Faulty Car - rejection - SECOND UPDATE - at wits end now!

Jumblebumble

jocstoke said:

UPDATE - we emailed Trade Centre at the weekend officially rejecting the car, seems from the advice on here that was the way to go rather than attempting an S75 claim from my credit card. They have called us today saying the Vauxhall specialist has told them the wrong battery has been fitted, so as it's not a major fault and they can easily rectify they won't be accepting the rejection. This sounds like nonsense to me, how could they be so incompetent to fit the wrong battery twice? Do we have to accept this? If not, what are our next steps?

I think they are telling porkies
Any Battery that is roughly the correct size should  start a car in this weather
It is far more likely to be the alternator/ loose drive belt or something is draining or the new battery is from a breakers

jocstoke

Jumblebumble said:

jocstoke said:

UPDATE - we emailed Trade Centre at the weekend officially rejecting the car, seems from the advice on here that was the way to go rather than attempting an S75 claim from my credit card. They have called us today saying the Vauxhall specialist has told them the wrong battery has been fitted, so as it's not a major fault and they can easily rectify they won't be accepting the rejection. This sounds like nonsense to me, how could they be so incompetent to fit the wrong battery twice? Do we have to accept this? If not, what are our next steps?

I think they are telling porkies
Any Battery that is roughly the correct size should  start a car in this weather
It is far more likely to be the alternator/ loose drive belt or something is draining or the new battery is from a breakers

Thanks, I also think they're telling porkies, but is there any way I can prove this? We're feeling a bit overwhelmed by the situation and not sure what to do next.

photome

jocstoke said:

Jumblebumble said:

jocstoke said:

UPDATE - we emailed Trade Centre at the weekend officially rejecting the car, seems from the advice on here that was the way to go rather than attempting an S75 claim from my credit card. They have called us today saying the Vauxhall specialist has told them the wrong battery has been fitted, so as it's not a major fault and they can easily rectify they won't be accepting the rejection. This sounds like nonsense to me, how could they be so incompetent to fit the wrong battery twice? Do we have to accept this? If not, what are our next steps?

I think they are telling porkies
Any Battery that is roughly the correct size should  start a car in this weather
It is far more likely to be the alternator/ loose drive belt or something is draining or the new battery is from a breakers

Thanks, I also think they're telling porkies, but is there any way I can prove this? We're feeling a bit overwhelmed by the situation and not sure what to do next.

You could accept the car back and see if it holds a charge this time and if it doesn’t you know they are telling porkies and will/should be able to reject it then

that may be easier than fighting them at this point

m0bov

jocstoke said:

Jumblebumble said:

jocstoke said:

UPDATE - we emailed Trade Centre at the weekend officially rejecting the car, seems from the advice on here that was the way to go rather than attempting an S75 claim from my credit card. They have called us today saying the Vauxhall specialist has told them the wrong battery has been fitted, so as it's not a major fault and they can easily rectify they won't be accepting the rejection. This sounds like nonsense to me, how could they be so incompetent to fit the wrong battery twice? Do we have to accept this? If not, what are our next steps?

I think they are telling porkies
Any Battery that is roughly the correct size should  start a car in this weather
It is far more likely to be the alternator/ loose drive belt or something is draining or the new battery is from a breakers

Thanks, I also think they're telling porkies, but is there any way I can prove this? We're feeling a bit overwhelmed by the situation and not sure what to do next.

You don't need to prove anything. If you rejected the car and returned it to them, wait 7 days and then start the next step.

Alderbank

Are you quite certain they actually fitted a brand new battery?

The way that sheds like Trade Centre usually work is that the apprentice goes to the heap of used batteries at the back of the workshop and roots out one which more or less fits in the battery tray, in the hope that it will last long enough to get the customer off their back.
The CRA does not really entitle you to the betterment of a brand new battery anyway, you're entitled to a replacement of similar age and spec to the old one (which might be the 5 yr old original one) but in reasonable working condition for its age.

Are you sure that no accessories are draining the battery?
There was a recent thread on MSE about a new car with a similar fault which turned out to because the dashcam was programmed to be on 24/7 instead of only when the engine was running.

jocstoke

Further update - we accepted the second replacement battery at the end of May. The car worked fine for about two weeks, then the same thing happened - it said low battery and wouldn't start. We again rejected the car, they towed it back to Trade Centre. My partner visited and explained everything to the manager, who said they still had to diagnose it before they could accept the rejection of the vehicle. It took them approximately 4 weeks to do this, and they have today told us that the car needs a new battery and they are rejecting our rejection of the vehicle. This will be the fourth battery, counting the original one that came with the car. Where do we go from here? Clearly there is something more serious wrong with the car, which they cannot diagnose, but all they keep telling us is that it needs a new battery!

Grumpy_chap

jocstoke said:

Further update - we accepted the second replacement battery at the end of May. The car worked fine for about two weeks, then the same thing happened - it said low battery and wouldn't start. We again rejected the car, they towed it back to Trade Centre. My partner visited and explained everything to the manager, who said they still had to diagnose it before they could accept the rejection of the vehicle. It took them approximately 4 weeks to do this, and they have today told us that the car needs a new battery and they are rejecting our rejection of the vehicle. This will be the fourth battery, counting the original one that came with the car. Where do we go from here? Clearly there is something more serious wrong with the car, which they cannot diagnose, but all they keep telling us is that it needs a new battery!

Has anyone checked the alternator?

jocstoke

Grumpy_chap said:

jocstoke said:

Further update - we accepted the second replacement battery at the end of May. The car worked fine for about two weeks, then the same thing happened - it said low battery and wouldn't start. We again rejected the car, they towed it back to Trade Centre. My partner visited and explained everything to the manager, who said they still had to diagnose it before they could accept the rejection of the vehicle. It took them approximately 4 weeks to do this, and they have today told us that the car needs a new battery and they are rejecting our rejection of the vehicle. This will be the fourth battery, counting the original one that came with the car. Where do we go from here? Clearly there is something more serious wrong with the car, which they cannot diagnose, but all they keep telling us is that it needs a new battery!

Has anyone checked the alternator?

Nobody there can tell us what they've checked. It is like getting blood out of a stone to get anyone to talk to us and none of them seem to know what's going on without having everything explained. The chap today seemed to expect us to be happy that they'd diagnosed the car as needing a new battery!

A_Geordie

Seems to me you are in a bit of a legal mess because you/your partner have chopped and changed your minds which may have created some legal uncertainty around the available consumer rights if this matter went to court. 

I think the starting point is that you need to confirm who actually signed the paperwork because only that person will have legal rights. If it is yourself and not your partner, then that adds to the potential legal problems because it seems that it has been your partner who is doing all of the talking. 

That said, let's assume it is your partner who contracted with Trade Centre unless you tell us something different. 

You mentioned in your original post that your partner told Trade Centre that he was rejecting the car after the battery went dead for a second time following its replacement. Assuming this was done on the basis of relying on the Consumer Rights Act, the Act says that if you reject the goods* and indicate to the trader that you are doing that, then the contract automatically comes to an end. It doesn't require the trader's permission nor can the trader reject or refuse the rejection. The contract simply comes to an end and either the termination was lawful or it was unlawful i.e. your partner had a right to terminate or he didn't. 

* I see that some posters have suggeted that a flat battery is not ordinarily classified as a fault, but looked at in the context of the CRA, you could arguably say that the car was not of satisfactory quality or not as described (if advertised as in working, good or excellent condition, no car issues or words to that effect or any pre-vehicle checks confirm the battery in working order). Even if that can't be said for the initial flat battery, the fact that Trade Centre replaced the battery and/or it stopped working a day or two later, would be indicitive of a fault.

The dispute becomes somewhat more complex because instead of suing Trade Centre for the return of the monies (less any reasonable deduction for use, if any) your partner has decided to accept further attempted repairs to the vehicle and to be returned to his possession. Because the original contract is seen to have been terminated, it is possible a new contract or contracts have been created through repeated repairs and further rejections. 

If you reject the goods and treat the contract at an end, you only do this once. Doing something contrary to that position then creates a legal argument that your partner has entered into a new contract and therefore Trade Centre are legally entitled to hold that money that was previously paid as a reasonable price for the car. 

So, it's not quite clear what rights your partner has at the present time, whether they have been superseded or if they still exist. I thought I read somewhere in your original post there were 4 attempted repairs to fix the battery issue but then further down it only mentions there were two repairs, so it sounds like things have happened that you haven't told us about, unless I have missed it. Can you give us a simple chronology of events with dates relating to the recurring faults, repairs and how many times your partner has communicated a rejection.

jocstoke

A_Geordie said:

Seems to me you are in a bit of a legal mess because you/your partner have chopped and changed your minds which may have created some legal uncertainty around the available consumer rights if this matter went to court. 

I think the starting point is that you need to confirm who actually signed the paperwork because only that person will have legal rights. If it is yourself and not your partner, then that adds to the potential legal problems because it seems that it has been your partner who is doing all of the talking. 

That said, let's assume it is your partner who contracted with Trade Centre unless you tell us something different. 

You mentioned in your original post that your partner told Trade Centre that he was rejecting the car after the battery went dead for a second time following its replacement. Assuming this was done on the basis of relying on the Consumer Rights Act, the Act says that if you reject the goods* and indicate to the trader that you are doing that, then the contract automatically comes to an end. It doesn't require the trader's permission nor can the trader reject or refuse the rejection. The contract simply comes to an end and either the termination was lawful or it was unlawful i.e. your partner had a right to terminate or he didn't. 

* I see that some posters have suggeted that a flat battery is not ordinarily classified as a fault, but looked at in the context of the CRA, you could arguably say that the car was not of satisfactory quality or not as described (if advertised as in working, good or excellent condition, no car issues or words to that effect or any pre-vehicle checks confirm the battery in working order). Even if that can't be said for the initial flat battery, the fact that Trade Centre replaced the battery and/or it stopped working a day or two later, would be indicitive of a fault.

The dispute becomes somewhat more complex because instead of suing Trade Centre for the return of the monies (less any reasonable deduction for use, if any) your partner has decided to accept further attempted repairs to the vehicle and to be returned to his possession. Because the original contract is seen to have been terminated, it is possible a new contract or contracts have been created through repeated repairs and further rejections. 

If you reject the goods and treat the contract at an end, you only do this once. Doing something contrary to that position then creates a legal argument that your partner has entered into a new contract and therefore Trade Centre are legally entitled to hold that money that was previously paid as a reasonable price for the car. 

So, it's not quite clear what rights your partner has at the present time, whether they have been superseded or if they still exist. I thought I read somewhere in your original post there were 4 attempted repairs to fix the battery issue but then further down it only mentions there were two repairs, so it sounds like things have happened that you haven't told us about, unless I have missed it. Can you give us a simple chronology of events with dates relating to the recurring faults, repairs and how many times your partner has communicated a rejection.

Thanks for your reply. These dates aren't exact but they give a rough idea of the timescales. Everything is in my partner's name (I paid the deposit on my credit card but my name isn't on any of the paperwork and my partner paid the balance on his debit card).

3rd May May - Paid deposit
8th May - Paid balance and took possession of the car (nb total price was just over £10,000 which I believe means we can't go through small claims)
9th May - Battery went flat for the first time. 
11th May - Trade Centre advised issue was that car needed a new battery.
12th May - Picked up car with new battery installed.
14th May - Battery flat for the second time
16th May - Emailed trade centre rejecting the vehicle
20th May - Trade Centre advised that Vauxhall the specialist told them the wrong battery was fitted the first time it was replaced, so as it's not a major fault and they can easily rectify they won't be accepting the rejection. 
27th May - Collected the vehicle with second new battery fitted.
9th June - Battery flat for the third time, Trade Centre collected the vehicle
16th June - Visited Trade Centre and advised would not be accepting the car back. Manager was actually sympathetic this time and said that to be able to process the rejection they had to diagnose the issue first.
23rd July - Trade Centre advised issue was being resolved by ANOTHER new battery and they are not accepting the rejection. They have not given any indication as to why they think yet another new battery would actually resolve the situation this time.

This has taken weeks of calling, being passed around between different people, having to explain the situation every time we call. It has made my partner ill with stress. They never call when they say they will and we are going round in circles. Just don't know what to do, we're down £10,000 and have no car.