992 Turbo S issues-Right to reject

[nickfrog]

Daft as it sounds, would it be "cheaper" to go legal?
Surely the OP's rights (if any!) don't vary based to the OPC's supply situation or the market's unfavourable context.
I appreciate this will affect good will but perhaps that's where a bit of coercion might help?

[Guyr]

OPOGTS said:

I may be alone, but this sounds like a monumental overreaction to me!

+1

Hard to see this ending well as they would be well within rights to argue that the buy-back should be based on the value of a 2,500 mile used car, which would be a cost in the tens of thousands of pounds.

If it is truly fixed now then the only reason to reject is that it is actually a regretted purchase IMHO.

Edited by Guyr on Sunday 14th April 11:31

[funboxster]

David W. said:

I’d kill to have a bit more detail on the chassis system fault. Is it a warning light, does the car go into limphome mode, is it underivable and needed roadside recovery? Ordinarily it sounds like it should be fixable and in my 16+year experience the Porsche warranty system works very well resetting back to zero on a replacement part. Can’t see how you have lost confidence.

It just says chassis system fault, then adapted driving required. It doesn't go into limp mode, not undriveable or needs recovery. They couldn't fix it after one go, why will they be able to sort at second attempt? As I've stated, emotion is taken out of this. It's a product that, imo, is not of satisfactory build quality, hence loss of confidence in car/brand. I've had two Boxsters from new, with no issues during ownership.
I'm not rejecting because of depreciation issues, but perceived reliabilty of a premium product.. My Audi RS3 is one year old, with no issues from new. My wife had three Mini Cooper S' from new, each for three years. No problem again with them.

[funboxster]

darreni said:

cseven said:

I assume the value offered would be trade (not retail?) in which case see what opc cars match yours in spec and mileage and knock 15k off?

Think I would just let them fix the car

If you can achieve rejection, the dealer is obliged to refund the purchase price less a mutually agreed amount for mileage during ownership.

I'd taken legal advice before considering rejection and they stated I'm entitled to full refund, because first fault occurred within 30 days of purchase. I chose not to reject then, as I hoped it wouldn't reoccur.

I know that I'm not, because 30 days have expired, so into 30 days to 6 months period (final right to reject) and therefore reasonable reduction (to both parties) for miles covered.

I didn't buy the car to be a garage queen, but to use and I travel to Devon a lot from Sussex, so 350 miles round trip, hence the 2.5k miles. I gave the dealer 14 days to respond to my email from 11 April.

I'm not expecting my full purchase price back and never have.

[maz8062]

funboxster said:

Thanks again for the further replies. To summarise some of the extra points raised:

No, I'm not looking to get out of the depreciation issue. I want to stress I bought the car, because I wanted one and planned to keep it for two years., but I've lost confidence in the car. I know cars are an easy way to throw money away. The car was advertised with a £14k discount. It had £20k of extras on it.

I'm taking the emotion out of the issue. A car, in my mind, is no different to buying say, a premium product. If the product went wrong twice in three months and the supplier had had a chance to repair once, I'd reject as not of satisfactory build quality. Wouldn't you? I'm guided by cars I've owned which have never given any problems during ownership.

Would I accept another TS? Yes, but it would need to be new, of the same spec(or better) and a colour acceptable to me. As some of you have said, this could turn out a long drawn out affair.

The DP is back this week, so hopefully, he'll be ringing me and yes, the salesman is not responding to my emails of record, ie, I've stopped driving the car, as of last week, due to the fault.

I have history with this issue. In 2018, I rejected a McLaren bought new after one year of ownership, having experienced lots of electrical and starting problems with it, from about nine months old.

From my first rejection letter, the dealer agreed to buy back the car after two weeks, for the list price, less the extras, so lost £20k, having owned for one year and put 5k on the clock. Perhaps I was lucky there. Again, I saw the McLaren as a product and took emotion out of my thinking.

I’m sorry to say this but you’re a nightmare of a customer and should be blacklisted from buying high end cars. You appear to use the cars extensively over a short period of time and then at the slightest sign of an issue, you want out and start threatening legal action etc.

My view is that you’re playing the system because you can and I hope this time you get burned. Nothing further to add.

[ConnectionError]

funboxster said:

darreni said:

cseven said:

I assume the value offered would be trade (not retail?) in which case see what opc cars match yours in spec and mileage and knock 15k off?

