992 Turbo S issues-Right to reject
Discussion
funboxster said:
Thanks once again for today's posts. I've stirred a hornets' nest, I fear, but I will certainly keep you updated.
I was talking to a friend today, who was the owner of a local Mazda dealership, before selling up. I told him to wear his owner's hat and don't pull your punches. He felt I had a very good case to reject, but that I should contact Porsche HO Customer service. I'm nervous of doing this though, as that would undermine the dealer, before they've had a chance to respond, which was by 25 April.
When I told him the dealer couldn't look at it until 2 May, so a month from emailing them on 2 April about the return of this fault, he said that was not acceptable, especially as I'm not now using it and, as an owner of a business, he would have been getting the car in much sooner.
I do stick by my maxim, that it's not unreasonable for me to expect a £200k product to work and to be of satisfactory build quality.
I wouldn't put a lot of faith in HO Customer Service as they will direct you back to dealer, they have slopier shoulders than a cliff.I was talking to a friend today, who was the owner of a local Mazda dealership, before selling up. I told him to wear his owner's hat and don't pull your punches. He felt I had a very good case to reject, but that I should contact Porsche HO Customer service. I'm nervous of doing this though, as that would undermine the dealer, before they've had a chance to respond, which was by 25 April.
When I told him the dealer couldn't look at it until 2 May, so a month from emailing them on 2 April about the return of this fault, he said that was not acceptable, especially as I'm not now using it and, as an owner of a business, he would have been getting the car in much sooner.
I do stick by my maxim, that it's not unreasonable for me to expect a £200k product to work and to be of satisfactory build quality.
maz8062 said:
I think it’s a crazy law and open to abuse. The OP buys a car for £230k say - drives it for 6 month and 2500 miles - with a warranty, but hands it back and only has to pay £1125 (@45p per mile) or £187 per month for the enjoyment. Meanwhile the car is worth circa £170k.
That’s mad in my view. The only ones that loses is the manufacturer, the salesman and the DP.
But as the saying goes, “dems da rules”
Let's not forget OP has been without his £230k for 6 months - that's not free, money has an opportunity cost. Then add on the stress of the car failing twice, the trip(s) to the dealership. He has a right to expect better. The law is there to protect the average consumer - keep in mind Porsche AG made >£7bn in operating profit last year.That’s mad in my view. The only ones that loses is the manufacturer, the salesman and the DP.
But as the saying goes, “dems da rules”
OP, for whatever my two cents is worth - it sounds like you're past it with this car. I would apply pressure to get an answer from DP as soon as possible. Once you understand the options, you can decide whether you want to go down the letter of the law route, or take something less favourable and retain a good dealership relationship AND save yourself a whole bunch of heartburn.
Good luck.
breadvan said:
funboxster said:
Thanks once again for today's posts. I've stirred a hornets' nest, I fear, but I will certainly keep you updated.
I think it's a really interesting thread from both sides of the fence.I'm curious to see how this pans out.
I think there’s more hassle, angst and confrontation in trying to get out of these things. If I did my due diligence before buying the car it would take more than one fault for me to lose interest - unless I was having buyers remorse - even then I wouldn’t have the temerity to demand a refund after 6 months and 2500 miles. But folk understand these things so the op should get on with it - for the second time, and perhaps buy secondhand next time around after the early gremlins should have been sorted out at someone else’s expense.
Good luck.
funboxster said:
Thanks once again for today's posts. I've stirred a hornets' nest, I fear, but I will certainly keep you updated.
I was talking to a friend today, who was the owner of a local Mazda dealership, before selling up. I told him to wear his owner's hat and don't pull your punches. He felt I had a very good case to reject, but that I should contact Porsche HO Customer service. I'm nervous of doing this though, as that would undermine the dealer, before they've had a chance to respond, which was by 25 April.
When I told him the dealer couldn't look at it until 2 May, so a month from emailing them on 2 April about the return of this fault, he said that was not acceptable, especially as I'm not now using it and, as an owner of a business, he would have been getting the car in much sooner.
I do stick by my maxim, that it's not unreasonable for me to expect a £200k product to work and to be of satisfactory build quality.
I find there timeline not acceptable - they should look at it within days, not a month after you contacted them. Assuming the dealer is not too far from you, I would probably drop the car off with them and tell them to please look at it asap. I was talking to a friend today, who was the owner of a local Mazda dealership, before selling up. I told him to wear his owner's hat and don't pull your punches. He felt I had a very good case to reject, but that I should contact Porsche HO Customer service. I'm nervous of doing this though, as that would undermine the dealer, before they've had a chance to respond, which was by 25 April.
When I told him the dealer couldn't look at it until 2 May, so a month from emailing them on 2 April about the return of this fault, he said that was not acceptable, especially as I'm not now using it and, as an owner of a business, he would have been getting the car in much sooner.
I do stick by my maxim, that it's not unreasonable for me to expect a £200k product to work and to be of satisfactory build quality.
15HN said:
Funboxtser can I just check if the car is with you or the dealer as if it is with you then you must cease using it right away and deliver it to the dealer as part of your rejection or invite them to collect it and record the mileage so you cannot be accused of using it. To clarify if you are rejecting it then you must not use the car.
I did the same as you and did not involve GB unless I had to however the dealer encouraged me to report it to GB as it assists them in getting a manufacturer's contribution. What you could do is to communicate the issue to GB so it is on record and say that you wish to allow the dealer to resolve it amicably with you and that way your report is not hostile nor a complaint.
With me it took around 8-10 weeks (they will try and wriggle out of it and persuade you that they can fix the vehicle) hence I would ask the dealer or GB for a hire car if they are taking 1 month just to revert to you need a car for the interim. That is not unreasonable if they are saying wait a month for a response.
If you did have finance payments going out during the time they take to process the rejection then they would have to pay the interest - just explaining if anyone refers to this thread in the future.
I have friends who are DPs and they say what they will do in a rejection situation is to heavily discount a replacement car to retain the customer. That is very likely to be possible on a Turbo S. Better they sell another unit as opposed to having you go elsewhere.
There is one alternative under the CRA2015 (Section 24). You could negotiate a price reduction for the fault as an alternative to the refund.
Thanks for your further advice. The car is with me, but in my email to the DP, I asked them to collect it, but did also offer to return it, if necessary. My email clearly states the mileage of 2.5k. I also sent with my email a separate word document, detailing the issues experienced with the car and timelines and that also states I stopped using the car after 2 April. I did the same as you and did not involve GB unless I had to however the dealer encouraged me to report it to GB as it assists them in getting a manufacturer's contribution. What you could do is to communicate the issue to GB so it is on record and say that you wish to allow the dealer to resolve it amicably with you and that way your report is not hostile nor a complaint.
With me it took around 8-10 weeks (they will try and wriggle out of it and persuade you that they can fix the vehicle) hence I would ask the dealer or GB for a hire car if they are taking 1 month just to revert to you need a car for the interim. That is not unreasonable if they are saying wait a month for a response.
If you did have finance payments going out during the time they take to process the rejection then they would have to pay the interest - just explaining if anyone refers to this thread in the future.
I have friends who are DPs and they say what they will do in a rejection situation is to heavily discount a replacement car to retain the customer. That is very likely to be possible on a Turbo S. Better they sell another unit as opposed to having you go elsewhere.
There is one alternative under the CRA2015 (Section 24). You could negotiate a price reduction for the fault as an alternative to the refund.
Muzzer79 said:
s2000db said:
I shouldn’t be too concerned about Porsche losing money in this, there’s probably at least £100k gross margin on this car..
I very much doubt the parts and manufacturing costs total any where near 6 figures imo…
I am in agreement with the OP in respect of rejection.I very much doubt the parts and manufacturing costs total any where near 6 figures imo…
However, highlighting parts and manufacturing cost is irrelevant. An iPhone doesn’t cost £1000 to physically make, but that ignores th research, development, testing, marketing, etc - all of which have to be paid for.
The fact is that Porsche could easily afford to:-
deal with this customer in a timely manner
Develop the car better so these faults don’t occur
Absorb the car into its system, repair it and resell it.
Train and monitor their dealers/techs better so these faults don’t reoccur.
What folk fail to appreciate are the unintended consequences of these types of incidents. The op has lost interest in the car so even if Porsche offered a partial refund, extended warranty, a massage even, the OP wants their money back. Period.
Over the short term it looks like a win for the small
man vs the corporate company, but in the end we all end up paying for it. Corporates don’t like living money so they find a way, perhaps charge more for the product, increase warranty costs, service costs etc.
The Op has had a McLaren. Chopped it in for a refund. A secondhand AM with lots of issues during the first few months of ownership. He didn’t chop it in, he stuck it out and loved the car through it. The Porsche, he’s had enough so it has to go. There’s a pattern for sure, but he can and most likely will.
Over the short term it looks like a win for the small
man vs the corporate company, but in the end we all end up paying for it. Corporates don’t like living money so they find a way, perhaps charge more for the product, increase warranty costs, service costs etc.
The Op has had a McLaren. Chopped it in for a refund. A secondhand AM with lots of issues during the first few months of ownership. He didn’t chop it in, he stuck it out and loved the car through it. The Porsche, he’s had enough so it has to go. There’s a pattern for sure, but he can and most likely will.
maz8062 said:
What folk fail to appreciate are the unintended consequences of these types of incidents. The op has lost interest in the car so even if Porsche offered a partial refund, extended warranty, a massage even, the OP wants their money back. Period.
Over the short term it looks like a win for the small
man vs the corporate company, but in the end we all end up paying for it. Corporates don’t like living money so they find a way, perhaps charge more for the product, increase warranty costs, service costs etc.
The Op has had a McLaren. Chopped it in for a refund. A secondhand AM with lots of issues during the first few months of ownership. He didn’t chop it in, he stuck it out and loved the car through it. The Porsche, he’s had enough so it has to go. There’s a pattern for sure, but he can and most likely will.
What you fail to appreciate is that if you produce and sell a premium product it should behave like one. Over the short term it looks like a win for the small
man vs the corporate company, but in the end we all end up paying for it. Corporates don’t like living money so they find a way, perhaps charge more for the product, increase warranty costs, service costs etc.
The Op has had a McLaren. Chopped it in for a refund. A secondhand AM with lots of issues during the first few months of ownership. He didn’t chop it in, he stuck it out and loved the car through it. The Porsche, he’s had enough so it has to go. There’s a pattern for sure, but he can and most likely will.
Forester1965 said:
What you fail to appreciate is that if you produce and sell a premium product it should behave like one.
Yes, but in life things do go wrong, regardless of cost.Any seller should have a reasonable opportunity to rectify a fault, with minimal inconvenience to the customer - otherwise this element of consumer law can easily be abused. And, as said above, we would all end up paying.
What folk fail to appreciate are the unintended consequences of these types of incidents. The op has lost interest in the car so even if Porsche offered a partial refund, extended warranty, a massage even, the OP wants their money back. Period.
Over the short term it looks like a win for the small
man vs the corporate company, but in the end we all end up paying for it. Corporates don’t like living money so they find a way, perhaps charge more for the product, increase warranty costs, service costs etc.
The Op has had a McLaren. Chopped it in for a refund. A secondhand AM with lots of issues during the first few months of ownership. He didn’t chop it in, he stuck it out and loved the car through it. The Porsche, he’s had enough so it has to go. There’s a pattern for sure, but he can and most likely will.
Over the short term it looks like a win for the small
man vs the corporate company, but in the end we all end up paying for it. Corporates don’t like living money so they find a way, perhaps charge more for the product, increase warranty costs, service costs etc.
The Op has had a McLaren. Chopped it in for a refund. A secondhand AM with lots of issues during the first few months of ownership. He didn’t chop it in, he stuck it out and loved the car through it. The Porsche, he’s had enough so it has to go. There’s a pattern for sure, but he can and most likely will.
The unintended consequence of loose consumer protections is manufacturers and retailers offering substandard services and products.
The world didn't start with these laws in place, they evolved to deal with consumers being treated poorly- a societal problem.
It's an odd hill to die on, to say you can spend more than the cost of a house on a new car, it has a serious failure within 6 months, 'fixed' only for the same fault to reappear again almost immediately, and the purchaser should accept the product is of satisfactory quality.
The fact these are very expensive cars is aggravating rather than mitigating. A buyer should expect a £200k car to be flawless within the first 6 months and, if it fails, for it to be fixed and not fail again in that same way straight away. It's in the hands of the manufacturer to produce a product of sufficient quality. They know and accept the rules and regs of the territory they're selling in to.
I don't understand how the underdog can be the company selling the defective £200k car rather than the person buying it? Yes, the cost of dealing with the problem is expensive in terms of depreciation, but that's down to the manufacturer not the buyer.
The world didn't start with these laws in place, they evolved to deal with consumers being treated poorly- a societal problem.
It's an odd hill to die on, to say you can spend more than the cost of a house on a new car, it has a serious failure within 6 months, 'fixed' only for the same fault to reappear again almost immediately, and the purchaser should accept the product is of satisfactory quality.
The fact these are very expensive cars is aggravating rather than mitigating. A buyer should expect a £200k car to be flawless within the first 6 months and, if it fails, for it to be fixed and not fail again in that same way straight away. It's in the hands of the manufacturer to produce a product of sufficient quality. They know and accept the rules and regs of the territory they're selling in to.
I don't understand how the underdog can be the company selling the defective £200k car rather than the person buying it? Yes, the cost of dealing with the problem is expensive in terms of depreciation, but that's down to the manufacturer not the buyer.
An excellent post above from Forester. To provide more context, I bought the car as I drive to Devon a lot and elsewhere in the UK. I’ve wanted one for a long time and I finally had the means. I haven’t had buyer’s remorse, just disappointment in the product, due to the issues experienced. I’ve reiterated to the dealer in writing that I stopped using the car on 2 April, when the second fault occurred and also confirmed the mileage. It’s sitting in the garage on a trickle charger, now unavailable to me. I also said I would be happy to meet the DP, if necessary, so I’m trying to be as reasonable as possible, whilst still retaining my right to reject. The issue is sitting with their legal team but I asked for a response by 25 April, so giving them 14 days to reply.
Surely its worth giving them another go to fix the problem - could be something relatively minor and not necessarily the same issue as before?
I had a PADM failure after only 3000 miles, the week after getting it fixed I had the same PADM error again - turned out to be the one on the other side - dropped it in to OPC, they replaced - no big deal, car back on the road the next day and no issues since.
I had a PADM failure after only 3000 miles, the week after getting it fixed I had the same PADM error again - turned out to be the one on the other side - dropped it in to OPC, they replaced - no big deal, car back on the road the next day and no issues since.
To be absolutely fair, I don't think anyone should be surprised to receive a car (even a very expensive one) that develops a fault within 6 months. The reliance on sensors and software is so great that it doesn't take much to trip something up. For me it's about whether the same issue manifests within a short time after a chance to repair.
I bought an M3 a few years ago and shortly after the DCT gearbox developed a fault where it tripped into neutral at traffic lights (you look a right numpty revving the nuts off an M3 at some urban traffic lights because it's decided to flip into neutral without telling you). It took two attempts to fix (first time software flash, second time an actuator) and all was good. Would've been within my rights to reject when it failed the 2nd time, but I trusted it'd be sorted. Someone else might have thought differently. That would've been fair enough, too.
I bought an M3 a few years ago and shortly after the DCT gearbox developed a fault where it tripped into neutral at traffic lights (you look a right numpty revving the nuts off an M3 at some urban traffic lights because it's decided to flip into neutral without telling you). It took two attempts to fix (first time software flash, second time an actuator) and all was good. Would've been within my rights to reject when it failed the 2nd time, but I trusted it'd be sorted. Someone else might have thought differently. That would've been fair enough, too.
funboxster said:
An excellent post above from Forester. To provide more context, I bought the car as I drive to Devon a lot and elsewhere in the UK. I’ve wanted one for a long time and I finally had the means. I haven’t had buyer’s remorse, just disappointment in the product, due to the issues experienced. I’ve reiterated to the dealer in writing that I stopped using the car on 2 April, when the second fault occurred and also confirmed the mileage. It’s sitting in the garage on a trickle charger, now unavailable to me. I also said I would be happy to meet the DP, if necessary, so I’m trying to be as reasonable as possible, whilst still retaining my right to reject. The issue is sitting with their legal team but I asked for a response by 25 April, so giving them 14 days to reply.
Mate, I’m giving you a hard time - don’t take it personally and I genuinely hope it all gets resolved - either way, and you carry on enjoying these high end cars. For me it’s an eye opener, one that I hadn’t consciously thought of in the past - I will from now on, but hope I’m never in your position because it must be stressful.
Good luck and Nick, I’m out
Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff