Sales of good act question??? Used Car

[stevieb]

I am having a ongoing battle with a Volvo Main dealer.

I purchased a used car from them 13 months ago, with a Volvo approved warrenty. During this time i had made some big claims for some of the common problems with the car.. all was going well until the Radio stopped working.

The radio is linked to a control module called the ICM which controls the interface between the DVD System, Radio, Phone, Front and rear parking sensors etc.

The car was found to have a faulty ICM in October last year, at which point the dealer stated this would not be under warrenty as it the Car stereo is specifically excluded.

My point is that this module is not just part of the Car stereo but part of the wider control system for the car. This is not a wear and tear issue, as the part is not user replaceable. It is a black box of electronics stored behind the dashboard.

Now under the terms of the sales of goods act would i be fair to claim that i would expect that this should last for longer than the 10/11 month i have had the car? or would the sales of good act apply from when the car was first made??

The reason i am asking this is that Volvo want £1300 to replace this item.

Many Thanks

Steve

[Andy_GSA]

How old is the car and what specifically does the warranty say about exclusions? Is the warranty the remains of the original manufacturer's warranty or an insurance-backed warranty bought after the original had expired?

It would also be useful to know whether this is just the dealer's view or whether this is view of the underwriters of the warranty.

[stevieb]

Ok,

The dealer was under the impression that the warrenty should pay out for the repair as it is not a serviceable part, and forms part of the wider control system for the car. The warrent company inspector came and decided that it is not covered under warrently in December 2009. The Volvo Dealer already was awaiting the part from Volvo as they were on back order. It was due to be fitted in December 2009 when the MOT and full service was to be completed.

The car at the time was nearly 5 years old.

Additionally there have been a large number of these faults on XC90 but volvo are claiming that there is not an issue, with the quality of the part.

[TooLateForAName]

I think that you are probably looking at small claims. Dont get sidelined by warranty stuff, your contract is with the dealer (although lots of dealer like to fob people off with a 3rd party warranty and act like they have no liability themselves). Has the dealer tried to negotiate with the warranty co on your behalf?

You need the court to decide if it is reasonable for the part to fail on a 5 year old car. Did you pay top retail price or what? (paying top whack at main dealer for premium car as opposed to cheap/trade price for a knackered dog may make a difference to how the court feels)

SOGA isnt a total fix for all issues, and on a 5 year old car you are probably getting towards the limit.

Given the cost of the replacement, and the dealers original intention to replace it under the warranty, I would write to the dealer saying that you intend to issue proceedings and give them 14 days to respond. Im guessing that £1300 is retail price ?

For the minimal fee you get to have your say in small claims and might get something back.

Ianal so this will be rubbished shortly.

Edited by TooLateForAName on Thursday 4th February 12:06

[stevieb]

I know i may be approaching the limit on SOGA, but i was wondering if this applied from when the car was first sold or when this was sold by the dealer as a used Car..

I purchased the car from a Dealer with the Volvo approved warrenty included as part of the deal.

To be honest, i am probably clutching at straws to get it replaced by the dealer but given that its 1300 retail i am going to have a go!

steve

Edited by stevieb on Thursday 4th February 12:15

[Piglet]

Don't get too distracted by SOGA. To me this is much more of a warranty issue.

In relation to used cars, SOGA's position is that if you buy from a dealer you should be able to assume that it is "safe/roadworthy" etc (speech marks because this isn't the exact wording and I can't remember what it is). IMO it's effectively saying that the car should be of merchantable quality for a car of its age at the time you buy it. I can't see that SOGA will give you any comeback 10 or 11 months after purchase for car that is 5 years old.

So (IMV) you are left with whether this is something that your warranty covers over this period of time and for that you need to review the warranty wording. It's probably too big to post up but if you find relevant sections bung 'em up and some of us can have a look.

Edited by Piglet on Thursday 4th February 12:19

Edited by Piglet on Thursday 4th February 12:20

[Plug550]

I think your argument is with warranty company if anyone. On a five year old car, the dealer off the hook completely, as it's not a major mechanical item. (I guess the car is still usable as a car?) If the module is still operating the other jobs it is supposed to do, then it still hasn't failed as a part in those functions. If the radio part is specifically excluded, and that's the only bit that's failed, then you're stuffed. That's the problem with modern cars, multiplex wiring and control boxes everywhere.

If this is common with Volvo's in general, and you bought from a Volvo dealer, and had it serviced there, then I would suggest you would probably get better satisfaction from Volvo customer services.

[stevieb]

Plug550 said:

I think your argument is with warranty company if anyone. On a five year old car, the dealer off the hook completely, as it's not a major mechanical item. (I guess the car is still usable as a car?) If the module is still operating the other jobs it is supposed to do, then it still hasn't failed as a part in those functions. If the radio part is specifically excluded, and that's the only bit that's failed, then you're stuffed. That's the problem with modern cars, multiplex wiring and control boxes everywhere.

If this is common with Volvo's in general, and you bought from a Volvo dealer, and had it serviced there, then I would suggest you would probably get better satisfaction from Volvo customer services.

The module is not operting the other parts as it should do.. It is throwing up a Airbag SRS error!

[DavidHM]

To be honest I'm not sure if it's a SOGA point or not.

Personally I'd be unhappy as to the durability of the part having paid ~£14k for a then four-year-old XC90 at a main dealer. Therefore I would lean towards saying that the dealer is liable (but conversely an independent dealer who offers higher mileage, lower quality and lower margin cars probably wouldn't be). Either way it's a question of fact, not of law - and while people can offer their experience and judgement, I doubt you'd be able to say conclusively unless you can point to case law that is very similar.

Ultimately if it's done as a small claim you can issue against the dealer and the warranty company, if necessary. If it is a SOGA issue, the dealer can still attempt to argue that it's up to the warranty company's problem - and if it's not then you still have the warranty company to go after.

[stevieb]

Its just annoying to be honest.. I am looking to get it repairsed and i am willing to pay a certain amount.. But £1300 is taking the biscuit.

I know it is a grey area, which is why i am canvasing opinion on possible options. I have not contacted the dealer for a few weeks on this. But the dealer still has the part as he is unable to return this to Volvo as it is past the 30day return period for them.

So far the car has been in 3 times for major work.

1. Fuel lines and injectors leaking (Known Problem) - Fixed
2. Spline Gear/transfer shafted siezed (Known Problem) - Fixed
3. OilSeals between Gearbox/Engine. (Known Problem) - Fixed
4. ICM failure (Known Problem) - Disputed by warranty company

[Andy_GSA]

An action under the sale of goods act would be within 6 years from when you bought the vehicle.

As already mentioned there are two possible routes - one against the dealer which would be your sale of goods act claim, however given the age of the vehicle and the terms of that act I suspect you may have an uphill battle recovering anything like the actual repair cost you're quoting. The other would be against the warranty provider for breach of contract but again it may be an uphill battle depending what the exact terms of the warranty are.

In either case you'd probably find a court would want independent expert evidence either on whether the part should have failed or whether the part in question is part of the radio or both.

[escargot]

stevieb said:

The radio is linked to a control module called the ICM which controls the interface between the DVD System, Radio, Phone, Front and rear parking sensors etc.

The car was found to have a faulty ICM in October last year, at which point the dealer stated this would not be under warrenty as it the Car stereo is specifically excluded.

My point is that this module is not just part of the Car stereo but part of the wider control system for the car. This is not a wear and tear issue, as the part is not user replaceable. It is a black box of electronics stored behind the dashboard.

I don't really see how the warranty co can dispute this. You're adhering to the terms of the warranty perfectly. The fault is not with the excluded car stereo and therefore said stereo should be completely irrelevant. The fault is with the ICM.

It would be like saying, no we don't cover the exhaust pipe even though it's the engine that's fked. Completely irrelevant.

[Plug550]

Not sure what the cost of the part has to do with your argument. The mere fact that it's over your notional figure of reasonable cost, and therefore someone else should pick up the tab, is flawed reasoning. Either it's covered or it isn't. I think it's down to the list of parts covered in the warranty document, and the interpretation thereafter. Some warranties will give you a list of parts covered, others will give you a list of exclusions. The fact that it is causing the airbag system to fail would seem to rule out the radio exclusion clause though. What does the warranty document say?

Also, one poster suggests that as its a main dealer, they should pick up the cost, whereas an independent dealer would not have to. That's utter nonsense as all retailers conduct business under the same trading laws. It's just that manufacturers tend to prop up their products and reputations by enhancing the cover they are prepared to offer. The minimum standards according to the law are lot less than one might expect.

[JustinP1]

stevieb said:

I know i may be approaching the limit on SOGA, but i was wondering if this applied from when the car was first sold or when this was sold by the dealer as a used Car..

I purchased the car from a Dealer with the Volvo approved warrenty included as part of the deal.

To be honest, i am probably clutching at straws to get it replaced by the dealer but given that its 1300 retail i am going to have a go!

steve

Edited by stevieb on Thursday 4th February 12:15

SOGA won't help you.

The only thing you have is whether it is covered by the warranty or not.

Discussion of that is useless unless you can confirm:

1) Whether you are inside the warranty period.

2) What EXACTLY the Volvo approved warranty says it covers.

[Engineer1]

Now an Airbag warning is a safety system and also an MOT issue, so that may be a better line of attack than a failed radio. Speak to customer services, the warranty people the main dealer etc playing up the safety side, after all you don't want to find the airbags fail because of this control as a failure could be seriously bad for your health.

[Jasandjules]

stevieb said:

The radio is linked to a control module called the ICM which controls the interface between the DVD System, Radio, Phone, Front and rear parking sensors etc.

The car was found to have a faulty ICM in October last year, at which point the dealer stated this would not be under warrenty as it the Car stereo is specifically excluded.

I'm going to go against the majority on here I think, but I will want more info before taking a really firm view.

1. When did you notify the dealer of the ICM issue? (From date of purchase)
2. If 1 is less than 12 months, I think you have a good claim under the SoGa
3. The Sale of Goods Act period of time starts from the time which YOU purchase the vehicle, not from when the vehicle is new
4. What evidence do you have that the ICM controls various things and is not simply the radio?
5. What is the term of the Warranty upon which the warranty co is seeking to rely? Have you provided the evidence to the Warranty co?
6. Did you purchase the Warranty from the dealer/was the warranty attached by the dealer?
7. What EXACTLY is the warranty company stating in their reply? Have you put your claim in writing to the warranty company?

Basically, as noted above, I think you have in effect 2 causes of action, the first is against the warranty company however you also have a reasonable case against the dealer if the item failed within 12 months.

[stevieb]

Jasandjules said:

stevieb said:

The radio is linked to a control module called the ICM which controls the interface between the DVD System, Radio, Phone, Front and rear parking sensors etc.

The car was found to have a faulty ICM in October last year, at which point the dealer stated this would not be under warrenty as it the Car stereo is specifically excluded.

I'm going to go against the majority on here I think, but I will want more info before taking a really firm view.

1. When did you notify the dealer of the ICM issue? (From date of purchase)
2. If 1 is less than 12 months, I think you have a good claim under the SoGa
3. The Sale of Goods Act period of time starts from the time which YOU purchase the vehicle, not from when the vehicle is new
4. What evidence do you have that the ICM controls various things and is not simply the radio?
5. What is the term of the Warranty upon which the warranty co is seeking to rely? Have you provided the evidence to the Warranty co?
6. Did you purchase the Warranty from the dealer/was the warranty attached by the dealer?
7. What EXACTLY is the warranty company stating in their reply? Have you put your claim in writing to the warranty company?

Basically, as noted above, I think you have in effect 2 causes of action, the first is against the warranty company however you also have a reasonable case against the dealer if the item failed within 12 months.

1. 10 months from date of purchase (when fault first occured)

4. The ICM control parts of the Airbag system, Parking Sensors, Radio, CD, Phone.
5. The Warrenty company exclude entertainment systems.
6. The warrenty was part of the USed car thing from the Main Dealer (Approved Volvo Used Warrenty)
7. I have put a claim in directly with the warrenty company but they response was that is the the entertainment system and it is not covered.

The Warrenty has now exprire though.. Which is probably going to give me more grief, to get it fix as the original claim was when the car was covered by a warrenty.

Thanks

sTeve

[JustinP1]

stevieb said:

Jasandjules said:

stevieb said:

The radio is linked to a control module called the ICM which controls the interface between the DVD System, Radio, Phone, Front and rear parking sensors etc.

The car was found to have a faulty ICM in October last year, at which point the dealer stated this would not be under warrenty as it the Car stereo is specifically excluded.

I'm going to go against the majority on here I think, but I will want more info before taking a really firm view.

1. When did you notify the dealer of the ICM issue? (From date of purchase)
2. If 1 is less than 12 months, I think you have a good claim under the SoGa
3. The Sale of Goods Act period of time starts from the time which YOU purchase the vehicle, not from when the vehicle is new
4. What evidence do you have that the ICM controls various things and is not simply the radio?
5. What is the term of the Warranty upon which the warranty co is seeking to rely? Have you provided the evidence to the Warranty co?
6. Did you purchase the Warranty from the dealer/was the warranty attached by the dealer?
7. What EXACTLY is the warranty company stating in their reply? Have you put your claim in writing to the warranty company?

Basically, as noted above, I think you have in effect 2 causes of action, the first is against the warranty company however you also have a reasonable case against the dealer if the item failed within 12 months.

1. 10 months from date of purchase (when fault first occured)

4. The ICM control parts of the Airbag system, Parking Sensors, Radio, CD, Phone.
5. The Warrenty company exclude entertainment systems.
6. The warrenty was part of the USed car thing from the Main Dealer (Approved Volvo Used Warrenty)
7. I have put a claim in directly with the warrenty company but they response was that is the the entertainment system and it is not covered.

The Warrenty has now exprire though.. Which is probably going to give me more grief, to get it fix as the original claim was when the car was covered by a warrenty.

Thanks

sTeve

Then this situation is more simple then.

The warranty company have wrongfully rejected your claim on the basis that it is the 'entertainment system'. Write to the warranty company and put them on notice that they are wrong, and to give them the chance to reconsider the situation before you get it repaired and bill them or take legal action.

[Jasandjules]

AS Justin says (and that's why I wanted the answers!) it's a bit easier - the Warranty company have to fix it (do you have any evidence that the ICM controls more than just the stereo - even if there is anything in the manual or whatever about it? i.e. why do you say it controls the brakes etc). That the warranty has now expired is not relevant, the question is when they were notified, and if that was within the warranty period then they are obligated to fix it.

However, I'd say you also have a claim against the main dealer as the product failed within 12 months, regardless of whether that is just the stereo or otherwise.

If the ICM does the brakes, and it's crackered, does that mean the vehicle is dangerous to drive?

[john_p]

I am surprised Volvo haven't agreed to contribute something? Bad show on their part.