Purchased Car with Dodgy MOT- What are my Options?

Sidewalk123

Purchased my first car (Kia Picanto SP14 XJY) in July of this year, still a learner, I bought the car so I could get extra practice in before my test and eventually for daily use to get to work. I purchased from a dealer, he included a full service and MOT in the price of the car. The MOT was done on the 15th, I made the purchase on the 18th. The car passed with 85,019 miles and no advisories. 

A month later, someone reversed into my car whilst it was parked. The damage was localised to the driver's side bumper, mainly scratched and cracked with a broken fog light. I went through insurance who deemed the car a total loss because of age and stated it'd be a Cat N, I bought the car back from my insurer to repair myself as the damage to the bodywork was minor. In order to get the car back on the road legally, a MOT is required which I had done on the 18th September, which the vehicle failed with 85,084 miles. The car had a plethora of defects that I believe would have been present at the time of the MOT that was done before the car was sold to me. I understand the car was involved in an accident but the majority of the defects and advisories were not on the bit of the car that was hit. The car has also only been driven 64 miles in my 3 month ownership as sorting out insurance and repair to bodywork took a few weeks so I was unable to practice. 

I messaged the guy that sold me the car, hoping to negotiate getting the car back on the road and repaired, he was quite responsive at first but was irritated by the fact I suggested I'd get the car checked after he repaired it and did an MOT. From my understanding of the Consumer Rights Act of 2015 as I've had the car for more than 30 days but less than 6 months I have a right to go back to him asking for a repair or replacement and if this is unsuccessful I have the right to a full or partial refund. I don't want to antagonise him by bringing this up as he was already upset by the fact that I "didn't trust his work" and said that he's not going "to bother" reparing it if I have the car checked. I really want to avoid any big disputes and just want the car back on the road but I'm not sure if he'll accept the fact that I'd get a second opinion once work is completed even though, from my understanding, this is within my rights as that's how I'd know if the repairs were unsuccesful. 

I realise the car being involved in an accident weakens my case but I believe the original MOT was not up to standard to begin with. I need the car fixed and back on the road so I can practice for my test and then take myself to work. I'm not sure if this is worth escalating if he refuses to co-operate as I don't know how strong my case is given that the car was written off due to its age. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Renfrewman

Has your insurance paid you?

Sidewalk123

Renfrewman said:

Has your insurance paid you?

Yes they have, I do have some money left over from the payout but I don't really want to use it on repairs for things that I didn't cause

singhini

Sidewalk123 said:

Purchased my first car (Kia Picanto SP14 XJY) in July of this year, still a learner, I bought the car so I could get extra practice in before my test and eventually for daily use to get to work. I purchased from a dealer, he included a full service and MOT in the price of the car. The MOT was done on the 15th, I made the purchase on the 18th. The car passed with 85,019 miles and no advisories. 

A month later, someone reversed into my car whilst it was parked. The damage was localised to the driver's side bumper, mainly scratched and cracked with a broken fog light. I went through insurance who deemed the car a total loss because of age and stated it'd be a Cat N, I bought the car back from my insurer to repair myself as the damage to the bodywork was minor. In order to get the car back on the road legally, a MOT is required which I had done on the 18th September, which the vehicle failed with 85,084 miles. The car had a plethora of defects that I believe would have been present at the time of the MOT that was done before the car was sold to me. I understand the car was involved in an accident but the majority of the defects and advisories were not on the bit of the car that was hit. The car has also only been driven 64 miles in my 3 month ownership as sorting out insurance and repair to bodywork took a few weeks so I was unable to practice. 

I messaged the guy that sold me the car, hoping to negotiate getting the car back on the road and repaired, he was quite responsive at first but was irritated by the fact I suggested I'd get the car checked after he repaired it and did an MOT. From my understanding of the Consumer Rights Act of 2015 as I've had the car for more than 30 days but less than 6 months I have a right to go back to him asking for a repair or replacement and if this is unsuccessful I have the right to a full or partial refund. I don't want to antagonise him by bringing this up as he was already upset by the fact that I "didn't trust his work" and said that he's not going "to bother" reparing it if I have the car checked. I really want to avoid any big disputes and just want the car back on the road but I'm not sure if he'll accept the fact that I'd get a second opinion once work is completed even though, from my understanding, this is within my rights as that's how I'd know if the repairs were unsuccesful. 

