Worth going to court?

sheramber

Why did it take 4/5 months for the warning light to come on if the exhaust part was missing when you bought it?

FKIW99

sheramber said:

Why did it take 4/5 months for the warning light to come on if the exhaust part was missing when you bought it?

Good question and who knows 🤷🏻‍♀️ one suggestion was  that the wind was in a diff direction and blew the fumes back in through the hole in the silencer thing triggering the warning light. It was such a long pipe and back box missing, there is no way where I was driving I wouldn’t have noticed it falling off or seen it when I limped the mile back home in it. The broken brackets underneath that would have be holding it had clearly been like it for a long time as the breaks weren’t clean. 

visidigi

Are you missing the CAT converter too? Well known that these are stolen frequently from older Toyota's. Would go some way to explain the sudden light appearing if so.

Aylesbury_Duck

FKIW99 said:

sheramber said:

Why did it take 4/5 months for the warning light to come on if the exhaust part was missing when you bought it?

Good question and who knows 🤷🏻‍♀️ one suggestion was  that the wind was in a diff direction and blew the fumes back in through the hole in the silencer thing triggering the warning light. It was such a long pipe and back box missing, there is no way where I was driving I wouldn’t have noticed it falling off or seen it when I limped the mile back home in it. The broken brackets underneath that would have be holding it had clearly been like it for a long time as the breaks weren’t clean. 

That sounds totally implausible, who suggested that?!   After 5 months of driving the car encountered a gust of wind from a completely unique direction never encountered in the previous five months?

I'm still struggling to believe the car was missing an exhaust for months and no one noticed, but if you have photographic evidence that it was missing at the point of sale, then take that to court.

It begs the question...what else is missing?  Are the gears crunchy without a clutch pedal?

born_again

FKIW99 said:

Last mot was 6 months before I bought it. You can honestly see in pictures that there was no exhaust when it was sold. I’d it had fallen off I would have heard it and seen it as it was missing a large pipe and back box and it broke down a mile from my house on a straight road, I would have found it/seen it. I wouldn’t do all the emotional bits if I did go to court, just the facts. Consumer rights act only gives one chance for a problem to be rectified. 

Also the car never made an exhausty type loud sound, it always sounded the same throughout. 

Which begs the question why buy it?

No dealer selling cars at that age, mileage & price is going to spend money on the car before anyone buys it. Even if they have said they want it & are coming a distance to buy it. 
They will want cash before spending anything. As you can change your mind & they then have wasted their money. As if unsold they will just chuck it back in a auction.

TBH. Dealer could argue that you knew it had no exhaust at time of purchase.

Aylesbury_Duck

born_again said:

FKIW99 said:

Last mot was 6 months before I bought it. You can honestly see in pictures that there was no exhaust when it was sold. I’d it had fallen off I would have heard it and seen it as it was missing a large pipe and back box and it broke down a mile from my house on a straight road, I would have found it/seen it. I wouldn’t do all the emotional bits if I did go to court, just the facts. Consumer rights act only gives one chance for a problem to be rectified. 

Also the car never made an exhausty type loud sound, it always sounded the same throughout. 

Which begs the question why buy it?

No dealer selling cars at that age, mileage & price is going to spend money on the car before anyone buys it. Even if they have said they want it & are coming a distance to buy it. 
They will want cash before spending anything. As you can change your mind & they then have wasted their money. As if unsold they will just chuck it back in a auction.

TBH. Dealer could argue that you knew it had no exhaust at time of purchase.

I'm glad you asked.  

OP, do you have a link to the original advert and photos?  I'm trying to get my head around a situation where you spotted it had three bald tyres, but neither you nor the mechanic replacing the tyres noticed the lack of most of the exhaust system!  And that the lack of the exhaust is obvious from photographs but not obvious to anyone at the point of sale or in the following seven months, visibly or audibly!  It just sounds implausible.

FKIW99

Aylesbury_Duck said:

born_again said:

FKIW99 said:

Last mot was 6 months before I bought it. You can honestly see in pictures that there was no exhaust when it was sold. I’d it had fallen off I would have heard it and seen it as it was missing a large pipe and back box and it broke down a mile from my house on a straight road, I would have found it/seen it. I wouldn’t do all the emotional bits if I did go to court, just the facts. Consumer rights act only gives one chance for a problem to be rectified. 

Also the car never made an exhausty type loud sound, it always sounded the same throughout. 

Which begs the question why buy it?

No dealer selling cars at that age, mileage & price is going to spend money on the car before anyone buys it. Even if they have said they want it & are coming a distance to buy it. 
They will want cash before spending anything. As you can change your mind & they then have wasted their money. As if unsold they will just chuck it back in a auction.

TBH. Dealer could argue that you knew it had no exhaust at time of purchase.

I'm glad you asked.  

OP, do you have a link to the original advert and photos?  I'm trying to get my head around a situation where you spotted it had three bald tyres, but neither you nor the mechanic replacing the tyres noticed the lack of most of the exhaust system!  And that the lack of the exhaust is obvious from photographs but not obvious to anyone at the point of sale or in the following seven months, visibly or audibly!  It just sounds implausible.

I agree it’s crazy really, even once we knew there was the exhaust missing it never at and point sounded loud as the silencer was still there. We had it hitched up to get pics of underneath and revved the engine and it sounded normal. 

It never occurred to me to check there was the exhaust when I bought it. And I never crossed my mind it was sold without one until we realised it wasn’t there and I looked back and photos to see when it was there, and found it didn’t appear to ever be there.

I’ve tried to attach 3 photos, one from the advert, one from the day I bought it when we got home and then one of the back of it now the exhaust has been fitted to compare…

Aylesbury_Duck

Good lord!

Does that mean you have the original advert text as well?  If so, save it now.  It could prove to be very helpful because unless it mentions a missing exhaust(!) and assuming it describes the car as roadworthy, etc. then you've got great evidence that it wasn't.

FKIW99

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Good lord!

Does that mean you have the original advert text as well?  If so, save it now.  It could prove to be very helpful because unless it mentions a missing exhaust(!) and assuming it describes the car as roadworthy, etc. then you've got great evidence that it wasn't.

It’s mad isn’t it! Clearly not there! No I don’t have the original advert sadly but it definitely never mentioned the missing exhaust, and I actually have WhatsApp messages from the garage saying they have all the cars up on a ramp before sale and wouldn’t have sold it without an exhaust. But there are the pictures to prove it! 

FKIW99

I think despite the fact it’s so unbelievable, the pictures show that the car was indeed sold missing its exhaust. The question though is whether the advisory on the MOT that the back box is touching and melting the bumper is enough to say that the fix was not done to a satisfactory standard and therefore I can use my final right to reject. The garage and its consultancy firm who are “handling” the issue argue that as it’s only an advisory it may or may not need fixing and I should just take it to them to sort.