Car Supermarkets - warranties etc...

[bramston21]

Hello all,

so looking to pick up the new used car from a well known 'Supermarket in NW London', and just wanted to check on something re warranties.

I am of course expecting the hard sell on extras (no thanks), but wanted to check what legal obligation a Car supermarket has to mend anything that goes wrong - if i don't purchase the extended warranty from them...?

Any assistance would be great!

Thanks,

AL.

[Integroo]

Yes, they do. They are a trade seller and therefore subject to the Consumers Rights Act 2015. This means they have to sell you a car that is of satisfactory quality and is as described. Satisfactory quality is dependent on the car itself i.e. if you drop twenty grand on a one year old car, the expectation of quality is higher than if you drop six hundred quid on a twenty year old banger. Statements such as sold as seen are irrelevant and do not exclude the sale from the Act. If the fault appears within thirty days of the sale, it is for the trader to prove it did not exist at the time of sale; if after that, it is for the buyer to prove (on the balance of probabilities) that it did.

Now, having rights is one thing, but enforcing them is another ...

[bramston21]

Thanks,

so with that in mind would it be prudent to get someone like the AA to come and do an inspection of the car before buying it?

Also - if i purchased, and then took it my local garage and they found X wrong with it - could i reasonably expect the 'Supermarket' to cover the cost to rectify the issue?

Just want to check that I don't end up with a car that needs several £000s of work to make it 'safe' and 'roadworthy' - and have no other option other to pay up myself.

I should add - I am looking at approx £10k, so not an £500 banger.

Thanks!

[CYMR0]

This assumes that the car is out of warranty: Safe and roadworthy now - yes, they're liable for that.

Safe in six months' time when the brake pads/discs/tyres/exhaust have worn out - probably not.

Misbehaving heated seats? Also probably not unless they're actively dangerous.

The expectation will be that you get a safe, roadworthy car that's been pulled from fleet operations and given a basic check to ensure that it's safe and legal to use at the time of sale. Beyond that, I don't think it's unreasonable, for the prices charged, to expect the new buyer to take over maintenance that falls due down the line as the original fleet owner would have done.

[MorganP104]

For a £10k outlay, I would say you're right to undertake a decent level of due diligence.

AA inspections are a good idea, as are warranties from TRUSTED companies, NOT the vendor the car supermarket is in bed with.

[Integroo]

CYMR0 said:

This assumes that the car is out of warranty: Safe and roadworthy now - yes, they're liable for that.

Safe in six months' time when the brake pads/discs/tyres/exhaust have worn out - probably not.

Misbehaving heated seats? Also probably not unless they're actively dangerous.

The expectation will be that you get a safe, roadworthy car that's been pulled from fleet operations and given a basic check to ensure that it's safe and legal to use at the time of sale. Beyond that, I don't think it's unreasonable, for the prices charged, to expect the new buyer to take over maintenance that falls due down the line as the original fleet owner would have done.

The CRA15 doesn't simply require a car to be roadworthy, safe and/or legal at the time of purchase. This is incorrect and what you think is reasonable or unreasonable is irrelevant. It requires the goods supplied to be of satisfactory condition and to be as described.

Take my car, for example. £10600 for a 2014 Honda Civic with 9k miles on the clock, sold as being in excellent condition. It doesn't have heated seats, but if it did, and they stopped working after a week, the garage would be required to sort them, as it is (a) reasonable to expect a car of that description to have working heated seats and (b) the car was described as being in excellent condition.

If in six months time the engine blows and the buyer can prove that it was due to a fault existing at the time of sale, the dealer would be liable, but proof would be difficult. Obviously maintenance parts, or parts that can fail suddenly, are not covered.

RE spending 10k: the position obviously differs between buying a six month old Dacia and buying a twenty year old Porsche. If you had an inspection on a four year old car, for example, after purchase, and it said the brake pads were a bit worn, you wouldn't be able to get the garage to fix them.

Edited by Integroo on Tuesday 12th September 16:48

[bramston21]

I'll be getting an AA check on the car before buying it, and we'll see what that throws up - with a lawyer as a wife... she'll insist!!

Thanks for the help!

A.