car dealer refused to help
Discussion
In early January this year I purchased from an indepedant dealer a 2010 Freelander 2 valued at £11,999 this included a fresh MOT,service and three months warranty. During a journey on wednesday this week when braking I heard a scraping noise from the rear of the car and my suspicion was a worn brake pad, on reaching home I removed one rear wheel and confirmed that indeed one brake pad did not have any material left and I had metal to metal contact; the car has done 3,000 miles since I took delivery!
I telephoned the trader and told him the story, I then got a long spiel about how good his service agent was and MOT guy and that brake pads only last probably 10,000 miles and therefore this would fall in line with the wear rate; he was very sorry but he could not do anything for me. Now I have been round cars for over 50 years and I am not naive enough to accept this, I told him that I would expect new pads to last at least 20,000 miles on a sensibly driven vehicle and that for them to be worn out in 3,000 miles they must have been exceptionally low when the car was serviced and MOT'd, at the very least I would have expected to see an advisory on the MOT. However he was having none of it and although I suggested he might like to make a contribution to the cost of the pads he refused point blank and embarked on another spiel at which point I lost the will to live.
I took the car to my usual servicing garage who did an emergency job for me and indeed one pad had no material at all and was bright where it had rubbed on the disc, the other three pads had a maximum of 1/32" of materail, the hand brake was also found to be overtight; they also confirmed that in their opinion pads should last longer than the dealer had said and indeed it should have been picked up on the MOT.
Now am I being pedantic here, I agree the cost of the repair at £70.00 was not big in the great scheme of things but I feel the dealer should have offered some reimbursment and I have a concern about the service the vehicle received and was it sold to me in a dangerous condition; although to date nothing else has raised it's ugly head. What this has taught me is that when purchasing a used vehicle it would probably be wise to check a few essential things (other than oil and water) and not trust the servicing agent. I am not sure whether there is a way forward now in this dispute or should I just "suck it up".
I telephoned the trader and told him the story, I then got a long spiel about how good his service agent was and MOT guy and that brake pads only last probably 10,000 miles and therefore this would fall in line with the wear rate; he was very sorry but he could not do anything for me. Now I have been round cars for over 50 years and I am not naive enough to accept this, I told him that I would expect new pads to last at least 20,000 miles on a sensibly driven vehicle and that for them to be worn out in 3,000 miles they must have been exceptionally low when the car was serviced and MOT'd, at the very least I would have expected to see an advisory on the MOT. However he was having none of it and although I suggested he might like to make a contribution to the cost of the pads he refused point blank and embarked on another spiel at which point I lost the will to live.
I took the car to my usual servicing garage who did an emergency job for me and indeed one pad had no material at all and was bright where it had rubbed on the disc, the other three pads had a maximum of 1/32" of materail, the hand brake was also found to be overtight; they also confirmed that in their opinion pads should last longer than the dealer had said and indeed it should have been picked up on the MOT.
Now am I being pedantic here, I agree the cost of the repair at £70.00 was not big in the great scheme of things but I feel the dealer should have offered some reimbursment and I have a concern about the service the vehicle received and was it sold to me in a dangerous condition; although to date nothing else has raised it's ugly head. What this has taught me is that when purchasing a used vehicle it would probably be wise to check a few essential things (other than oil and water) and not trust the servicing agent. I am not sure whether there is a way forward now in this dispute or should I just "suck it up".
About 5 years ago I bought a similar age car from a dealer.
Everything was great for the first few days, then, a warning light came on, and 50 miles later the engine just conked out.
First thing I did was to call the dealer, I was livid. The cheeky tt told me that once you buy a car dealing with consumable items were my responsibility. He suggested that I would have to pay to refill the fuel tank myself, and it was not his responsibility to supply a car with a full tank of fuel, neither was he going to contribute to refill it for me.
This story is clearly made up, but do you see the point I am making?
Once you buy a car, you are responsible for the consumable items. If those consumable items are in a safe condition then it was pass an MOT, and it is safe to drive it, and sell it to you. The dealer doesn't pay for, or contribute for consumables after 3000 miles.
Everything was great for the first few days, then, a warning light came on, and 50 miles later the engine just conked out.
First thing I did was to call the dealer, I was livid. The cheeky tt told me that once you buy a car dealing with consumable items were my responsibility. He suggested that I would have to pay to refill the fuel tank myself, and it was not his responsibility to supply a car with a full tank of fuel, neither was he going to contribute to refill it for me.
This story is clearly made up, but do you see the point I am making?
Once you buy a car, you are responsible for the consumable items. If those consumable items are in a safe condition then it was pass an MOT, and it is safe to drive it, and sell it to you. The dealer doesn't pay for, or contribute for consumables after 3000 miles.
A couple of hundred miles and they start doing that I'd probably agree and say the garage should have noticed but 3,000 miles is a fair few before they needed doing.
Yes it would be nice to think that you'd get more out of the pads than that having spent £12k on the car but it is used and the pads were (I assume) legal and functional when you first bought the car.
Bit of a pain but I don't think the dealer is being entirely unreasonable.
Yes it would be nice to think that you'd get more out of the pads than that having spent £12k on the car but it is used and the pads were (I assume) legal and functional when you first bought the car.
Bit of a pain but I don't think the dealer is being entirely unreasonable.
Sorry OP, but I'm with the others on this. I would not have even had the gall to ring the dealer asking for a contribution, although I might have wondered if the MOT tester was really that thorough. It is possible that the pads were well within spec when the MOT was done. If you often drive in a hilly or mountainous area, or you tow, then the pads can wear much faster than you expect. It's just one of those things.
Muzzer79 said:
The dealer agreed a service and MOT. The pads had enough life not to fail the MOT
Unless the pads can be clearly seen without taking the wheel off, they can be half a mile from dead and they'd pass - the MOT mostly just checks the actual functioning of the brakes.Muzzer79 said:
and a service means service-related parts - he's under no obligation to replace pads?
I'd certainly expect any "service" half-way worthy of the name to pull all four wheels off and check the pads.Muzzer79 said:
Anyhow, it's £70. Replace and move on.
Agree there, though.Please see all responses above.
The squeeling suggest its time for replacement so there may still be a lot friction material left, it does not suggest the pads are now completely worn to the metal. Some pads are designed to do this, an may only have been 50% worn at the time of purchase. Add on the fact that the dealer did not do the MOT/service himself so is not responsible for what is or is not written on the MOT certificate and it becomes even more apparent.
The squeeling suggest its time for replacement so there may still be a lot friction material left, it does not suggest the pads are now completely worn to the metal. Some pads are designed to do this, an may only have been 50% worn at the time of purchase. Add on the fact that the dealer did not do the MOT/service himself so is not responsible for what is or is not written on the MOT certificate and it becomes even more apparent.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff