Can I reject a used car for this?

[Bobton125]

To cut a long story short, bought a used bmw for £12k from a used car lot. It's been back to them 3 times now for different issues (including problems below and 2 different engine faults).

I bought it 2 months ago, however 1 month of which it was with them.

Some of the issues still have not been repaired by them and they're having none of it because it doesn't affect the running of the car.

1) The heating is not blowing hot from the drivers side vent. They've tried to fix this last time they took it back but looks like it didn't work.
2) There is a shuffling noise as you're driving along. I'm not sure if it's a wheel bearing or gearbox. They've tried to fix this the last time they had it by replacing the discs and pads all round but it wasn't that.
3) The steering has a creak. They haven't tried to fix this because they say it's normal. (However no other bmw i've driven does this).

The car developed an engine light, so it's gone back to them as they've agreed to fix that. Am i within my rights to reject this lemon of a car for the points above which i don't think they will fix, as by this point i just want out of it by now.

thanks

Edited by Bobton125 on Monday 30th August 21:26

[Davie_GLA]

Some more details please?

Age and mileage? Any of this present on test drive etc etc.

[Bobton125]

Davie_GLA said:

Some more details please?

Age and mileage? Any of this present on test drive etc etc.

apologies, 2012 - 3 series, 56k miles.

The shuffling noise i noticed on the test drive but was more faint and i assumed it was just the discs if it had been sitting around. Didn't notice the others at the time

[MitchT]

Got to wonder what sort of life this car has had. A mate of mine bought a similar age 3 Series with 90k on the clock. He's put almost as much on again yet it still feels like it's hewn from a block of granite and hasn't cause him a minute's trouble.

[ninjag]

Might have had an annual haircut.

[Matt_E_Mulsion]

ninjag said:

Might have had an annual haircut.

This. It is quite low mileage for the year.

[jonwm]

For one of the issues I may be able to help.

I had a 2011 3 series and after having the windscreen they didn't change the sensor at the top which detects condensation on the screen, the blower would blow random temperatures in the car to try and compensate, took them ages to workout it had had the screen changed and the sensor also needed changing.

[Wagonwheel555]

Matt_E_Mulsion said:

This. It is quite low mileage for the year.

Its possible but 6k a year is not super low, plenty of people average that. I would like to think you can spot a 100k mile car but having owned a couple which were looked after, its not always very easy as cars tend to age better these days than they did 20-30 years ago.

OP - You can reject the car if its under 6 months old and you have given the dealer an opportunity to fix the issue but if they refuse, it sounds like legal action is the next step which could/will be a drama:

https://www.thecarexpert.co.uk/rejecting-a-car/

The heating issue is unusual, its not something I have heard of before and we have owned numerous BMW's over the years, currently have an F30 and F36. Might be worth a look on the main BMW forums to see if its something that has come up before, could be a quick fix but then again, if its an issue inside the dash you don't want to be removing the dash either.

Shuffling noise could be lots of things but a competent mechanic should be able to narrow it down fairly easily.

Being honest, BMW's do have steering creaks, its not unheard of. I think there was a recall for some Fxx models and the steering column. Again it might be worth checking the forums or perhaps calling BMW to find out if there are any recalls etc.

Any used car is going to have the odd issue but a 56k mile car really shouldn't have any odd noises so I would push the dealer again to get them looked at or you can try the reject route.

Have you input the reg into the Gov website which shows the MOT history? Might be worth it to see if A) The mileage tallies up and B) if any MOT fails or advisories came up last time.

[Bobton125]

The mileage tallies up on the mot history online

[Ryyy]

Give citizens advice a ring and they'll be able to tell you where you stand and under what act/right/law for any of your troubles

[ninjag]

Bobton125 said:

The mileage tallies up on the mot history online

That's pretty easy to do though as the MOT is a predictable occasion. A more likely area for clockers to get caught out is on garage receipts, servicing documents or insurance work where they may have taken a note of the mileage which is easier to overlook by someone clocking it. Normally I would think it's unlikely, but the more I get to know people in the industry the more I've come to realise that's it seems to be very common and easily done.

[Davie_GLA]

Bobton125 said:

The mileage tallies up on the mot history online

Don't take this as a benchmark for honesty. All it takes is for the current owner to take a few thousand miles off it just before the test and people generally only check that the mileage increases over time when looking at the history online.

Do a search for the car plate and see if any previous adverts pop up.

Also, (assuming you have already HPI'd it) - fo a further check on vcheck. It looks for more than HPI.

[Far Cough]

You`ve dropped £12k on a car that you have only been able to use ( unsatisfactorily) for 50% of the time, the rest being whilst its being repaired 3 times and still exhibits the same faults ?????

I`d be asking for a full refund long before now. You have given them plenty of opportunity to fix it. As you state, its a lemon so get rid.

[Canon_Fodder]

OP the relevant legislation is the Consumer Rights Act 2015

Some info here:
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/tips-advice/34744/re...

In your case if they have failed to repair a fault - or refuse to try - the it seems a good case for rejection. As there have a been a few faults (some of which sound rather vague) ans also a few attempted fixes, you might choose to give the vendor a date by which you want all faults fixed or you'll reject it

[Bobton125]

Far Cough said:

You`ve dropped £12k on a car that you have only been able to use ( unsatisfactorily) for 50% of the time, the rest being whilst its being repaired 3 times and still exhibits the same faults ?????

I`d be asking for a full refund long before now. You have given them plenty of opportunity to fix it. As you state, its a lemon so get rid.

They’ve refused to give a refund which is why I was asking on here to see if I’m actually eligible to go through the correct channels on rejecting a car.

It doesn’t seem to be as easy as just giving it back to them if they say no unfortunately

Also, regarding the mileage, can’t see any details online with the reg or with previous receipts (albeit there isn’t many)

[Muzzer79]

Bobton125 said:

They’ve refused to give a refund which is why I was asking on here to see if I’m actually eligible to go through the correct channels on rejecting a car.

It doesn’t seem to be as easy as just giving it back to them if they say no unfortunately

Also, regarding the mileage, can’t see any details online with the reg or with previous receipts (albeit there isn’t many)

Legally, you have the option to pursue a rejection of the car.

To pursue this, you will need to return the car to the source, with keys, documentation, etc and formally reject it. in writing stating your reasons why and requesting a full refund.

One of two things will then happen.

1. Dealer makes a commercial decision. They will likely have seen or experienced this before. They may see a formal rejection and think it isn't worth the hassle of a potential court case and/or loss of reputation and simply refund you. Great.

2. They may fight it. The law is never cut and dried - there is no such thing as a guaranteed win. If they choose to fight it legally, you will be without a car or your money for however long the case takes to hear and you will have to fund your legal expenses up front (later claiming back for that to a capped amount if you win)
You would need to decide if you are in a position to do this. Some people aren't and/or don't want to.

You may even win and the dealer shuts up shop, liquidating his company.....

The most sensible course of action is to try and meet with the dealer in person and negotiate a deal. You may get all your money back, but should perhaps be prepared to compromise to an extent. You should perhaps also be prepared to accept the car just being fixed - by another party if necessary.

Choosing your course of action very much depends on your situation and what the dealer is like - if they're reputable, option 1 is the most likely scenario but you may have to invest time to achieve it.

Someone else will come along in a minute and tell you it's easy, cut and dried - all you have to do is file a claim then wait for a cheque, that you don't need legal advice and you can do it all with a YouTube guide. Believe what you will.

[Crispy Pigeon]

Muzzer79 said:

This is all good and practical advice.

I just wanted to add a few comments on the legal process and merits, if OP should decide to pursue a rejection under the CRA 2015. Tactically, it would probably be advantageous for OP to start a formal complaint now and try to sound credible or legally advised, with a view to positioning himself best for a negotiated settlement, as you suggest. I've set out some detail below to help him to put together a complaint.

Right to reject

Right to reject (section 20)
There are two rights to reject faulty goods:

• A short-term right to reject of 30 days (which replaced the pre-1 October 2015 common law right to reject).
• A final right to reject.

Short-term right to reject
The short-term right to reject is limited to 30 days (section 22), which runs from the first day after all of the following has happened: ownership has transferred, goods have been delivered and (if the contract required the trader to install the goods) trader has confirmed installation. This 30 day period can be extended by the trader, but cannot be reduced (section 22(1)). The short-term right to reject is not lost just because the consumer requests a repair or replacement, but the time period stops running while the goods are being replaced or repaired, and the consumer then has at least 7 days after receiving the replacement or repair to reject.

A final right to reject is the final tier of a consumer's "tiered" remedies (see below).

A consumer also has a right of partial rejection in either the short-term right to reject or the final right to reject (section 21).
As to how any rejection of goods must be given, a consumer must simply indicate to the trader that they are rejecting the goods and treating the contract at an end (section 20(5)). That indication does not need to be in writing, and can be something that the consumer says or does as long as it is clear enough to be understood by the trader (section 20(6)). To treat a contract as at an end means treating it as repudiated (section 19(13)).

Following rejection, the trader must give the consumer a refund, and the consumer must make the goods available for collection, or return them to the trader (at the trader's reasonable cost) if there is agreement on this (for example, in the contract). The right to a refund, following rejection, is qualified in various ways, for example in the case of hire contracts. Specific rules apply to the refund available to the consumer (sections 20(8)-(15)).

Tiered remedies
The consumer may have a right (depending on the statutory right being breached) to repair or replacement of the non-conforming goods, or to a price reduction or final right to reject. Repair or replacement are often referred to as "first tier remedies", and the right to a price reduction and final right to reject as "second tier remedies". Generally, the trader must accept one attempt at a repair or replacement (unless repair or replacement is impossible or has not been carried out within a reasonable period of time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer), before moving to the second tier remedies.

As with the previous law, the consumer benefits from a reverse burden of proof during the first six months of the contract in respect of these remedies (but not the short-term right to reject) This means that goods which do not conform to the contract at any time within the period of six months from delivery of the goods are taken not to have conformed to it on delivery, unless such a presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or how they fail to conform to the contract (section 19(14)).

Satisfactory quality

The CRA provides that every contract to supply goods is to be treated as including a term that the quality of the goods is satisfactory (section 9(1) , CRA).

The quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following where appropriate:

• Fitness for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are usually supplied. The BEIS: Guidance for business: Consumer Rights Act: Goods does not include an example of cars, but gives the example that a pair of scissors should not be too blunt to cut paper.
• Appearance and finish.
• Freedom from minor defects. The BEIS CRA Goods Guidance comments that for a minor defect to mean that the goods are not of satisfactory quality, the goods must fall below the condition that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory.
• Safety.
• Durability. The BEIS CRA Goods Guidance comments that this does not mean that goods must last forever, but durability is an aspect of quality which may be considered as appropriate. For example, a shirt should not fall apart the first time that you wash it.

(Section 9(3), CRA.)

The BEIS CRA Goods Guidance comments that the above factors may not be relevant in all cases, but other factors may; the list is not exhaustive.

The BEIS CRA Goods Guidance ( link here) also comments that second hand goods must be of satisfactory quality but a reasonable person's expectation as to quality might be lower in some respects. It gives the example that a faded pattern on second hand crockery might be acceptable but second-hand goods should still work, unless the lack of functionality has been made clear or should have been discovered.

Suggested approach

Applying the above to the case, and as Muzzer79 says, it's never cut-and-dried and this is a highly fact-based issue. What would a reasonable person expect in respect of these faults, given the age of the car and its mileage? To what extent would your pre-purchase inspection of the car have revealed these issues? Were any of them drawn to your attention by the dealership before purchase? Are they minor or cosmetic issues or do they go towards the functioning of the car?

I can't answer those issues and it would be you arguing one thing and the dealership arguing the opposite, if it ever went to the small claims court. Not worth getting bogged down in the merits of these points too much at this stage, but just put your best foot forwards on it and try to negotiate a settlement.

If you wish to pursue this, my suggestion would be to put together a letter before action to the dealership using the above information that sets out:

1. the car is not of satisfactory quality in breach of the CRA 2015
2. you have already requested a repair and this has failed
3. you are now exercising your final right to reject the goods under the CRA2015

As the purchase is two months ago, the short-term right to reject has gone and you are into the tiered remedies and so you are relying on the final right to reject, having already given the trader the opportunity to repair or replace the car. You are still within 6 months, however, which gives you the advantage of the reversed evidentiary burden of proof; that is, the trader has to prove that the car was not faulty at the point of purchase rather than you having to prove it was faulty at the point of purchase (on the balance of probabilities, i.e., 51% or more likely).

Give them 14 days to respond and say you reserve your right to start legal proceedings if you do not receive a response. Let them respond and don't chase until the 14 days is up, then be prepared to negotiate when they do come back. Preface any discussions (written or oral) with "without prejudice" and be prepared to do a deal to get a replacement car of a similar spec or a price reduction, but they might cave and give you a full or partial refund. If they ignore you, you might want to issue proceedings online for a small court fee and send them a copy of the claim form (mark it "for information only and not by way of service" in the covering letter, so you don't have to bother drafting the particulars of claim), which might show you are serious and trigger a response if the initial letter is ignored.

While the above puts your best foot forward, based on the limited information here, I'd personally not suggest that you rush off to trial at court on this one, as it does sound like it could go either way. You have very limited risk of an adverse costs order (i.e., having to pay the dealership's legal fees) for a claim of this size if you were to decide to go all the way to court, but it does consume a lot of time and energy - and if you were to instruct a solicitor, the game would probably end up not being worth the candle, when you take into account legal fees versus the likely amount you would get back.

(Hope that helps give you a steer, but please note that the above does not constitute legal advice that you may rely on, so do consult a solicitor if you need formal legal advice.)

[Far Cough]

Bobton125 said:

They’ve refused to give a refund which is why I was asking on here to see if I’m actually eligible to go through the correct channels on rejecting a car.

It doesn’t seem to be as easy as just giving it back to them if they say no unfortunately

Also, regarding the mileage, can’t see any details online with the reg or with previous receipts (albeit there isn’t many)

Ahhh right , I missed that bit or it wasn't clear. The lads above have given all the advice you need in that case.

[Bobton125]

Thanks for the replies gents

Very helpful

[ninjag]

This is the problem we have and I reckon car dealers know this, it's all very well having strong consumer rights but trying to enforce them is the problem.

If it were me I would decide if the car is really worth getting sorted and if so then get it away from that place and take it to a good and trusted indy and unfortunately take the hit.

Otherwise, get shot on WBAC or something. You might actually turn a small profit on it at the moment!