Second hand car faulty CRA - rights if it goes over 30 days

Graciemumof5

After some thoughts and possible advice, if anyone can help. It is a bit of a long story, so I appreciate anyone who takes the time to read it

Son bought a car, which then broke down with a locked steering wheel.  He bought it second hand from a dealer.  As it was within the 30 days, he contacted the dealer, making them aware that he could reject the vehicle, but also offering an alternative of covering the cost of the repairs.  The reason being that he doesn't want to give the car back.  The dealer isn't local either.  Dealer asked him to get quotes for the repair, which he did, but this is an issue that can only be done by a main dealer.  He tried independent garages, but because of the nature of the fault, a main dealer is required.  

Dealer responded saying that after reviewing the vehicle's age and mileage they believe the cost of the work would be costly and as a goodwill gesture offered £200 towards the cost (approx £650) or they would take the vehicle back and deduct £300 from the original purchase price.  If he accepts either offer then the matter would be considered closed.

He replied saying that under the CRA he has the right to reject the vehicle with the price paid to be returned in full and that they have no right to deduct anything from the money he paid for it.  He also said that he was offering an alternative rather than rejecting the vehicle.

This is all within the 30 days under the CRA.  He has now received another email stating that they don't accept his interpretation of the situation or liability for the repair costs, but that they are willing to work with him to reach a reasonable resolution, but do not agree to cover the full repair costs quoted by the main dealer.

Now my interpretation is that they have admitted liability by offering a contribution towards the repairs.  I also disagree that my son's interpretation is incorrect.

Any thoughts on this and a way forward?  Also, as he has brought this to the dealer's attention within 30 days, does he have to accept the one opportunity to repair, as stated by the ACT, that must be offered between 30 days and 6 months, or could he still go straight to rejecting the car.

Thanks to everyone who has read this far!  

born_again

Car details?
How many miles has your son done in the car?

Graciemumof5

born_again said:

Car details?
How many miles has your son done in the car?

Less than 500 and half of those were getting the car home

MattMattMattUK

Graciemumof5 said:

born_again said:

Car details?
How many miles has your son done in the car?

Less than 500 and half of those were getting the car home

What is the car, how old is it, how many miles has it done in total and how much did he pay?

born_again

Graciemumof5 said:

born_again said:

Car details?
How many miles has your son done in the car?

Less than 500 and half of those were getting the car home

Getting it home is still miles covered?

Don't be shy, car details?

MarvinDay

powerful_Rogue said:

Graciemumof5 said:

After some thoughts and possible advice, if anyone can help. It is a bit of a long story, so I appreciate anyone who takes the time to read it

Son bought a car, which then broke down with a locked steering wheel.  He bought it second hand from a dealer.  As it was within the 30 days, he contacted the dealer, making them aware that he could reject the vehicle, but also offering an alternative of covering the cost of the repairs.  The reason being that he doesn't want to give the car back.  The dealer isn't local either.  Dealer asked him to get quotes for the repair, which he did, but this is an issue that can only be done by a main dealer.  He tried independent garages, but because of the nature of the fault, a main dealer is required.  

Dealer responded saying that after reviewing the vehicle's age and mileage they believe the cost of the work would be costly and as a goodwill gesture offered £200 towards the cost (approx £650) or they would take the vehicle back and deduct £300 from the original purchase price.  If he accepts either offer then the matter would be considered closed.

He replied saying that under the CRA he has the right to reject the vehicle with the price paid to be returned in full and that they have no right to deduct anything from the money he paid for it.  He also said that he was offering an alternative rather than rejecting the vehicle.

This is all within the 30 days under the CRA.  He has now received another email stating that they don't accept his interpretation of the situation or liability for the repair costs, but that they are willing to work with him to reach a reasonable resolution, but do not agree to cover the full repair costs quoted by the main dealer.

Now my interpretation is that they have admitted liability by offering a contribution towards the repairs.  I also disagree that my son's interpretation is incorrect.

Any thoughts on this and a way forward?  Also, as he has brought this to the dealer's attention within 30 days, does he have to accept the one opportunity to repair, as stated by the ACT, that must be offered between 30 days and 6 months, or could he still go straight to rejecting the car.

Thanks to everyone who has read this far!  

That's not correct. A deduction can be made for use. As above, how many miles has your son done in the vehicle?

I thought that a deduction was only permitted if the vehicle was rejected after the 30 day short term right of rejection had passed.
As the car in question became faulty and the dealer notified within the first 30 days, no deduction for usage is allowed.

powerful_Rogue

MarvinDay said:

powerful_Rogue said:

Graciemumof5 said:

After some thoughts and possible advice, if anyone can help. It is a bit of a long story, so I appreciate anyone who takes the time to read it

Son bought a car, which then broke down with a locked steering wheel.  He bought it second hand from a dealer.  As it was within the 30 days, he contacted the dealer, making them aware that he could reject the vehicle, but also offering an alternative of covering the cost of the repairs.  The reason being that he doesn't want to give the car back.  The dealer isn't local either.  Dealer asked him to get quotes for the repair, which he did, but this is an issue that can only be done by a main dealer.  He tried independent garages, but because of the nature of the fault, a main dealer is required.  

Dealer responded saying that after reviewing the vehicle's age and mileage they believe the cost of the work would be costly and as a goodwill gesture offered £200 towards the cost (approx £650) or they would take the vehicle back and deduct £300 from the original purchase price.  If he accepts either offer then the matter would be considered closed.

He replied saying that under the CRA he has the right to reject the vehicle with the price paid to be returned in full and that they have no right to deduct anything from the money he paid for it.  He also said that he was offering an alternative rather than rejecting the vehicle.

This is all within the 30 days under the CRA.  He has now received another email stating that they don't accept his interpretation of the situation or liability for the repair costs, but that they are willing to work with him to reach a reasonable resolution, but do not agree to cover the full repair costs quoted by the main dealer.

Now my interpretation is that they have admitted liability by offering a contribution towards the repairs.  I also disagree that my son's interpretation is incorrect.

Any thoughts on this and a way forward?  Also, as he has brought this to the dealer's attention within 30 days, does he have to accept the one opportunity to repair, as stated by the ACT, that must be offered between 30 days and 6 months, or could he still go straight to rejecting the car.

Thanks to everyone who has read this far!  

That's not correct. A deduction can be made for use. As above, how many miles has your son done in the vehicle?

I thought that a deduction was only permitted if the vehicle was rejected after the 30 day short term right of rejection had passed.
As the car in question became faulty and the dealer notified within the first 30 days, no deduction for usage is allowed.

You are indeed correct. My bad - Post deleted to avoid confusion.

Graciemumof5

In answer to your questions, the car Volvo D70, was first registered in 2007 and has done just short of 162,000 miles.  It failed after 12 days, which, going by the CRA 2015, would deem it not fit for purpose, nor lasting a reasonable length of time.  He is currently in an email trail with the garage, who is refusing to accept their obligations under this Act.  

Anything you think is helpful, please comment.  We are now in the 30 days - 6 months, so the right to one repair is now in force. They are resisting!

lincroft1710

The one thing you haven't said is the price he paid. Remember we are looking at a car more than 18 years old with a highish mileage, problems are to be expected.

sheramber

If you claim within 30 days the clock stops until it is repaired/ rejected.

 Xx the car has not been repaired so the clock is still stopped.