Opinions on action to take against a dealer
Discussion
What would you do in the following scenario:
Viewed a (15 year old) car advertised by a dealer, car had documented FSH and dealer stated would come with 12 months MOT (MOT expired few days before, therefore the dealer will put the car through the MOT (and pay for any work required to get it through)).
Purchase car and take it to a specialist (as I'm not really mechanically minded..) and the specialist identified a number of issues and a couple of them would have been (in the specialists opinion) clear MOT failures. Work comes to around £300 so I'm a bit peeved.
MOT failures were rear pads and a defective brake hose (that was the scary issue!), with the rear discs being on the edge of acceptability.
Work undertaken:
- New rear discs and pads
- New front anti roll bar drop links
- New brake hose + system bled and tested
The dealer has either got the car through the MOT by asking the tester to do them a favour or the MOT tester shouldn't be undertaking MOT tests!
Is there any grounds under which I can try and reclaim some £££? Report them to the relevant authorities?
Annoyingly there is a still a list of less urgent (but still required) work to be done over time, and it was billed as a v. good condition car!
Despite all of the above, the E36 now drives even better that when I first got her and I'm addicted to the experience!
Viewed a (15 year old) car advertised by a dealer, car had documented FSH and dealer stated would come with 12 months MOT (MOT expired few days before, therefore the dealer will put the car through the MOT (and pay for any work required to get it through)).
Purchase car and take it to a specialist (as I'm not really mechanically minded..) and the specialist identified a number of issues and a couple of them would have been (in the specialists opinion) clear MOT failures. Work comes to around £300 so I'm a bit peeved.
MOT failures were rear pads and a defective brake hose (that was the scary issue!), with the rear discs being on the edge of acceptability.
Work undertaken:
- New rear discs and pads
- New front anti roll bar drop links
- New brake hose + system bled and tested
The dealer has either got the car through the MOT by asking the tester to do them a favour or the MOT tester shouldn't be undertaking MOT tests!
Is there any grounds under which I can try and reclaim some £££? Report them to the relevant authorities?
Annoyingly there is a still a list of less urgent (but still required) work to be done over time, and it was billed as a v. good condition car!
Despite all of the above, the E36 now drives even better that when I first got her and I'm addicted to the experience!
What I would have done is call the dealer as soon as the specialist found the problems and get the dealer to fix them.
If fact that's exactly what I did when I bought my first MR2. Dealer fixed loads of stuff for free, job done.
I suspect they will be a lot less happy to give you cash towards fixing things that have already been put right.
If fact that's exactly what I did when I bought my first MR2. Dealer fixed loads of stuff for free, job done.
I suspect they will be a lot less happy to give you cash towards fixing things that have already been put right.
You must give the dealer the chance to put things right before you authorise anyone else to do the work.
If you had a problem with the MOT tester, you should have left the car in the condition in which it was tested so that it could be re-tested when VOSA investigate your complaint.
I'm afraid you have exactly as many legs to stand upon as Oscar Pistorius.
If you had a problem with the MOT tester, you should have left the car in the condition in which it was tested so that it could be re-tested when VOSA investigate your complaint.
I'm afraid you have exactly as many legs to stand upon as Oscar Pistorius.
MOT testers get regular visits from VOSA - surprise visits, mystry-shoppers, etc, etc...
The thing with your list of faults is that I'm not 100% sure they would have been MOT failures. Something like the rear brakes being on the edge of acceptable... it is an opinion thing. The tester does not measure brake discs. If they 'look' dangerous then he can fail the car on that. The brake hose could raise an eyebrow but does not have to be a failure, could be an advisory depending on the nature of the fault.
Both drop-links requiring replacement seems a bit unusual. Usually if a car has enough play in that sort of joint to fail an MOT then it won't be both joints together, it will be one joint on one side. I agree with the specialist who says replace them both at the same time. Those joints aren't expensive so might as well.
So I'd do nothing. It can all be argued either way so you're not unquestionably correct. The condition of a vehicle can change from minute to minute. An MOT tester is perfectly right to deny there was any issue with a particular test item once the vehicle has left the test centre. This is particulary true for things like light bulbs.
My understanding of the MOT routine for most S/H car dealers is that they quote the reg and chassis number to their local friendly tester and they run it through the computer and give them a certificate.
Probably the solution to this would be to take the responsibility for testing a car away from the dealer requiring a new keeper to renew the MOT when they buy the car. At least if you do it that way round the dealer will have to rectify any faults under warranty. When they don't get proper MOTs this isn't necessary.
The thing with your list of faults is that I'm not 100% sure they would have been MOT failures. Something like the rear brakes being on the edge of acceptable... it is an opinion thing. The tester does not measure brake discs. If they 'look' dangerous then he can fail the car on that. The brake hose could raise an eyebrow but does not have to be a failure, could be an advisory depending on the nature of the fault.
Both drop-links requiring replacement seems a bit unusual. Usually if a car has enough play in that sort of joint to fail an MOT then it won't be both joints together, it will be one joint on one side. I agree with the specialist who says replace them both at the same time. Those joints aren't expensive so might as well.
So I'd do nothing. It can all be argued either way so you're not unquestionably correct. The condition of a vehicle can change from minute to minute. An MOT tester is perfectly right to deny there was any issue with a particular test item once the vehicle has left the test centre. This is particulary true for things like light bulbs.
My understanding of the MOT routine for most S/H car dealers is that they quote the reg and chassis number to their local friendly tester and they run it through the computer and give them a certificate.
Probably the solution to this would be to take the responsibility for testing a car away from the dealer requiring a new keeper to renew the MOT when they buy the car. At least if you do it that way round the dealer will have to rectify any faults under warranty. When they don't get proper MOTs this isn't necessary.
Cheers for replies, yes specialist did inspect then undertake work, but they have a good standing in the E36 community, and they took me into the garage to show me the items (well everything except the drop links)that needed doing so they weren't making things up.
Circumstances were against me with this one, bought the car in Norwich as needed a car ASAP as starting a new job and moving locations (from London to MK) having had to give back my company car. The E36 is my only car, so can't be without it and haven't the time to take it back to the dealer, hence why I asked the specialist to undertake the work.
It wasn't exactly an expensive purchase, I'm more annoyed in principle about the obvious MOT issues, but hey ho suck it and move on I guess, I;m enjoying the car at the end of the day.
Circumstances were against me with this one, bought the car in Norwich as needed a car ASAP as starting a new job and moving locations (from London to MK) having had to give back my company car. The E36 is my only car, so can't be without it and haven't the time to take it back to the dealer, hence why I asked the specialist to undertake the work.
It wasn't exactly an expensive purchase, I'm more annoyed in principle about the obvious MOT issues, but hey ho suck it and move on I guess, I;m enjoying the car at the end of the day.
As said above. Breaking efficiency is tested. NOT the amount of meat left on the pads. Thats YOUR responsibility.
A defective break hose would mean you had no breaks from the start. A slightly perished hose is a different matter and can easily be missed by a MOT tester.
Sounds to me like you probably should be buying cars on your own. Take some one who knows what they are doing with you next time. And don't expect a 15 year old car not to have some ware on the breaking system.
A defective break hose would mean you had no breaks from the start. A slightly perished hose is a different matter and can easily be missed by a MOT tester.
Sounds to me like you probably should be buying cars on your own. Take some one who knows what they are doing with you next time. And don't expect a 15 year old car not to have some ware on the breaking system.
[quote=Jakestar]
and the specialist identified a number of issues and a couple of them would have been (in the specialists opinion) clear MOT failures. Work comes to around £300 so I'm a bit peeved.
MOT failures were rear pads and a defective brake hose (that was the scary issue!), with the rear discs being on the edge of acceptability.
Work undertaken:
- New rear discs and pads
- New front anti roll bar drop links
- New brake hose + system bled and tested
quote]
The key word here is 'the specialists opinion'.
An MOT does not mean things are perfect, it only means it was ok to pass the MOT.
And a car WILL pass an MOT with worn or corroded or pitted disks, and pads down to their last few mm' of wear/life, usually this will be listed as an advisory but pass.
Similar outcomes with perished flexy hoses and corroded brakes pipes, depends where you take it to, if they are happy with it or they are extra fussy they may says it needs done, its fairly subjective on old cars and it may well have been fine to the eyes of the MOT tester who knows what he is doing. Same with a/r bar bushes a bit of perishing is normal, might not need replaced.
Specialist will be happy to charge you for all this work, best to have it done and be safe but does not mean it was a dodgy mot!
How far is it reasonable to expect a dealer to go on a cheap old car of low value, if its cheap how can they cover the cost of doing extra work?
Without seeing the bits on the car no one can tell but dont be pannicked into thinking they have conned you, its an old car.
and the specialist identified a number of issues and a couple of them would have been (in the specialists opinion) clear MOT failures. Work comes to around £300 so I'm a bit peeved.
MOT failures were rear pads and a defective brake hose (that was the scary issue!), with the rear discs being on the edge of acceptability.
Work undertaken:
- New rear discs and pads
- New front anti roll bar drop links
- New brake hose + system bled and tested
quote]
The key word here is 'the specialists opinion'.
An MOT does not mean things are perfect, it only means it was ok to pass the MOT.
And a car WILL pass an MOT with worn or corroded or pitted disks, and pads down to their last few mm' of wear/life, usually this will be listed as an advisory but pass.
Similar outcomes with perished flexy hoses and corroded brakes pipes, depends where you take it to, if they are happy with it or they are extra fussy they may says it needs done, its fairly subjective on old cars and it may well have been fine to the eyes of the MOT tester who knows what he is doing. Same with a/r bar bushes a bit of perishing is normal, might not need replaced.
Specialist will be happy to charge you for all this work, best to have it done and be safe but does not mean it was a dodgy mot!
How far is it reasonable to expect a dealer to go on a cheap old car of low value, if its cheap how can they cover the cost of doing extra work?
Without seeing the bits on the car no one can tell but dont be pannicked into thinking they have conned you, its an old car.
If you - or your 'specialist' - felt the items were such that they should have not passed an MOT you should have contacted VoSa before doing anything to the car so they could check it.
You had the bits replaced so you now have no evidence for them to look at. So not a lot they can do about it.
Next time you buy a car, get the 'specialist' to examine the car before you buy it. That way you can ask the dealer to sort the repairs & keep your money!
ETA If the dealer describes a 15 year old car as v.good condition, that means v.good condition for a 15 year old car. You may find this from Citizens Advice of interest:
Satisfactory quality
"There are no precise standards for what satisfactory quality means for a second-hand car. What you'd expect from a ten-year-old Ford used as a towing vehicle would be very different from a two-year-old Ferrari with a low mileage."
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/c...
You had the bits replaced so you now have no evidence for them to look at. So not a lot they can do about it.
Next time you buy a car, get the 'specialist' to examine the car before you buy it. That way you can ask the dealer to sort the repairs & keep your money!
ETA If the dealer describes a 15 year old car as v.good condition, that means v.good condition for a 15 year old car. You may find this from Citizens Advice of interest:
Satisfactory quality
"There are no precise standards for what satisfactory quality means for a second-hand car. What you'd expect from a ten-year-old Ford used as a towing vehicle would be very different from a two-year-old Ferrari with a low mileage."
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/c...
Edited by paintman on Monday 25th February 18:24
So the MOT work would have amounted to rear pads, a drop link and the brake hose.
And yet you want the dealer to pay for discs, pads, two drop links and the brake hose.
If you want a mechanically perfect car, you need to have some expertise with you when viewing. And, if you want a 15 year old mechnically perfect car, you'll also need a lot of patience.
And yet you want the dealer to pay for discs, pads, two drop links and the brake hose.
If you want a mechanically perfect car, you need to have some expertise with you when viewing. And, if you want a 15 year old mechnically perfect car, you'll also need a lot of patience.
It's a lesson I think we all learn when we buy our first car by ourselves.
A 12 month MOT is not the same as a full service and fixup.
An MOT just means it's not broken or dangerous.
It doesn't mean it's not borderline knackered or worn out in other ways.
Lesson 1; MOT means bugger all really.
Lesson 2: If you're getting a car checked, do it before you buy it.
To be fair, £300 isn't a bad price for a post purchase fixup.
But;
Lesson 3: When you buy a used car, allow a budget for fixing stuff.
A 12 month MOT is not the same as a full service and fixup.
An MOT just means it's not broken or dangerous.
It doesn't mean it's not borderline knackered or worn out in other ways.
Lesson 1; MOT means bugger all really.
Lesson 2: If you're getting a car checked, do it before you buy it.
To be fair, £300 isn't a bad price for a post purchase fixup.
But;
Lesson 3: When you buy a used car, allow a budget for fixing stuff.
Not much point in asking this question after you've had the work done.
You should have tackled the seller with the specialists report before authorising the work.
Even a quick phone call may have brought results.
I would doubt there is a car in existence that a marque specialist wouldn't find some problem on.
You should have tackled the seller with the specialists report before authorising the work.
Even a quick phone call may have brought results.
I would doubt there is a car in existence that a marque specialist wouldn't find some problem on.
All points taken on board, this wasn't the first car I've bought it has to be said, and to date I've either been lucky or have a rough clue of what I'm looking at, as I've not had this issue before, but I'm no good with appraising the condition of mechanical itemsv(I love driving but don't have the mechanical expertise).
I paid £1450 for the car, this isn't big money and it was very rushed as I had 2 weekends in which to buy a car (for various reasons) and I had settled on the model / spec of car I wanted (can be seen in my profile). I maintain I'm happy with the purchase compared to the 3 others I viewed and test drove in the 4 days I had to buy a car!
No pictures of the aforementioned disc unfaortunetly, wished I had taken a detailed picture beforehand!
I started this thread not at the disappointment of the condition of the car, and not about the £300 I had to spend as this isn't an issue, it was the principle behind the dealer getting the car through an MOT which I had originally thought was underhand.
Thanks to the responses on here I'm now aware that this may well have all been above board and at how limited a MOT inspection really is (I was fully aware the level of scrutiny is different from that of a service but didn't realize the gulf was so large).
I guess the 1 frustrating point is that I would have hoped the defects identified would have been picked up during previous services, as the car has a fully stamped service book and receipts paying for inspection 1 / 2 being completed etc. I'll remember to not rely on documentation at all in future!
Anyway, off to enjoy the car :-)
I paid £1450 for the car, this isn't big money and it was very rushed as I had 2 weekends in which to buy a car (for various reasons) and I had settled on the model / spec of car I wanted (can be seen in my profile). I maintain I'm happy with the purchase compared to the 3 others I viewed and test drove in the 4 days I had to buy a car!
No pictures of the aforementioned disc unfaortunetly, wished I had taken a detailed picture beforehand!
I started this thread not at the disappointment of the condition of the car, and not about the £300 I had to spend as this isn't an issue, it was the principle behind the dealer getting the car through an MOT which I had originally thought was underhand.
Thanks to the responses on here I'm now aware that this may well have all been above board and at how limited a MOT inspection really is (I was fully aware the level of scrutiny is different from that of a service but didn't realize the gulf was so large).
I guess the 1 frustrating point is that I would have hoped the defects identified would have been picked up during previous services, as the car has a fully stamped service book and receipts paying for inspection 1 / 2 being completed etc. I'll remember to not rely on documentation at all in future!
Anyway, off to enjoy the car :-)
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff