Bought a used car, discovered issues - warranty or dealer?
Discussion
I bought a Jaguar Approved Used XKR from a franchised dealer about 3 weeks ago. On the day I picked it up I noticed a squeak on cold start which their techie identified as a supercharger belt and/or tensioner. They agreed to have the car booked in at my local Jaguar dealer to have this fixed and would pick up the bill.
In the couple of days after I collected the car I noticed a couple of other minor issues, so contacted the dealer I bought the car from and asked them if they'd sort those too. When I spoke to the local dealer they said that the place I bought the car from were "hoping the warranty would cover these additional items".
I've since spotted a couple of other things so asked the local place to look at them too. In practical terms, so long as the warranty (the better 12-month official Jaguar one) covers whatever the dealer I bought the car from then I'm not out of pocket but a bit of me thinks that on point of principle, the selling dealer should cover at least the items I spotted in the first couple of days, if not the latest ones as well.
Would I be being unreasonable if I spoke to the selling dealer and said so, or should I just wait and see what the warranty will cover?
In the couple of days after I collected the car I noticed a couple of other minor issues, so contacted the dealer I bought the car from and asked them if they'd sort those too. When I spoke to the local dealer they said that the place I bought the car from were "hoping the warranty would cover these additional items".
I've since spotted a couple of other things so asked the local place to look at them too. In practical terms, so long as the warranty (the better 12-month official Jaguar one) covers whatever the dealer I bought the car from then I'm not out of pocket but a bit of me thinks that on point of principle, the selling dealer should cover at least the items I spotted in the first couple of days, if not the latest ones as well.
Would I be being unreasonable if I spoke to the selling dealer and said so, or should I just wait and see what the warranty will cover?
Toaster Pilot said:
My bought at 2.5 year old Kia Rio had a gearbox fault a week after buying it from a used car place. Would I have returned it to them to cock around with rather than taking it to a Kia dealer for proper, authorised repair? Not on your life!
Don't think OP is saying he bought it from a used car place, but from a franchised dealer. Depending on the faults it's down to the discretion of the dealer. But it makes sence from a business point of view for the dealer to use the warranty than to have to pay for labour and parts themselves.nickbee said:
As long as you don't have to pay for it, and as long as you're not put to any extra inconvenience, does it really matter?
Purely in practical terms, no it doesn't. But if there is (legally and/or morally speaking) some responsibility on the selling dealer to put right any issues noted at, or within a given space of time after, the point of sale then I'd quite like to see them live up to that.However, if they've included a warranty and the warranty pays, they've paid for their responsibilities to be met.
If the car gets fixed, it will be fixed by the apprentice mechanic. You wouldn't insist on the dealership owner or CEO doing the repair work himself - so why would it be a problem if the dealer has taken steps to protect itself and you before the sale, by contracting out the work in advance?
If you are caught between two stools - i.e., warranty says something is not covered and the dealership says that it has no responsibilities to you because there is a warranty, you have every right to be aggrieved, but you are nowhere near that position.
If the car gets fixed, it will be fixed by the apprentice mechanic. You wouldn't insist on the dealership owner or CEO doing the repair work himself - so why would it be a problem if the dealer has taken steps to protect itself and you before the sale, by contracting out the work in advance?
If you are caught between two stools - i.e., warranty says something is not covered and the dealership says that it has no responsibilities to you because there is a warranty, you have every right to be aggrieved, but you are nowhere near that position.
CYMR0 said:
However, if they've included a warranty and the warranty pays, they've paid for their responsibilities to be met.
If the car gets fixed, it will be fixed by the apprentice mechanic. You wouldn't insist on the dealership owner or CEO doing the repair work himself - so why would it be a problem if the dealer has taken steps to protect itself and you before the sale, by contracting out the work in advance?
If you are caught between two stools - i.e., warranty says something is not covered and the dealership says that it has no responsibilities to you because there is a warranty, you have every right to be aggrieved, but you are nowhere near that position.
Not sure if this is what you mean but here goes - there is a warranty but it wasn't "thrown in", a portion of the purchase price of the car was for the warranty. In any case, does the fact that there is a warranty in place mean that the dealer is absolved from any responsibility for remedying any faults found before, at or (shortly) after the point of sale?If the car gets fixed, it will be fixed by the apprentice mechanic. You wouldn't insist on the dealership owner or CEO doing the repair work himself - so why would it be a problem if the dealer has taken steps to protect itself and you before the sale, by contracting out the work in advance?
If you are caught between two stools - i.e., warranty says something is not covered and the dealership says that it has no responsibilities to you because there is a warranty, you have every right to be aggrieved, but you are nowhere near that position.
FWIW I'm not aggrieved (yet), I've never bought a car with a warranty before so I'm asking the question out of genuine interest.
The problem with using a warranty is that you could lose your statutory rights under Consumer Law by doing so.
Consumer Law states that if something you buy has a fault, the retailer is responsible for rectifing it but you must allow them the chance to do so BEFORE you get anyone else involved.
In the event you have something repaired by someone other than the retailer, you pretty much lose your consumer rights - so if you later encounter something the warranty does not cover, you cannot fallback to consumer law with the retailer because you've "gone over their head" before.
In reality, when it comes cars it probably doesn't matter as consumer law isn't really much cop for car-related issues over-and-above really obvious stuff like engines/gearboxes exploding the week after you bought them.
Consumer Law states that if something you buy has a fault, the retailer is responsible for rectifing it but you must allow them the chance to do so BEFORE you get anyone else involved.
In the event you have something repaired by someone other than the retailer, you pretty much lose your consumer rights - so if you later encounter something the warranty does not cover, you cannot fallback to consumer law with the retailer because you've "gone over their head" before.
In reality, when it comes cars it probably doesn't matter as consumer law isn't really much cop for car-related issues over-and-above really obvious stuff like engines/gearboxes exploding the week after you bought them.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff