Faulty Car - Right to Reject
Discussion
I think this is a lost cause now.
Sometimes cars break. Fact. Nothing is perfect, and that's what the warranty is for. If you don't have a warranty, you fork out yourself. You should know that coming from a Land Rover of all things.
I bet the LR's economy figures were better than what you were getting too!
As a whole there's not really much wrong with your car. "What I feel/rights as a consumer" is a load of bull. You've just realised you've bought the wrong car, and you are looking for something/someone to blame other than yourself, and trying to find an easy way out.
Regardless of what you "feel", your car is fit for purpose, and thats all that matters when it comes to trying to reject, not feelings. Best you can do is follow what maclarkk has suggested above.
PS. The MG I hated after about 3 months (I had a warranty claim on that too BTW), I ended up keeping a further 18 months before I could afford to get rid of it. We all make mistakes. Suck it up.
Sometimes cars break. Fact. Nothing is perfect, and that's what the warranty is for. If you don't have a warranty, you fork out yourself. You should know that coming from a Land Rover of all things.
I bet the LR's economy figures were better than what you were getting too!
As a whole there's not really much wrong with your car. "What I feel/rights as a consumer" is a load of bull. You've just realised you've bought the wrong car, and you are looking for something/someone to blame other than yourself, and trying to find an easy way out.
Regardless of what you "feel", your car is fit for purpose, and thats all that matters when it comes to trying to reject, not feelings. Best you can do is follow what maclarkk has suggested above.
PS. The MG I hated after about 3 months (I had a warranty claim on that too BTW), I ended up keeping a further 18 months before I could afford to get rid of it. We all make mistakes. Suck it up.
Edited by BenRichards89 on Saturday 21st July 17:23
BenRichards89 said:
Regardless of what you "feel", your car is fit for purpose, and thats all that matters when it comes to trying to reject, not feelings. Best you can do is follow what maclarkk has suggested above.
Being "fit for purpose" is just one criteria for exercising your short term right to reject. Another is it must "be of satisfactory quality (taking into account its age and mileage)". This I guess is the one the OP could try and use as the basis of his rejection.Edited by BenRichards89 on Saturday 21st July 17:23
Bear in mind OP you must stop using the car as soon as you notify the dealer that you are exercising your right to reject. Unless there was any clause i the contract stating faulty goods must be returned to the dealer then it is up to them to collect the car. The fact that you had the car delivered adds weight to this.
The dealer is unlikely to roll over for what is actually a minor fault so be prepared for a lengthy battle if you go down this route. You may have to try ADR and ultimately small claims court which all takes time. Only you can decide whether it is worth the hassle.
I'm still surprised by the number of "experts" on here who haven't caught up with modern consumer rights. It's almost 3 years since they were introduced. Yes in this case the OP is taking the piss but he may still be within his rights to reject his car.
mcpoot said:
I'm still surprised by the number of "experts" on here who haven't caught up with modern consumer rights. It's almost 3 years since they were introduced. Yes in this case the OP is taking the piss but he may still be within his rights to reject his car.
I think everyone’s main concern is that the OP has already tried to reject the car based on poor MPG performance, detailed in another PH topic (hyperlinked in a previous post in this thread).As the OP has realised this would not be a good enough reason to reject, we theorise he has fabricated a fault related to the massage function in the seat.
As for the 2015 consumer rights regarding the massage function fault, it is outlined below that the consumer needs to allow the trader to try to repair the fault before rejection:
“A consumer who has the right to a price reduction and the final right to reject may only exercise one (not both), and may only do so in one of these situations—
(a)after one repair or one replacement, the goods do not conform to the contract;”
Now, if this massage function fault really is true... it seems odd that the OP is more concerned about creating another topic on a motoring forum, since creating his last MPG problem/rejection thread a week ago, rather than just contacting the dealer to repair the problem... highlighting the aforementioned theory that the OP is simply trying to pull a fast one, and return a car that he has rejected buying based on other reasons.
I think the chance of a rejection and full refund on the basis of a faulty massage seat that the dealer has had no opportunity to fix is a long shot. It is hard to imagine how it could be regarded as a significant fault.
This is a reasonable (but not 100% guaranteed accurate based on case law) interpretation of things
https://www.thecarexpert.co.uk/rejecting-a-car/
Speaking to the sales manager / general manager to remind them that this is within the 30 day period and that your position is that the fault was present when you bought it and that you regard it as significant and as grounds to reject the car...
Judge your next action on how they respond
Also, consider putting yourself in their position. Is a faulty massage seat going to be regarded (by a judge if it comes to that) as significant enough to warrant rejection? Is it something that could be proven to be present at the time of purchase? Is the buyer of the car employing a reasonable approach in a way that makes you want to help them (rather than just an idiot with buyer's remorse who can't bring herself to admit to that and deal with it)? etc.
Plan your approach to this carefully. Your first interaction with one of the few people at the dealership that can make the decision easily and quickly will colour how easy / difficult the process you are entering becomes and how favourable / unfavourable to you the outcome might end up.
This is a reasonable (but not 100% guaranteed accurate based on case law) interpretation of things
https://www.thecarexpert.co.uk/rejecting-a-car/
Speaking to the sales manager / general manager to remind them that this is within the 30 day period and that your position is that the fault was present when you bought it and that you regard it as significant and as grounds to reject the car...
Judge your next action on how they respond
Also, consider putting yourself in their position. Is a faulty massage seat going to be regarded (by a judge if it comes to that) as significant enough to warrant rejection? Is it something that could be proven to be present at the time of purchase? Is the buyer of the car employing a reasonable approach in a way that makes you want to help them (rather than just an idiot with buyer's remorse who can't bring herself to admit to that and deal with it)? etc.
Plan your approach to this carefully. Your first interaction with one of the few people at the dealership that can make the decision easily and quickly will colour how easy / difficult the process you are entering becomes and how favourable / unfavourable to you the outcome might end up.
Interestingly (or not) the Telegraph ran one of these things on a long term test. Touchscreen freezing leaving SmoothFM playing permanently at full volume in their case. I think peugeot got that idea from a Top Gear road trip. General summary was it’s French electronics are unreliable (who knew!). They achieved 60mpg - maybe a different engine?
Rejecting it because it’s a bit Gallic and shrugs it’s shoulders now and again is probably not going to work. Flakey massage seats aren’t really what the law has been changed to accommodate. Faults like this are what the warranty’s for.
Rejection on mpg won’t work either. No lardarsed SUV with an underpowered diesel will ever get the advertised mpg.
OP needs a serious fault. And quickly. Suggestions welcome. Stick some Audi S3 badges on it and hope a shortsighted (and deaf) thief takes it.
Or an industrial estate, petrol and matches...
Rejecting it because it’s a bit Gallic and shrugs it’s shoulders now and again is probably not going to work. Flakey massage seats aren’t really what the law has been changed to accommodate. Faults like this are what the warranty’s for.
Rejection on mpg won’t work either. No lardarsed SUV with an underpowered diesel will ever get the advertised mpg.
OP needs a serious fault. And quickly. Suggestions welcome. Stick some Audi S3 badges on it and hope a shortsighted (and deaf) thief takes it.
Or an industrial estate, petrol and matches...
let me chime in, the OP bought a $hit car and wants a different one, I suspect even if the OP got the dealer to repair all the bits and bobs seemingly wrong with it, that would not be enough.
my 2c is to try and get as much repaired as possible and flog it and buy a car you actually love, thats providing the dealer does not give a refund which seems unlikely
my 2c is to try and get as much repaired as possible and flog it and buy a car you actually love, thats providing the dealer does not give a refund which seems unlikely
2 hopes of being able to reject that car, and ones called Bob.
However, for all involved, it may well be the best decision the dealer has ever made, by just refunding this 'person' and telling him to F.O. and never darken my doorstep again.
Imagine what grief this fool is likely to give, when God forbid, an indicator bulb blows in 6 months time?
Buyer's remorse by the truckload but now he expects the dealer to take a hit through no fault of their own.
Extra owner on V5, more miles piled on, VAT paid on sale, re valeting, etc....
Man up and ask for a part exchange price against something else in stock or ask them if they are prepared to buy it back from you for stock and take the financial hit like a man, instead of trying to blame everyone else for your buying mistake and use consumer rights as a get out clause.
Not fit for purpose, my arse.
Unbelievable.
Sorry for rant, but for crying out loud, listen to yourself.
However, for all involved, it may well be the best decision the dealer has ever made, by just refunding this 'person' and telling him to F.O. and never darken my doorstep again.
Imagine what grief this fool is likely to give, when God forbid, an indicator bulb blows in 6 months time?
Buyer's remorse by the truckload but now he expects the dealer to take a hit through no fault of their own.
Extra owner on V5, more miles piled on, VAT paid on sale, re valeting, etc....
Man up and ask for a part exchange price against something else in stock or ask them if they are prepared to buy it back from you for stock and take the financial hit like a man, instead of trying to blame everyone else for your buying mistake and use consumer rights as a get out clause.
Not fit for purpose, my arse.
Unbelievable.
Sorry for rant, but for crying out loud, listen to yourself.
mcpoot said:
BenRichards89 said:
Regardless of what you "feel", your car is fit for purpose, and thats all that matters when it comes to trying to reject, not feelings. Best you can do is follow what maclarkk has suggested above.
Being "fit for purpose" is just one criteria for exercising your short term right to reject. Another is it must "be of satisfactory quality (taking into account its age and mileage)". This I guess is the one the OP could try and use as the basis of his rejection.Edited by BenRichards89 on Saturday 21st July 17:23
Bear in mind OP you must stop using the car as soon as you notify the dealer that you are exercising your right to reject. Unless there was any clause i the contract stating faulty goods must be returned to the dealer then it is up to them to collect the car. The fact that you had the car delivered adds weight to this.
The dealer is unlikely to roll over for what is actually a minor fault so be prepared for a lengthy battle if you go down this route. You may have to try ADR and ultimately small claims court which all takes time. Only you can decide whether it is worth the hassle.
I'm still surprised by the number of "experts" on here who haven't caught up with modern consumer rights. It's almost 3 years since they were introduced. Yes in this case the OP is taking the piss but he may still be within his rights to reject his car.
ks up, the touchscreen stuff stops working too. That actually sounds a bit more serious... at least, certainly sounds to me like the sort of problem that you shouldn't expect from a 7000 mile car, let alone one you bought from a dealer, and especially not something that makes itself apparent in the first 30 days.If this dealer is in the habit of buying cheap tat, selling it at a premium, and hoping that nothing goes wrong quickly, they need to get better at their job...
I'm always surprised by these occasional car rejection threads. Huge numbers of miseryguts always come out of the woodwork to say that OP should bend over and take the punishment. This even though the whole point of buying from a dealer, and paying the premium, is that you want to buy a car that isn't going to have any significant issues given the price and age! - and you want some comeback if any such issues do appear. The purpose of the consumer rights act stuff is to motivate professional (?) vendors to sell products that don't straight away go pop, since they're no longer allowed to wash their hands of them quite so quickly as might previously have been the case.
Edited by to3m on Sunday 22 July 01:01
to3m said:
You're quite right about the right to reject, and the details of doing that - I disagree they're taking the piss, though! It's stated clearly enough that when the massage seat fks up, the touchscreen stuff stops working too. That actually sounds a bit more serious... at least, certainly sounds to me like the sort of problem that you shouldn't expect from a 7000 mile car, let alone one you bought from a dealer, and especially not something that makes itself apparent in the first 30 days.
If this dealer is in the habit of buying cheap tat, selling it at a premium, and hoping that nothing goes wrong quickly, they need to get better at their job...
I'm always surprised by these occasional car rejection threads. Huge numbers of miseryguts always come out of the woodwork to say that OP should bend over and take the punishment. This even though the whole point of buying from a dealer, and paying the premium, is that you want to buy a car that isn't going to have any significant issues given the price and age! - and you want some comeback if any such issues do appear. The purpose of the consumer rights act stuff is to motivate professional (?) vendors to sell products that don't straight away go pop, since they're no longer allowed to wash their hands of them quite so quickly as might previously have been the case.
It's under manufacturers warranty for crying out loud.ks up, the touchscreen stuff stops working too. That actually sounds a bit more serious... at least, certainly sounds to me like the sort of problem that you shouldn't expect from a 7000 mile car, let alone one you bought from a dealer, and especially not something that makes itself apparent in the first 30 days.If this dealer is in the habit of buying cheap tat, selling it at a premium, and hoping that nothing goes wrong quickly, they need to get better at their job...
I'm always surprised by these occasional car rejection threads. Huge numbers of miseryguts always come out of the woodwork to say that OP should bend over and take the punishment. This even though the whole point of buying from a dealer, and paying the premium, is that you want to buy a car that isn't going to have any significant issues given the price and age! - and you want some comeback if any such issues do appear. The purpose of the consumer rights act stuff is to motivate professional (?) vendors to sell products that don't straight away go pop, since they're no longer allowed to wash their hands of them quite so quickly as might previously have been the case.
Edited by to3m on Sunday 22 July 01:01
I presume the seat was working at the point of sale?
What do you think car dealers are?...crystal ball gazers?
It's a 1 year Peugeot under manufacturers warranty, let them fix it, otherwise what's the point of having a factory warranty?
If it's under the manufacturer's warranty, I'm surprised the dealer didn't take advantage of this to get the issues with it fixed before sale.
I don't expect a car dealer to be able to tell the future perfectly, but I do expect them to be able to foretell it well enough to sell their customers cars that don't go wrong in the first 30 days of ownership. And I expect them to charge a premium on each car that allows them to handle the cases when they get it wrong - which, due to their professional experience, I expect to be a rare occurrence - with good grace.
I don't expect a car dealer to be able to tell the future perfectly, but I do expect them to be able to foretell it well enough to sell their customers cars that don't go wrong in the first 30 days of ownership. And I expect them to charge a premium on each car that allows them to handle the cases when they get it wrong - which, due to their professional experience, I expect to be a rare occurrence - with good grace.
to3m said:
If it's under the manufacturer's warranty, I'm surprised the dealer didn't take advantage of this to get the issues with it fixed before sale.
I don't expect a car dealer to be able to tell the future perfectly, but I do expect them to be able to foretell it well enough to sell their customers cars that don't go wrong in the first 30 days of ownership. And I expect them to charge a premium on each car that allows them to handle the cases when they get it wrong - which, due to their professional experience, I expect to be a rare occurrence - with good grace.
How can they fix a problem that did not exist in the first place?????I don't expect a car dealer to be able to tell the future perfectly, but I do expect them to be able to foretell it well enough to sell their customers cars that don't go wrong in the first 30 days of ownership. And I expect them to charge a premium on each car that allows them to handle the cases when they get it wrong - which, due to their professional experience, I expect to be a rare occurrence - with good grace.
Salesman to Bob in the workshop....
'Bob, this car is due for handover tomorrow and whilst I was supping my morning cuppa, the tea leaves spoke to me and told me that this car will have a problem with the seat massager in approx 2 weeks time,'
Bob... 'Err ok, well it's working at the mo, what do you want me to check?,'
Sales..,' Well I think it might go wrong in a fortnight'
Bob..' Err, well raise a job card with service for an hour's labour at £70 and I will check '
Sales..Ok
Service dept. ' So you want us to check for a problem that does not exist and you are happy for that extra £70 hours labour for nothing to come out of your used car profit bottom line and affect your commission earned on this car'?
Sales manager to sales ...'Fook off you moron'
See where this is going?
Edited by Mexman on Sunday 22 July 08:06
BenRichards89 said:
Of course you are quite within your rights to feel whatever you like about your car. However, apart from the seat, which should be easily rectified under warranty, that is after all what a warranty is for, define how exactly the vehicle is faulty?
I have a Peugeot 108 at the moment. If I drive at 55 mph with the HGVs, the engine is warm, the wind is blowing in the right direction, and the aircon is off, I can average 72 MPG. I live 5 miles from work on country lanes, I pretty much hammer it everywhere, I'm averaging 42 MPG. Of the 3 figures Peugeot give, the lowest is 58MPG, and the highest is 79MPG.
There are too many variables at play when it comes to fuel economy to suggest your car is faulty. The tests were flawed, that's not your fault but nor is it Peugeot's either. Hopefully the new WLTP testing will quote more realistic figures.
Unfortunately you're just going to have to suck it up, get them to sort the seat, sell it and buy something else. You haven't got a case to reject it.
42mpg wow that is impressive for that car!I have a Peugeot 108 at the moment. If I drive at 55 mph with the HGVs, the engine is warm, the wind is blowing in the right direction, and the aircon is off, I can average 72 MPG. I live 5 miles from work on country lanes, I pretty much hammer it everywhere, I'm averaging 42 MPG. Of the 3 figures Peugeot give, the lowest is 58MPG, and the highest is 79MPG.
There are too many variables at play when it comes to fuel economy to suggest your car is faulty. The tests were flawed, that's not your fault but nor is it Peugeot's either. Hopefully the new WLTP testing will quote more realistic figures.
Unfortunately you're just going to have to suck it up, get them to sort the seat, sell it and buy something else. You haven't got a case to reject it.
Edited by BenRichards89 on Saturday 21st July 16:50
Edited by BenRichards89 on Saturday 21st July 16:51
My ex owned two of the previous model, I used to spank it constantly and get 50mpg lol. Used to do slightly longer journeys than 3 mile tho.
Great cars!
DoubleD said:
Im glad i dont have to deal with the public in my job
Yup, some I just hate, especially buyers remorse... some people can't take responsibility for their own choices and suck up the cost of their mistake and move on.In this case, the car should get the niggles sorted by the dealer, then if the OP doesn't like the car, they should sell it and take the hit on depreciation and not try to make the dealer take a hit.
Mexman said:
I presume the seat was working at the point of sale?
Well fortunately for consumers what the law states differs from your presumption as a car salesman.CRA 2015 states within the first 6 months of ownership any fault is presumed to have been there since the time you bought it unless the retailer can prove otherwise. After 6 months it reverses and the onus is on the consumer to prove the fault was there since purchase.
For fair and law abiding retailers the new laws may be seen to be giving consumers unreasonable rights but by the same token dodgy retailers have been ripping off consumers for years and maybe it's now payback time.
I think we all agree that the OP is looking for excuses to bail out of the car.
The manufacturer warranty is there for a reason,
The CRA law is there for a reason, but this isn't one of those reasons.
CRA does not cover buyer's remorse.
I hope you would agree that any sane person would expect the seat massager to be fixed under manufacturers warranty and that would be the end of the matter, whether new or used.
To simply want to reject the car for such a trivial thing, which may have even been caused by the OP messing around with the seat and has possibly tugged a cable or connection beneath it, is simply crazy and not the kind of person I would ever want the misfortune of having to engage in business with again.
A genuine fault, like the thing cutting out or not starting in the morning or any other myriad of faults, then fair enough.
But MPG and now a seat massager?, Sorry it's just excuses to shaft the dealer in this instance.
The fact that the OP now has the car up for sale himself, justifies this.
The manufacturer warranty is there for a reason,
The CRA law is there for a reason, but this isn't one of those reasons.
CRA does not cover buyer's remorse.
I hope you would agree that any sane person would expect the seat massager to be fixed under manufacturers warranty and that would be the end of the matter, whether new or used.
To simply want to reject the car for such a trivial thing, which may have even been caused by the OP messing around with the seat and has possibly tugged a cable or connection beneath it, is simply crazy and not the kind of person I would ever want the misfortune of having to engage in business with again.
A genuine fault, like the thing cutting out or not starting in the morning or any other myriad of faults, then fair enough.
But MPG and now a seat massager?, Sorry it's just excuses to shaft the dealer in this instance.
The fact that the OP now has the car up for sale himself, justifies this.
Edited by Mexman on Sunday 22 July 17:09
Mexman said:
2 hopes of being able to reject that car, and ones called Bob.
However, for all involved, it may well be the best decision the dealer has ever made, by just refunding this 'person' and telling him to F.O. and never darken my doorstep again.
Imagine what grief this fool is likely to give, when God forbid, an indicator bulb blows in 6 months time?
Buyer's remorse by the truckload but now he expects the dealer to take a hit through no fault of their own.
Extra owner on V5, more miles piled on, VAT paid on sale, re valeting, etc....
Man up and ask for a part exchange price against something else in stock or ask them if they are prepared to buy it back from you for stock and take the financial hit like a man, instead of trying to blame everyone else for your buying mistake and use consumer rights as a get out clause.
Not fit for purpose, my arse.
Unbelievable.
Sorry for rant, but for crying out loud, listen to yourself.
^^^^ThisHowever, for all involved, it may well be the best decision the dealer has ever made, by just refunding this 'person' and telling him to F.O. and never darken my doorstep again.
Imagine what grief this fool is likely to give, when God forbid, an indicator bulb blows in 6 months time?
Buyer's remorse by the truckload but now he expects the dealer to take a hit through no fault of their own.
Extra owner on V5, more miles piled on, VAT paid on sale, re valeting, etc....
Man up and ask for a part exchange price against something else in stock or ask them if they are prepared to buy it back from you for stock and take the financial hit like a man, instead of trying to blame everyone else for your buying mistake and use consumer rights as a get out clause.
Not fit for purpose, my arse.
Unbelievable.
Sorry for rant, but for crying out loud, listen to yourself.
The OP is making a disproportionate fuss about a very minor issue which can almost certainly be fixed under warranty (that being the point of a warranty).
It is clear that the OP simply doesn't like the model of car he has bought - and is now looking for some way (any way) to use some kind of minor issue to get his money back.....
Edited by OddCat on Sunday 22 July 17:30
to3m said:
You're quite right about the right to reject, and the details of doing that - I disagree they're taking the piss, though! It's stated clearly enough that when the massage seat fks up, the touchscreen stuff stops working too. That actually sounds a bit more serious... at least, certainly sounds to me like the sort of problem that you shouldn't expect from a 7000 mile car, let alone one you bought from a dealer, and especially not something that makes itself apparent in the first 30 days.
If this dealer is in the habit of buying cheap tat, selling it at a premium, and hoping that nothing goes wrong quickly, they need to get better at their job...
I'm always surprised by these occasional car rejection threads. Huge numbers of miseryguts always come out of the woodwork to say that OP should bend over and take the punishment. This even though the whole point of buying from a dealer, and paying the premium, is that you want to buy a car that isn't going to have any significant issues given the price and age! - and you want some comeback if any such issues do appear. The purpose of the consumer rights act stuff is to motivate professional (?) vendors to sell products that don't straight away go pop, since they're no longer allowed to wash their hands of them quite so quickly as might previously have been the case.
My Hero. Thank you.ks up, the touchscreen stuff stops working too. That actually sounds a bit more serious... at least, certainly sounds to me like the sort of problem that you shouldn't expect from a 7000 mile car, let alone one you bought from a dealer, and especially not something that makes itself apparent in the first 30 days.If this dealer is in the habit of buying cheap tat, selling it at a premium, and hoping that nothing goes wrong quickly, they need to get better at their job...
I'm always surprised by these occasional car rejection threads. Huge numbers of miseryguts always come out of the woodwork to say that OP should bend over and take the punishment. This even though the whole point of buying from a dealer, and paying the premium, is that you want to buy a car that isn't going to have any significant issues given the price and age! - and you want some comeback if any such issues do appear. The purpose of the consumer rights act stuff is to motivate professional (?) vendors to sell products that don't straight away go pop, since they're no longer allowed to wash their hands of them quite so quickly as might previously have been the case.
Edited by to3m on Sunday 22 July 01:01
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff