Car fault apparent after 3 weeks

DeathByFluffy

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81937930#Comment_81937930

I hope you had a word with whoever told you to take that path - it was terrible advice!

Okell

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938837#Comment_81938837

Fair enough. We can agree to differ - but I'd first like to make these comments in case the OP may find them of benefit:

(1) "The waiting period ending is irrelevant if they haven't fixed the issue that was reported within the time limit…" That view doesn't appear to be supported by the wording of the legislation. All the legislation says is that the waiting period ends - and presumably the 30 day window restarts - when the item is returned to the consumer. It doesn't say that it needs to have been fixed before the clock restarts.

(2) "They get one chance to repair the fault, after that the consumer still has the short term right to reject even if the 30 days has elapsed since…" Yes the seller has only one opportunity either to repeir or to replace the item, but if 30 days (excluding the waiting period) has elapsed, then the window for the short-term right to reject has passed. But that doesn't mean the consumer has necessarily lost the final right to reject…

(3) "Imagine an extreme scenario where you buy a car which develops a suspension fault inside 30 days. You take the car back, the garage 'fixes' it and returns it to you. The clock restarts. One day/one week/one month (the time is irrelevant) outside the time limit the car breaks down, same fault, and it turns out the garage bodged it together with superglue and elastic bands. You do not lose your right to reject because they failed to fix a fault you reported within the timelines". You are right in that the consumer does not lose the final right to reject, but if they are outside the 30 day (excluding waiting time) short-term right to reject, they do, in my opinion, lose the short-term right to reject, and the benefits it confers over the final right to reject. (eg entitlement to a full refund*).

(4) "The relevant section of the CRA after the first repair is 24 (5a)". That para. refers to the final right to reject and not the short-term right.

(5) When dealing with motor vehicle purchases it is important to distinguish between the short-term right to reject and the final right to reject. That's because - unlike other goods - as soon as the short-term right has expired the seller is then permitted to make a deduction for use from any refund, but not before.*

You might be convinced that the OP still has the short-term right to reject, but in the absence of any confirmed dates I'm not persuaded, and i'd be reluctant to possibly mislead the OP into believing that they still had (or have) the right to exercise the short-term right to reject ror a full refund without deduction for use.

*I think you were mistaken in your post at 7:33pm on 24 March where you seemed to be suggesting that the seller could make a deduction for use even where the consumer had exercised the short-term right to reject.

"The clock stops when you report the fault, so the dealer either needs to fix it, or refund you (with a deduction for usage)…"

My understanding is that the seller cannot make a deduction for use when the consumer exercises the short-term-right

Okell

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938920#Comment_81938920

I'm not sure @PTP123 correctly understood the position. their options [edit]

PTP123

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938884#Comment_81938884

No, the one i refer to was back in 2022

PTP123

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938920#Comment_81938920

Are you suggesting the customer has the choice of repair or refund when the seller has offered a full refund?

beatthebookienet

UPDATE

I first took the car back with the limp mode fault 29 days after buying, however there is no record as I just turned up and dropped it off. They had it over a week and when I collected it, had the same fault and took it back the next day and they had it a further 2 weeks.

I collected it today and was told it was fixed, took it on the motorway and went into limp mode again straight away. 2 failed attempts to fix the fault.

The dealer says he won't refund me and my options are that he will repair it or sell me another car which I don't want. He won't listen to the consumer rights laws. He also says he's closing the business in the next week. He says to book it into the specialist and he'll pay for it but I don't trust his word that I won't have to pay the specialist

born_again

Closing next week could be a bluff to simply get you to swap car, rather than going legal.

Check Companies House for both company & owner & see it there is a history of previous companies owned. If there is, then they may well be true to their word & shut up shop. Leaving you with no one to claim against.

DeathByFluffy

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81939251#Comment_81939251

No - quite the opposite. A retailer can reject a remedy if it’s disproportionately costly, so whoever told you that you can force them to repair was wrong.

beatthebookienet

In the 3+ weeks the dealer has had the car for repair, they have run the clock up by around 350 miles and didn't even bother to replace the £40 or so diesel the second time.

I'm assuming one reason they have used it as a runabout is to use this against me in case it comes down to deducting some use in a refund case.

The dealer is 72 so may well be shutting up shop in the next couple of weeks to retire as he claimed.

So if the dealer refuses my rejection of the car and refuses to answer any letters or ADR then what is my next step?

Aylesbury_Duck

Letter before action and small claims court, but I suspect it will be futile. From what you've told us, it seems highly likely he'll close the business either before it gets to court, or shortly after you win the case.