Consumer rights on car

Mistymo01

I know an oil change won’t solve the issue but there would be signs of belt fibres, but if I didn’t know a wet belt was in there how would I know to check is what I’m trying to get at. Surly I should be told this car does have a wet belt, even when I asked if it had a wet belt surly that is mis-selling a car. 

Yes that’s for a new engine, i don’t see why I should have to pay if they have lied to me about this car, I never signed a sold as seen 

Isthisforreal99

Mistymo01 said:

I know an oil change won’t solve the issue but there would be signs of belt fibres, but if I didn’t know a wet belt was in there how would I know to check is what I’m trying to get at. Surly I should be told this car does have a wet belt, even when I asked if it had a wet belt surly that is mis-selling a car. 

Yes that’s for a new engine, i don’t see why I should have to pay if they have lied to me about this car, I never signed a sold as seen 

And as has been asked, what evidence do you have that you asked and they said it wasn't a wet belt?

p.s. it's "surely'

Aylesbury_Duck

Mistymo01 said:

I know an oil change won’t solve the issue but there would be signs of belt fibres, but if I didn’t know a wet belt was in there how would I know to check is what I’m trying to get at. Surly I should be told this car does have a wet belt, even when I asked if it had a wet belt surly that is mis-selling a car. 

Yes that’s for a new engine, i don’t see why I should have to pay if they have lied to me about this car, I never signed a sold as seen 

I'm afraid it may have to go down as just one of those things that can happen.  Without any firm evidence that you specifically asked not to be sold a car with a wet belt, I can't see you getting anything beyond a goodwill contribution to the repair.  Even if you had evidence that they lied I don't see that it allows you to "wind the clock back" and make them pay for a brand new engine.

You clearly know a little about wet belt technology, enough to know why you didn't want a car with one.  Did you do any checks of your own to see if that model had a wet belt?  

TELLIT01

A routine service will not show the state of any internal components.  The lack of any proof that the garage said what you state won't help your cause either.

Mistymo01

I have emails from them saying this car doesn't have a wet belt, yet I have one in my car. 

born_again

Mistymo01 said:

I have emails from them saying this car doesn't have a wet belt, yet I have one in my car. 

So what is the service schedule for changing the belt?
Did the car have any service history when you bought it?

Some Astra have a wet belt, some do not. It all depends on the exact engine used.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CarTalkUK/comments/1k4h2g2/does_2023_astra_12_gs_have_a_wet_belt_or_a_timing/

Car Dealer Here: Wet Belt until 2024 on most of the 1.2 Puretech stuff. They have moved back to chain. Like most things, wet belts are over blown online, yes it's a !!!!!! design and expensive to do but if you change your car every 3 - 5 years you won't have to worry about it. The intervals for PSA Wet belts are 62,500 miles or 6 years from date of reg. The belts last longer but they need to have the EXACT Type of oil used and make sure it's never missed a service. Easy to way to check these engines is to remove the oil filler cap. You can see the belt through there and see if there is fraying or cracks forming.

So you car is not up to the schedule by that post. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Mistymo01 said:

I have emails from them saying this car doesn't have a wet belt, yet I have one in my car. 

Then the goods do not match the description, repair/replace is impossible so reject, expect some deduction for actual use (and a fight from the dealership). 

Alderbank

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Mistymo01 said:

I have been emailing them and they have turned round and said that I never asked for them to service it, as I had no paper work from them, but they say on their website that they service and maintain their cars before being sold. No unfortunately I don’t have the advert, but I’m sure they call pull it up from the archive, if it was serviced there would of been some indication that the wet belt in the oil sump would of been showing signs of aging when they change the oil. 

The onus is on you to do that, they're not going to help you compile a case against them.

As for the indication of wet belt wear, I'm not familiar with that particular engine but I doubt you can view the belt in the sump when performing a straightforward oil change, so even if it was serviced just before you purchased it, I doubt belt wear would have been detected.

On those engines you can actually see the wet belt and assess its condition simply by taking the filler cap off and looking inside (you have to squint a bit). No need to drop the sump.

Several versions of the Puretech and other engines were fitted to Astra models first reg in 2021; some chains but most had timing belts. Progressive changeover from wet belt to chain during production runs (I think a few still have belts).

The belts were extremely sensitive to the exact type of lubricant religiously changed at the correct intervals. Proper servicing every time by Stellantis main dealer should be OK, very much a lottery otherwise.

Mistymo01

My car has a chain, the wet belt is in the oil sump, no where in my hand book states wet belt, it’s .5 turbo diesel, it has had 3 services in total, all at random dates not yearly. When I bought it, they stated it had a service and oil change so I didn’t think to look, took their word for it as I needed a car

Okell

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Mistymo01 said:

I have emails from them saying this car doesn't have a wet belt, yet I have one in my car. 

Then the goods do not match the description, repair/replace is impossible so reject, expect some deduction for actual use (and a fight from the dealership). 

Yes.

If the OP has an email trail showing that the question was asked and the trader gave a wrong and misleading answer then it seems pretty clear cut to me.  (Assuming he also has evidence that the car did have a wet belt)

As well as a claim for not as described under s11 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 he might also have a claim for misrepresentation.

I don't know whether misrepresentation - if applicable - would give a better remedy.  Would the OP still have to pay for use of the vehicle?  I don't know...