted a substitute car plus paid another £1000.

What was the  cost of the  almost identical to my original Velar ?