I realise the car being involved in an accident weakens my case but I believe the original MOT was not up to standard to begin with. I need the car fixed and back on the road so I can practice for my test and then take myself to work. I'm not sure if this is worth escalating if he refuses to co-operate as I don't know how strong my case is given that the car was written off due to its age. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

I'm no expert but i thought Cat-N did NOT need another MOT   (Cat-S would need a new MOT)

Also i know nothing about Consumer Rights Act but the MOT is only an inspection on any given day and is only an inspection of some aspects of the car and not the whole car (things like brakes, lights, tyres are covered but engine, clutch, gearbox less so) Car parts checked at an MOT - GOV.UK

Hopefully someone will come along and inform both of us

Sidewalk123

I was told by my insurance that I did need to complete an MOT if I chose to keep the car

GrumpyDil

Nothing I can see online supports that assertion so not convinced about automatically needing a new MOT.

Sidewalk123

GrumpyDil said:

Nothing I can see online supports that assertion so not convinced about automatically needing a new MOT.

I just did what the insurer told me to do as I've never had to deal with something like this before. If I didn't have the MOT I would not have known the real state of the car- I was told I couldn't drive it home after the MOT that I had done.

singhini

I think that's correct. My understanding is if your car has "Dangerous Defects"  the car cannot be driven away.
If you have "major" defects you can drive the car away only if you still have a previous valid MOT, which you have till 2026 [i think this, im not an MOT inspector so not sure] 

The Realistic Options:

1 - Get the new garage to fix all the "Dangerous" and "Major" defects so you now have a valid MOT   (job done)

2 - Find out if fixing the "Dangerous" defects lets you drive the car away as you still have a valid previous MOT till 2026 so you can get the mechanic who sold you the car to look at it, put things right and issue a new MOT

I'm not sure of your Consumer Rights. Hopefully others more knowledgeable can advise 

Alderbank

singhini said:

I'm not sure of your Consumer Rights. Hopefully others more knowledgeable can advise 

You bought this car from its previous owner on or about 18 September, so less than 30 days ago.

I'm happy to be proved wrong but my understanding is that your statutory consumer rights are exclusively with that trader (an insurance company) with whom you have a contract of sale.

This car is more than 10 years old and has covered 85,000 miles. It will have had a few previous owners since 2014 but I don't think you have any consumer rights against any of them, only with the trader you currently bought it from.

HampshireH

Alderbank said:

singhini said:

I'm not sure of your Consumer Rights. Hopefully others more knowledgeable can advise 

You bought this car from its previous owner on or about 18 September, so less than 30 days ago.

I'm happy to be proved wrong but my understanding is that your statutory consumer rights are exclusively with that trader (an insurance company) with whom you have a contract of sale.

This car is more than 10 years old and has covered 85,000 miles. It will have had a few previous owners since 2014 but I don't think you have any consumer rights against any of them, only with the trader you currently bought it from.

They bought it 18th July not 18th September 

Alderbank

HampshireH said:

Alderbank said:

singhini said:

I'm not sure of your Consumer Rights. Hopefully others more knowledgeable can advise 

You bought this car from its previous owner on or about 18 September, so less than 30 days ago.

I'm happy to be proved wrong but my understanding is that your statutory consumer rights are exclusively with that trader (an insurance company) with whom you have a contract of sale.

This car is more than 10 years old and has covered 85,000 miles. It will have had a few previous owners since 2014 but I don't think you have any consumer rights against any of them, only with the trader you currently bought it from.

They bought it 18th July not 18th September 

They don't give the exact date but it was around 18th September.

Read the first post.
Sometime in mid August they sold the car to their insurance company. There was a contract of sale, money changed hands and the insurance company became the new owner.
The OP says 'I bought the car back from my insurer to repair myself'. He MOT'd it on 18 September so he would have bought it on or shortly before 18 Sept.