Think I would just let them fix the car

If you can achieve rejection, the dealer is obliged to refund the purchase price less a mutually agreed amount for mileage during ownership.

I'd taken legal advice before considering rejection and they stated I'm entitled to full refund, because first fault occurred within 30 days of purchase. I chose not to reject then, as I hoped it wouldn't reoccur.

I know that I'm not, because 30 days have expired, so into 30 days to 6 months period (final right to reject) and therefore reasonable reduction (to both parties) for miles covered.

I didn't buy the car to be a garage queen, but to use and I travel to Devon a lot from Sussex, so 350 miles round trip, hence the 2.5k miles. I gave the dealer 14 days to respond to my email from 11 April.

I'm not expecting my full purchase price back and never have.

So why not just sell it on Collecting cars and move on/

[White-Noise]

I cant say I've been in the same situation but my gf had a similar thing with the macan.

Bought used from porsche exeter. Car had an issue with the transmission. Suspect transfer box but never confirmed. Car went in to opc West London twice within the 6 months under warranty. 3rd time she wanted to reject the car but it was just outside the 6 months.

Wasn't getting anywhere with the dealers, so wrote to the ceo (I don't know who this was but I can find out if it helps). Suddenly there was traction and it was given back to Exeter for 6 grand less than the asking.

Interestingly exeter did re list it around 3 months later for 3 grand more than she got back. But they dropped the price to what she got back and it must have sold after a while.

She wasn't within her rights as it wasn't within 6 months. I would think that you are within your rights. Our matter was more complex as it was a franchise some distance away but not fixed by opc West London so they did some internal haggling to get the money to buy it back.

I hope that helps in some way, and you have much more leverage than our situation. I can also understand why you lost confidence and don't want to end up in the same situation we did.

[nickfrog]

I agree, as consumers we should be even more naive and accept the salesman line that the car is complex.
It doesn't really matter if there is a light on the dashboard as the MOT is not due anyway.

[Forester1965]

maz8062 said:

I’m sorry to say this but you’re a nightmare of a customer and should be blacklisted from buying high end cars. You appear to use the cars extensively over a short period of time and then at the slightest sign of an issue, you want out and start threatening legal action etc.

My view is that you’re playing the system because you can and I hope this time you get burned. Nothing further to add.

How odd.

I don't think the OP's being unreasonable expecting a new car, costing more than many people's houses, to be reliable. If it's suffered the same fault twice within the first 6 months, it doesn't seem it's going to be. The law exists as it does to protect him in these circumstances. Are you suggesting he shouldn't use his consumer rights, in order to protect high end car companies from having to produce products of sufficient quality? That's a funny hill to die on.

[rainmaker2]

ConnectionError said:

So why not just sell it on Collecting cars and move on/

Because he loses money that way. He shouldn’t have to lose money if he’s moving the car on, plus what kind of a person moves a car on with a known fault when it’s under warranty.

I sympathise with OP.

I had a battery issue on my 992 C2S with Porsche warranty. Issue Started in first month of ownership and carried on for 4 months.

I couldn’t sit in the car with PCM on doing a phone call for more than 5 minutes without the battery going flat.

A minor but very annoying issue. The battery passed all Porsches tests, and I spent hours taking the car back 3 times and then telling me no problem. Finally I camped out at the dealer until the did a real world test which proved it , then tried to charge me for the faulty battery which had “degraded” - I told them I would reject the car because if you can’t do a phone call in your stationary car for 5 minutes then it’s not fit for purpose.

They relented but I had to fight hard. OP shouldn’t have to spend hours messing about over years to get this sorted for £150k car, all the while wondering if it will happen again.

They should have one more chance sort it otherwise full refund or new car with no questions asked.

[maz8062]

Forester1965 said:

maz8062 said:

I’m sorry to say this but you’re a nightmare of a customer and should be blacklisted from buying high end cars. You appear to use the cars extensively over a short period of time and then at the slightest sign of an issue, you want out and start threatening legal action etc.

My view is that you’re playing the system because you can and I hope this time you get burned. Nothing further to add.

How odd.

I don't think the OP's being unreasonable expecting a new car, costing more than many people's houses, to be reliable. If it's suffered the same fault twice within the first 6 months, it doesn't seem it's going to be. The law exists as it does to protect him in these circumstances. Are you suggesting he shouldn't use his consumer rights, in order to protect high end car companies from having to produce products of sufficient quality? That's a funny hill to die on.

This is the second time that the OP has rejected a car - there’s a pattern emerging; buy brand new car, enjoy for a period with one eye on the period of time during which the lemon law can be called and then do so just in time at the hint of a fault. If the OP genuinely loves the car he’d give Porsche another opportunity to fix it - for as long as it takes provided he/she gets a courtesy car while they’re doing so.

If we all did what the OP has done twice now, the car companies would go out of business or design parts to last for a shorter period of time.

[Forester1965]

There is a pattern emerging, you're right. Manufacturers are building £200k cars that aren't as reliable as £30k ones. That's the problem that needs removing, not consumer rights.

[GRD_72]

funboxster said:

It just says chassis system fault, then adapted driving required. It doesn't go into limp mode, not undriveable or needs recovery. They couldn't fix it after one go, why will they be able to sort at second attempt?

Why? Because cars are complicated. The systems in modern cars are complex and interlinked, both of which can make troubleshooting a nightmare. From what you describe I doubt you'll get anywhere by involving lawyers, illumination of the chassis light represents many possible faults across many components, sensors and systems. Suggesting that they have one shot at fixing it will be disputed no end with such a complex car.

One simple statement from the OPC may rubbish your claim "Sir the fault was fixed but it seems the electrical connector was not seated correctly during the repair causing it to reappear". But by this point you've lost your relationship with them - which may or may not bother you.

If I was the DP picking this case up my assumption would be that you simply want out of an expensive car and I'd be very resistive to allowing you to reject the car but on the flip side, I'd do everything to alleviate the situation and avoid a legal wrangle. Why don't you suggest they swap your car with another 2,500 mile car that you are happy with spec wise? That would not cost the OPC a penny as once yours is fixed they'd simply sell it instead of the car they give you. You may even end up with a nicer spec'd car!

Life is too short, work with them, not against.

[funboxster]

maz8062 said:

This is the second time that the OP has rejected a car - there’s a pattern emerging; buy brand new car, enjoy for a period with one eye on the period of time during which the lemon law can be called and then do so just in time at the hint of a fault. If the OP genuinely loves the car he’d give Porsche another opportunity to fix it - for as long as it takes provided he/she gets a courtesy car while they’re doing so.

If we all did what the OP has done twice now, the car companies would go out of business or design parts to last for a shorter period of time.

A little harsh, but you're entitled to an opinion. I'm more than happy to let them have another go at fixing,IF, the clock stops and if the same problem reoccurs, I can reject.

I've had many cars over the years, probably 20-30 and have rejected two. If the car works, without reoccurring faults, I keep them for two years and change.

[ZX10R NIN]

funboxster said:

A little harsh, but you're entitled to an opinion. I'm more than happy to let them have another go at fixing,IF, the clock stops and if the same problem reoccurs, I can reject.

I've had many cars over the years, probably 20-30 and have rejected two. If the car works, without reoccurring faults, I keep them for two years and change.

If you've lost confidence in the car, see if they have another one that's similar & see where that leaves you financially.

[AliMc99]

I’d say a fair mileage deduction would be the excess mileage charge on a Porsche FS PCP- which looks to be 40.2p mile+vat.

[Jefferson Steelflex]

Is there not a nice middle ground here? Ask the OPC to fix it and guarantee if a related fault reappears after x time they will buy it back? Appreciate there are holes in that but surely a sensible conversation can be had?

I don’t disagree with OPs stance by the way, it should be faultless and reliable but there are so many nuances here i’d want to give them a chance to fix it with a solid back up plan.

[ChocolateFrog]

OPOGTS said:

I may be alone, but this sounds like a monumental overreaction to me!

Me too.

They've had one chance to fix it that's all.

OP wants out and has seen the bath he was about to take so now wants to share that bath with the dealer and rhe fault light is his tenuous in.

[ChocolateFrog]

nickfrog said:

I agree, as consumers we should be even more naive and accept the salesman line that the car is complex.
It doesn't really matter if there is a light on the dashboard as the MOT is not due anyway.

I hate dealers more than most but they should be given more than 1 opportunity to fix a fault.

No doubt all they did the first time was clear the codes anyway.

Would be interesting to hear more on the actual fault.

[Muzzer79]

belfry said:

Also, would you accept a new 992 Turbo S as an alternative to a full refund?

If I were the OP, I’d be looking to negotiate out of this car and into a new one with as minimal financial effect as possible.

That will probably be more appealing to the dealer, therefore greasing the wheels of the process.