Right to Reject - Multiple Faults
Discussion
I picked up a Citroen C4 Grand Picasso (maybe my first mistake) with 118k miles on the clock (maybe my second). It cost me £5k but is an excellent spec and appeared to have a very good service history albeit cosmetically, a typical family bus.
I have had the car two and a half weeks and so far have noted the following:
- A/C not working, went to top up and required a valve replaced with it and the higher priced gas. I absorbed that cost myself at £200.
- Intermittent beeps from the restraint system, including two rear passenger sensors requiring the belts done up constantly as it thinks there are passengers without belts on - livable if not ideal.
- The car came with a new MOT but noted on the previous MOT were two things missing off this one. The number plate light being out and suspension arm bushes worn as advisories didn't come up but there is a knock from the front and the bulb was still out indicates the car was given a somewhat sympathetic MOT.
- Today I am driving home from work and get an emissions error, then a message telling me the car will not start within 700 miles. I pop in to my local garage thinking maybe it needs an Adblue top up but it turns out the PAT fluid is leaking badly (meaning lost pressure) and a significant repair.
- On top of this the garage detected 70 error codes but given how many electronic features the car has and a flat battery can trigger many, I wasn't super concerned.
Before the obvious is stated, I clearly didn't do my due diligence regrettably in a rush to get a suitable car for a job I have now started after 2 months out of work. Also, I know the car is 12 years old and I was wholly expecting to accept a few niggles, cosmetic as well as the odd thing like the seat belts needing to be plugged in etc. Livable issues. But with a fairly hefty list already, I feel I may be opening myself up to a raft of continuous issues.
I have raised this with the garage via text and his reply was to get a quote from the mechanic and send it across to them but in reality, I am inclined to reject the car and it seems from reading online this would be sufficient proof to reject the car as, "not fit for purpose". I also feel it has been given potentially a dodgy MOT or at the least a very very relaxed on.
I just wanted to ask others on here as a bit of a soundboard really as I have not had to do it before so any advice would be really appreciated.
I have had the car two and a half weeks and so far have noted the following:
- A/C not working, went to top up and required a valve replaced with it and the higher priced gas. I absorbed that cost myself at £200.
- Intermittent beeps from the restraint system, including two rear passenger sensors requiring the belts done up constantly as it thinks there are passengers without belts on - livable if not ideal.
- The car came with a new MOT but noted on the previous MOT were two things missing off this one. The number plate light being out and suspension arm bushes worn as advisories didn't come up but there is a knock from the front and the bulb was still out indicates the car was given a somewhat sympathetic MOT.
- Today I am driving home from work and get an emissions error, then a message telling me the car will not start within 700 miles. I pop in to my local garage thinking maybe it needs an Adblue top up but it turns out the PAT fluid is leaking badly (meaning lost pressure) and a significant repair.
- On top of this the garage detected 70 error codes but given how many electronic features the car has and a flat battery can trigger many, I wasn't super concerned.
Before the obvious is stated, I clearly didn't do my due diligence regrettably in a rush to get a suitable car for a job I have now started after 2 months out of work. Also, I know the car is 12 years old and I was wholly expecting to accept a few niggles, cosmetic as well as the odd thing like the seat belts needing to be plugged in etc. Livable issues. But with a fairly hefty list already, I feel I may be opening myself up to a raft of continuous issues.
I have raised this with the garage via text and his reply was to get a quote from the mechanic and send it across to them but in reality, I am inclined to reject the car and it seems from reading online this would be sufficient proof to reject the car as, "not fit for purpose". I also feel it has been given potentially a dodgy MOT or at the least a very very relaxed on.
I just wanted to ask others on here as a bit of a soundboard really as I have not had to do it before so any advice would be really appreciated.
Most cars I've bought from dealers have had a/c that failed soon after purchase. They refill it before sale as a quick fix but of course it needed refilling because there's a leak somewhere and they either don't have the facilities to fix it properly or CBA/too expensive. Hopefully your £200 fix holds up. Then again, if you reject the car, you just lost £200...
MOTs can definitely be ropey - I bought a car by 'mail order' during Covid which had a new MOT; when I took it to my trusted local garage to check they found four fail points. However an advisory is only advisory.
Emissions error - that sounds like it needs to be fixed.
I think you have to give them a chance to fix all the problems before you can reject the car, but check this first.
MOTs can definitely be ropey - I bought a car by 'mail order' during Covid which had a new MOT; when I took it to my trusted local garage to check they found four fail points. However an advisory is only advisory.
Emissions error - that sounds like it needs to be fixed.
I think you have to give them a chance to fix all the problems before you can reject the car, but check this first.
Simpo Two said:
I think you have to give them a chance to fix all the problems before you can reject the car, but check this first.
Within the first 30 days, if there are fault(s), you have a "short term right to reject". All that needs to happen is the dealer accept the faults and understand his obligations under law. Since the dealer has asked for it to be checked at a garage, this is half way there.Adblue tank can be a pricey fix.
IIRC, you can’t just replace the tank but have to change all the gubbins that come with it and is a known weak spot on Stellantis stuff.
Remember that your car won’t start once the mileage countdown has expired so you’ll have to sort it one way or another pretty sharpish.
IIRC, you can’t just replace the tank but have to change all the gubbins that come with it and is a known weak spot on Stellantis stuff.
Remember that your car won’t start once the mileage countdown has expired so you’ll have to sort it one way or another pretty sharpish.
Thanks for all the advice, it's much appreciated.
Oddly it's not the Adblue tank it's actually a leak from the PAT/Eolys fluid tank which is some other kind of fluid which assists the DPF in burning off what it's collected. Not nice stuff by all accounts. Either way, I strongly suspect that it is a costly fix either way as I'm aware of how complex those systems can be.
Good shout on the CAB, I will have a look on their website now.
Oddly it's not the Adblue tank it's actually a leak from the PAT/Eolys fluid tank which is some other kind of fluid which assists the DPF in burning off what it's collected. Not nice stuff by all accounts. Either way, I strongly suspect that it is a costly fix either way as I'm aware of how complex those systems can be.
Good shout on the CAB, I will have a look on their website now.
It didn't take me long but the CAB website states the wording I can use with the trader and that I am entitled to a refund under consumer law. Given the list of issues with the car, if it was one thing I may have gone down the repair route but I simply don't feel the car is fit for purpose.
"Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, this car should be of a satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. My rights have been breached because the car you sold me is faulty/doesn’t match the description. I would like you to put this right by giving me a refund/repairing the car at your cost.”
"‘Faulty’ means the car is not:
‘of satisfactory quality’ - it should do what you’d expect for its age, mileage, price and type
‘fit for purpose’ - for example if you asked for a car that would pull a caravan, it must be able to do that
‘as described’ - it must match the advert or the description the trader gave you
If the problem fits into at least one of these categories, take the car back to the trader to get a full refund. You’ll need to take it back within 31 days, including the day you bought it. "
I would have to deliver the car back to them which is a pain but doable unless the issue is deemed not safe to drive. I'm not sure if for the cars sake it is safe to drive but that would be on the garage.
"Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, this car should be of a satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. My rights have been breached because the car you sold me is faulty/doesn’t match the description. I would like you to put this right by giving me a refund/repairing the car at your cost.”
"‘Faulty’ means the car is not:
‘of satisfactory quality’ - it should do what you’d expect for its age, mileage, price and type
‘fit for purpose’ - for example if you asked for a car that would pull a caravan, it must be able to do that
‘as described’ - it must match the advert or the description the trader gave you
If the problem fits into at least one of these categories, take the car back to the trader to get a full refund. You’ll need to take it back within 31 days, including the day you bought it. "
I would have to deliver the car back to them which is a pain but doable unless the issue is deemed not safe to drive. I'm not sure if for the cars sake it is safe to drive but that would be on the garage.
I wouldn't say anything about the MOT.
The bulb not lit could be a dodgy contact that works for a couple of days after a dose of spray and a clean, it's not proof of a slack MOT.
The bushes are subjective, you can get advisories come and go even from the same test station.
You have some small niggles typical of an older car.
But you also have a serious problem with the adblue stuff.
I would suggest focusing on that and rejecting the car for that reason.
That's assuming you've made your mind up that rejection is the outcome you want.
Maybe note the other faults, but don't get dragged into debates about suppositions and trivia.
Stick to the big undeniable problem.
The downside with rejection is that you will shortly have no car, you will need to find something better at short notice.
So you need to make a judgement whether you might be better off getting this one fixed.
Personally, I'd probably reject it, but it's got to be your call.
As for aircon, I've had various old cars re-gassed and all but one performed OK for at least 18 months. At >10 years old, slow leakage has probably added up, and a refill will probably sort it. But it could have a proper leak which will need serious work if it's ever going to work again. I'd be more sceptical about a younger car with duff air con, that's more likely actual damage IMHO.
Does the dealer have another car you like? Sometimes amicable deals get done.
The bulb not lit could be a dodgy contact that works for a couple of days after a dose of spray and a clean, it's not proof of a slack MOT.
The bushes are subjective, you can get advisories come and go even from the same test station.
You have some small niggles typical of an older car.
But you also have a serious problem with the adblue stuff.
I would suggest focusing on that and rejecting the car for that reason.
That's assuming you've made your mind up that rejection is the outcome you want.
Maybe note the other faults, but don't get dragged into debates about suppositions and trivia.
Stick to the big undeniable problem.
The downside with rejection is that you will shortly have no car, you will need to find something better at short notice.
So you need to make a judgement whether you might be better off getting this one fixed.
Personally, I'd probably reject it, but it's got to be your call.
As for aircon, I've had various old cars re-gassed and all but one performed OK for at least 18 months. At >10 years old, slow leakage has probably added up, and a refill will probably sort it. But it could have a proper leak which will need serious work if it's ever going to work again. I'd be more sceptical about a younger car with duff air con, that's more likely actual damage IMHO.
Does the dealer have another car you like? Sometimes amicable deals get done.
Yeah I wouldn't go full on regarding the MOT, I think it was a tad friendly for my liking. The bulb is a non-issue but considering I fixed it with a bulb which was simply missing I find indicative. Like you say if the knocking I have a the front is what was on the previous MOT, I can't prove but it has a distinct knock and the mechanic noted it too.
If the Adblue issue was the only issue I'd be inclined to let them fix it but given all the other issues combined, I have little faith the car won't throw up another bill in a months time and just end up a nightmare. They are fickle cars anyway but if it's a total dog, I wouldn't entertain it. Shame as it drives well in every other sense.
As for the whole rejection inconvenience. Yes it is a pain, I do have another car to use but a 450 miles commute for the week in a V8 is not ideal but is passable for a week if needs be.
If the Adblue issue was the only issue I'd be inclined to let them fix it but given all the other issues combined, I have little faith the car won't throw up another bill in a months time and just end up a nightmare. They are fickle cars anyway but if it's a total dog, I wouldn't entertain it. Shame as it drives well in every other sense.
As for the whole rejection inconvenience. Yes it is a pain, I do have another car to use but a 450 miles commute for the week in a V8 is not ideal but is passable for a week if needs be.
Alex_225 said:
It didn't take me long but the CAB website states the wording I can use with the trader and that I am entitled to a refund under consumer law. Given the list of issues with the car, if it was one thing I may have gone down the repair route but I simply don't feel the car is fit for purpose.
"Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, this car should be of a satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. My rights have been breached because the car you sold me is faulty/doesn t match the description. I would like you to put this right by giving me a refund/repairing the car at your cost.
" Faulty means the car is not:
of satisfactory quality - it should do what you d expect for its age, mileage, price and type
fit for purpose - for example if you asked for a car that would pull a caravan, it must be able to do that
as described - it must match the advert or the description the trader gave you
If the problem fits into at least one of these categories, take the car back to the trader to get a full refund. You ll need to take it back within 31 days, including the day you bought it. "
I would have to deliver the car back to them which is a pain but doable unless the issue is deemed not safe to drive. I'm not sure if for the cars sake it is safe to drive but that would be on the garage.
I have just highlighted this, given that it is an old, high-mileage cheap car."Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, this car should be of a satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described. My rights have been breached because the car you sold me is faulty/doesn t match the description. I would like you to put this right by giving me a refund/repairing the car at your cost.
" Faulty means the car is not:
of satisfactory quality - it should do what you d expect for its age, mileage, price and type
fit for purpose - for example if you asked for a car that would pull a caravan, it must be able to do that
as described - it must match the advert or the description the trader gave you
If the problem fits into at least one of these categories, take the car back to the trader to get a full refund. You ll need to take it back within 31 days, including the day you bought it. "
I would have to deliver the car back to them which is a pain but doable unless the issue is deemed not safe to drive. I'm not sure if for the cars sake it is safe to drive but that would be on the garage.
havoc said:
MustangGT said:
I have just highlighted this, given that it is an old, high-mileage cheap car.
I'm not entirely disagreeing, but since when did £5k become a "cheap car"?!?Many were faultless, including the drive to the dealer.
One was in such good order I bought it for myself.
I also don't feel that a 5k car from a dealer should be allowed to have numerous faults.
Many of the cars these days I get sent to, that have warning lights on, are much newer, higher value cars.
Edited by Trevor555 on Thursday 28th May 09:35
MustangGT said:
I have just highlighted this, given that it is an old, high-mileage cheap car.
And I don't disagree, I didn't go into the sale ignorant to the fact that I was buying an older relatively cheap car. I accepted the bongs from the seatbelt sensors, the intermittent key not being detected, stop start not working, re-gassing and fixing the A/C etc. The cosmetic elements I can forgo as it's a family type car, not one that's going to be cherished. But I don't think I'm unreasonable expecting a £5k car to not have knocking whilst driving, nor to have a significant issue with the DPF system and the drivers door leaking These are issues present at the point of sale.
Trevor555 said:
I've done a few inspections/purchases recently on cars to be retailed around 5k
Many were faultless, including the drive to the dealer.
One was in such good order I bought it for myself.
I also don't feel that a 5k car from a dealer should be allowed to have numerous faults.
Many of the cars these days I get sent to, that have warning lights on, are much newer, higher value cars.
I appreciate that and sounds like you're very much in the know. Personally, I anticipated niggles, for the money and why I bought it they would be totally livable. The fact that there are 2-3 notable problems is why I have now rejected the car. Many were faultless, including the drive to the dealer.
One was in such good order I bought it for myself.
I also don't feel that a 5k car from a dealer should be allowed to have numerous faults.
Many of the cars these days I get sent to, that have warning lights on, are much newer, higher value cars.
I did my reading up on the CAB site and used relevant wording to e-mail the dealership rejecting the car. I noted the issues I have been willing to put right myself and those that seem reasonable given the cars age but have cited the PAT fluid leak and knocking as core reasons for rejecting the vehicle.
Now let's see how long it takes for them to respond and for the money to come back to me.
Alex_225 said:
I did my reading up on the CAB site and used relevant wording to e-mail the dealership rejecting the car. I noted the issues I have been willing to put right myself and those that seem reasonable given the cars age but have cited the PAT fluid leak and knocking as core reasons for rejecting the vehicle.
Now let's see how long it takes for them to respond and for the money to come back to me.
I'm sure the dealer will push for a chance to repair.Now let's see how long it takes for them to respond and for the money to come back to me.
If that's something you consider, within the first 30 days you can allow them one chance to repair, and if that fails, you still have the 30 day right to a full refund.
If the dealer pushes back, or fails to respond, then it's worth calling Citizens advice as they'll give you a case number.
Quoting the CAB case number on future emails can make a difference, it lets the dealer know you've taken advice, and that you're not likely to just fade away.
Best of luck with it.
Trevor555 said:
I'm sure the dealer will push for a chance to repair.
If that's something you consider, within the first 30 days you can allow them one chance to repair, and if that fails, you still have the 30 day right to a full refund.
If the dealer pushes back, or fails to respond, then it's worth calling Citizens advice as they'll give you a case number.
Quoting the CAB case number on future emails can make a difference, it lets the dealer know you've taken advice, and that you're not likely to just fade away.
Best of luck with it.
Thanks Trevor, that's really good advice if I don't hear from them. I have e-mailed and text requesting confirmation of receipt. If that's something you consider, within the first 30 days you can allow them one chance to repair, and if that fails, you still have the 30 day right to a full refund.
If the dealer pushes back, or fails to respond, then it's worth calling Citizens advice as they'll give you a case number.
Quoting the CAB case number on future emails can make a difference, it lets the dealer know you've taken advice, and that you're not likely to just fade away.
Best of luck with it.
I think given my concerns around the car once I got driving it properly, the niggles it already has, the money I have already spent and the fact that I can't really drive the car they can have the car back. I don't trust that if I gave them the car back it would be repaired properly and I'm left with the hassle of trying to get issues fixed locally when I need the car for work.
I really don't expect perfection but something to waft up and down the motorway to work is not too much to ask. I bought a Saab 9-3 for £2,500, put 25k trouble free miles on (bar a few repairs), it wasn't perfect but it never let me down and I sold it with 150k on. I don't think spending £5k for a car that at least functions as nothing other than a car is too much to expect! haha
Decky_Q said:
I worked as a citroen specialist. The PAT fluid is great system, would need refilled at around 90-100k miles so is it leaking or has it just ran out? Either way it's been fitted to diesel citroen for years so 2nd hand parts are very plentiful if you want to repair it yourself.
This is the bit I love about Pistonheads.Real people, with real experiences, helping forum members
Decky_Q said:
I worked as a citroen specialist. The PAT fluid is great system, would need refilled at around 90-100k miles so is it leaking or has it just ran out? Either way it's been fitted to diesel citroen for years so 2nd hand parts are very plentiful if you want to repair it yourself.
Thanks mate, it's leaking out of the bottom of the car. I did read up on the system before buying and was aware they need topping up every 100k or so. Essentially squirts into the fuel tank when you fill up the car. Was a new one on me as not seen it on any German diesels I've owned but didn't put me off the notion. I don't plan on repairing this and letting the trader sort but that's good to know. I actually very much liked the car, it's not a "PistonHeads" car but it was a very nice drive. For covering distances and putting the kids in, it was very good and with all the glass it felt like a good place to be sat.
Little update on this. No response from the dealer as of yet so will see if he's going to bother at some point or if he'll surprise me with a solution of some kind.
As an aside, I actually went to test drive a different C4 today, a privately owned one which is tempting. By contrast, there were no random beeps or bongs going off, same spec and cosmetically better. Similar service history but annoyingly a service light which the owner had no idea as to why it was on, so cautious on that one. Had it been a trader I'd have strongly considered it.
As an aside, I actually went to test drive a different C4 today, a privately owned one which is tempting. By contrast, there were no random beeps or bongs going off, same spec and cosmetically better. Similar service history but annoyingly a service light which the owner had no idea as to why it was on, so cautious on that one. Had it been a trader I'd have strongly considered it.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff