Consumer advice

nightrider1951 wrote: »

I had a new clutch fitted. This clutch failed whilst miles from home. I had the vehicle towed to the nearest garage who inspected and diagnosed the problem. I had a choice of paying there and then for a new clutch, or pay for the inspection and also to have it towed to the garage that originally fitted the clutch. I chose to have it repaired there and then. I spoke to the original garage and they refused me a pro-rata refund because I never gave them the opportunity to inspect it first hand. Circumstances would of had me out of pocket and why should I be forced to take it back to someone who obliviously fitted a dud clutch(probably cheap junk) in the first place. Quality is what I paid them for. Where do I stand in all this? I have tried to engage with the owner but am being ignored, do I have a case to make a claim for a pro-rata refund?

Look at this from the other side
How would the original garage who fitted the clutch be confident that you and a dishonest mate who runs a garage have not concocted the whole scenario ?
Did you even tell the original garage before the work was done.?

nightrider1951 wrote: »

do I have a case to make a claim for a pro-rata refund?

Just to echo the comments made by Unholyangel, having the other garage do the repair doesn't automatically mean you have no case against the original garage.

As she notes you'd be in far better position to claim damages if you have something from the garage that performed the repair detailing what the fault was in order to demonstrate that the original service didn't confirm to the contract, should that have been the case.

bris wrote: »

There is no claim against the original garage, they were not independent in this.


Even if they were then the report would still have to be presented to the original installer to rectify the problem, they were never given this chance which is tbh a well known right they have.

The consumer has the right to seek other remedies with regards to a service not confirming to the the contract:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/54/enacted

(7)Those other remedies include any of the following that is open to the consumer in the circumstances—
(a)claiming damages;
(b)seeking to recover money paid where the consideration for payment of the money has failed;
(c)seeking specific performance;
(d)seeking an order for specific implement;
(e)relying on the breach against a claim by the trader under the contract;
(f)exercising a right to treat the contract as at an end.

And the right to a price reduction:

(3)If the service does not conform to the contract, the consumer’s rights (and the provisions about them and when they are available) are—
(a)the right to require repeat performance (see section 55);
(b)the right to a price reduction (see section 56).
(4)If the trader is in breach of a term that section 50 requires to be treated as included in the contract but that does not relate to the service, the consumer has the right to a price reduction (see section 56 for provisions about that right and when it is available).

It could easily be argued in this situation it would be of significant inconvenience to return a broken down car to the original garage if the driver was far away from the original garage.

I agree the OP needs to demonstrate to the original garage that the service didn't conform but I don't see anything written that states this must be done prior to having the service performed again by someone else.