Returning used car within 30-days
Discussion
johnnyBv8 said:
Have you got your money back yet, OP?
Unfortunately not.I returned the car last Monday 23rd. No update until last night when I received an email from them.
Dealer said:
Without prejudice
Dear mr XXX
Regarding your golf gti registration [XXXXXXX]
We have plugged your car into diagnostics and found no faults, only stored information regarding air bag deployment at time of accident.
We have also spoken to independent mot centre who carried out mot, car was fully passed at time of mot.
We have spoken to previous owner and reported car had no issues.
We also spoke to valeters who cleaned the car, who advise trims were loose when cleaning and tried to secure.
Has You have said in your email, we had no idea other than it was a cat” D”, and now that the airbags were deployed at time of accident.
We believe we done nothing wrong and reject your explanation as to why you wish to return based on loss of faith.
We however have investigated costs to replace the air bags if this is of interest to you approx £70 each +£50 to fit each.
We can offer in goodwill to find these for you at your cost but we will pay to fit,
If you are unhappy with this citizens advice/trading standards suggest we both go to A.D.R. ie alternative dispute resolution. Which we are happy to do.
Please arrange to pick up the car at your earliest convenience, if you do decide to go through ADR,
YOUR SINCERELY
Dear mr XXX
Regarding your golf gti registration [XXXXXXX]
We have plugged your car into diagnostics and found no faults, only stored information regarding air bag deployment at time of accident.
We have also spoken to independent mot centre who carried out mot, car was fully passed at time of mot.
We have spoken to previous owner and reported car had no issues.
We also spoke to valeters who cleaned the car, who advise trims were loose when cleaning and tried to secure.
Has You have said in your email, we had no idea other than it was a cat” D”, and now that the airbags were deployed at time of accident.
We believe we done nothing wrong and reject your explanation as to why you wish to return based on loss of faith.
We however have investigated costs to replace the air bags if this is of interest to you approx £70 each +£50 to fit each.
We can offer in goodwill to find these for you at your cost but we will pay to fit,
If you are unhappy with this citizens advice/trading standards suggest we both go to A.D.R. ie alternative dispute resolution. Which we are happy to do.
Please arrange to pick up the car at your earliest convenience, if you do decide to go through ADR,
YOUR SINCERELY
Whilst I'm still confident of getting a refund, it just appears it's going to be a bit more of a hassle unfortunately.
I'm going to get further legal advice and speak to CAB later, but if anyone has any suggestions, it'd be appreciated.
Thanks
As always - big thanks for the advice all.
Can anybody advise whether taking/using the car back in the meantime would go against me? Whilst I'm keen to wash my hands of it, I'm still paying insurance on the car as well as having to fork out extra insurance as a named driver on another car (A 1.4 beetle no less!).
Whilst I was happy to live with a bit of driving frustration for 2 weeks, if this is going to be ongoing for a while, I can't be doing without a car and not in a position to buy another... !
Can anybody advise whether taking/using the car back in the meantime would go against me? Whilst I'm keen to wash my hands of it, I'm still paying insurance on the car as well as having to fork out extra insurance as a named driver on another car (A 1.4 beetle no less!).
Whilst I was happy to live with a bit of driving frustration for 2 weeks, if this is going to be ongoing for a while, I can't be doing without a car and not in a position to buy another... !
jsims1 said:
I think they're taking the absolute piss asking you to pay for the airbags, they've clearly stated that they know they were deployed PRIOR to you taking ownership and now expect you to pay to rectify?!
Exactly. I'm confident if it goes to small claims/tribunal it'll go in my favour but it's just living with it all in the meantime.The dealer is trying it on, the CRA 2015 states
"the ‘goods’ (i.e. – the car) must be “of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and free from any defect"
Clearly with air bags missing the car is not fit for purpose, not satisfactory quality and not free from defect so it actually fails on all three conditions.
Look at section 20 here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/part/1...
The dealer has failed to fulfill the contract of purchase by supplying a car that fails the above three conditions, you rejected it within 30 days and as such by law are allowed a refund. In their own letter they state that they found the air bags missing and need replacing so they have via this email admitted that they are in fail of three conditions above selling you a car not of sufficient quality, not fit for purpose and not free from defect.
The following is all irrelevant:
"We have plugged your car into diagnostics and found no faults, only stored information regarding air bag deployment at time of accident.
We have also spoken to independent mot centre who carried out mot, car was fully passed at time of mot.
We have spoken to previous owner and reported car had no issues.
We also spoke to valeters who cleaned the car, who advise trims were loose when cleaning and tried to secure."
As you are returning the car as the air bags were missing, as is your consumer right.
The following is also irrelevant and in contradiction of the CRA 2015
"Has You have said in your email, we had no idea other than it was a cat” D”, and now that the airbags were deployed at time of accident.
We believe we done nothing wrong and reject your explanation as to why you wish to return based on loss of faith.
We however have investigated costs to replace the air bags if this is of interest to you approx £70 each +£50 to fit each.
We can offer in goodwill to find these for you at your cost but we will pay to fit,"
If you were asking for the car to be repaired so it passes the three conditions it fails they should be paying anyway.
The small claims form can be done online in no time at all, you can follow it up and chase and push it through.
"the ‘goods’ (i.e. – the car) must be “of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and free from any defect"
Clearly with air bags missing the car is not fit for purpose, not satisfactory quality and not free from defect so it actually fails on all three conditions.
Look at section 20 here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/part/1...
The dealer has failed to fulfill the contract of purchase by supplying a car that fails the above three conditions, you rejected it within 30 days and as such by law are allowed a refund. In their own letter they state that they found the air bags missing and need replacing so they have via this email admitted that they are in fail of three conditions above selling you a car not of sufficient quality, not fit for purpose and not free from defect.
The following is all irrelevant:
"We have plugged your car into diagnostics and found no faults, only stored information regarding air bag deployment at time of accident.
We have also spoken to independent mot centre who carried out mot, car was fully passed at time of mot.
We have spoken to previous owner and reported car had no issues.
We also spoke to valeters who cleaned the car, who advise trims were loose when cleaning and tried to secure."
As you are returning the car as the air bags were missing, as is your consumer right.
The following is also irrelevant and in contradiction of the CRA 2015
"Has You have said in your email, we had no idea other than it was a cat” D”, and now that the airbags were deployed at time of accident.
We believe we done nothing wrong and reject your explanation as to why you wish to return based on loss of faith.
We however have investigated costs to replace the air bags if this is of interest to you approx £70 each +£50 to fit each.
We can offer in goodwill to find these for you at your cost but we will pay to fit,"
If you were asking for the car to be repaired so it passes the three conditions it fails they should be paying anyway.
The small claims form can be done online in no time at all, you can follow it up and chase and push it through.
Hifty said:
As always - big thanks for the advice all.
Can anybody advise whether taking/using the car back in the meantime would go against me? Whilst I'm keen to wash my hands of it, I'm still paying insurance on the car as well as having to fork out extra insurance as a named driver on another car (A 1.4 beetle no less!).
Whilst I was happy to live with a bit of driving frustration for 2 weeks, if this is going to be ongoing for a while, I can't be doing without a car and not in a position to buy another... !
It might be a pain mate but consumers need to make a stand against dealers like this who try to sidestep the law and put the onus back on the consumer to buckle and just give in. Take more consumer advice on claiming back costs for running a car you rejected, also on the situation as it now stands.Can anybody advise whether taking/using the car back in the meantime would go against me? Whilst I'm keen to wash my hands of it, I'm still paying insurance on the car as well as having to fork out extra insurance as a named driver on another car (A 1.4 beetle no less!).
Whilst I was happy to live with a bit of driving frustration for 2 weeks, if this is going to be ongoing for a while, I can't be doing without a car and not in a position to buy another... !
I would then put together an email back citing the law, stating clearly you are returning it due to it failing the conditions above. That you are exercising your right under the CRA 2015 to a refund. I would say you do not want to go to small claims but you will if you have to.
Keep it all functional, don't talk about loss of faith etc. keep it to the point:
1. Bought car (cat d is irrelevant)
2. Car was found to fail quality/purpose tests
3. Returned car under CRA 2015 for full refund citing reason to absence of air bags (send links to legislation)
4. Awaiting refund as your consumer rights
5. Inform of final position to go via small claims if above is not processed as is dictated by UK law
You dont need to talk about dashboard lights, category of car, loss of faith etc.
coldel said:
The dealer is trying it on, the CRA 2015 states
"the ‘goods’ (i.e. – the car) must be “of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and free from any defect"
Clearly with air bags missing the car is not fit for purpose, not satisfactory quality and not free from defect so it actually fails on all three conditions.
Look at section 20 here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/part/1...
The dealer has failed to fulfill the contract of purchase by supplying a car that fails the above three conditions, you rejected it within 30 days and as such by law are allowed a refund. In their own letter they state that they found the air bags missing and need replacing so they have via this email admitted that they are in fail of three conditions above selling you a car not of sufficient quality, not fit for purpose and not free from defect.
The following is all irrelevant:
"We have plugged your car into diagnostics and found no faults, only stored information regarding air bag deployment at time of accident.
We have also spoken to independent mot centre who carried out mot, car was fully passed at time of mot.
We have spoken to previous owner and reported car had no issues.
We also spoke to valeters who cleaned the car, who advise trims were loose when cleaning and tried to secure."
As you are returning the car as the air bags were missing, as is your consumer right.
The following is also irrelevant and in contradiction of the CRA 2015
"Has You have said in your email, we had no idea other than it was a cat” D”, and now that the airbags were deployed at time of accident.
We believe we done nothing wrong and reject your explanation as to why you wish to return based on loss of faith.
We however have investigated costs to replace the air bags if this is of interest to you approx £70 each +£50 to fit each.
We can offer in goodwill to find these for you at your cost but we will pay to fit,"
If you were asking for the car to be repaired so it passes the three conditions it fails they should be paying anyway.
The small claims form can be done online in no time at all, you can follow it up and chase and push it through.
Awesome, thanks Coldel! If you're ever up in Lancashire, let me know so I can buy you a beer!"the ‘goods’ (i.e. – the car) must be “of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and free from any defect"
Clearly with air bags missing the car is not fit for purpose, not satisfactory quality and not free from defect so it actually fails on all three conditions.
Look at section 20 here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/part/1...
The dealer has failed to fulfill the contract of purchase by supplying a car that fails the above three conditions, you rejected it within 30 days and as such by law are allowed a refund. In their own letter they state that they found the air bags missing and need replacing so they have via this email admitted that they are in fail of three conditions above selling you a car not of sufficient quality, not fit for purpose and not free from defect.
The following is all irrelevant:
"We have plugged your car into diagnostics and found no faults, only stored information regarding air bag deployment at time of accident.
We have also spoken to independent mot centre who carried out mot, car was fully passed at time of mot.
We have spoken to previous owner and reported car had no issues.
We also spoke to valeters who cleaned the car, who advise trims were loose when cleaning and tried to secure."
As you are returning the car as the air bags were missing, as is your consumer right.
The following is also irrelevant and in contradiction of the CRA 2015
"Has You have said in your email, we had no idea other than it was a cat” D”, and now that the airbags were deployed at time of accident.
We believe we done nothing wrong and reject your explanation as to why you wish to return based on loss of faith.
We however have investigated costs to replace the air bags if this is of interest to you approx £70 each +£50 to fit each.
We can offer in goodwill to find these for you at your cost but we will pay to fit,"
If you were asking for the car to be repaired so it passes the three conditions it fails they should be paying anyway.
The small claims form can be done online in no time at all, you can follow it up and chase and push it through.
I'll respond to them now. Not going to bother being nice any more. It might not be their fault, but it's certainly their issue and not mine.
Will keep you updated.
Just playing devils advocate here...
I understand all the legal requirements for a dealer to supply a roadworthy car etc but how does the law fare when the car was declared and bought as an accident damaged and repaired vehicle?
Surely if the car is repaired and passed an MOT, the dealer declared the CAT D status, the buyer was aware of this then what is fair to expect from a damage repaired car?
Whilst the missing airbag deviates from the manufacturers safety specification and has clearly been bodged, can the dealer be held liable? (again I don't know, just posing the question thats all)!
If the dealer has bought and retailed the car in good faith can they be forced to buy back and suffer a loss or refit an airbag or whatever? Has the 'dealer' done anything wrong here?
I wonder if the consumer rights are different when buying a known damaged and repaired car?
I understand all the legal requirements for a dealer to supply a roadworthy car etc but how does the law fare when the car was declared and bought as an accident damaged and repaired vehicle?
Surely if the car is repaired and passed an MOT, the dealer declared the CAT D status, the buyer was aware of this then what is fair to expect from a damage repaired car?
Whilst the missing airbag deviates from the manufacturers safety specification and has clearly been bodged, can the dealer be held liable? (again I don't know, just posing the question thats all)!
If the dealer has bought and retailed the car in good faith can they be forced to buy back and suffer a loss or refit an airbag or whatever? Has the 'dealer' done anything wrong here?
I wonder if the consumer rights are different when buying a known damaged and repaired car?
Its a fair shout - I believe the OP took this up with the CAB though and car whether cat c/d or not still has to be fit for purpose, quality and free of defects.
Clearly you cannot reject a car if you buy it and say the cabin squeaks or the wing mirror motor doesn't function. But if there are airbags missing when the car is sold as having air bags fitted then that shows a significant issue with the car (what if he drove it home and was hit side on and no airbag deployed and he was killed for instance?)
The key to rejecting is showing that it fails the tests and that its significant. enough to warrant a return.
Clearly you cannot reject a car if you buy it and say the cabin squeaks or the wing mirror motor doesn't function. But if there are airbags missing when the car is sold as having air bags fitted then that shows a significant issue with the car (what if he drove it home and was hit side on and no airbag deployed and he was killed for instance?)
The key to rejecting is showing that it fails the tests and that its significant. enough to warrant a return.
lord trumpton said:
Just playing devils advocate here...
I understand all the legal requirements for a dealer to supply a roadworthy car etc but how does the law fare when the car was declared and bought as an accident damaged and repaired vehicle?
Surely if the car is repaired and passed an MOT, the dealer declared the CAT D status, the buyer was aware of this then what is fair to expect from a damage repaired car?
Whilst the missing airbag deviates from the manufacturers safety specification and has clearly been bodged, can the dealer be held liable? (again I don't know, just posing the question thats all)!
If the dealer has bought and retailed the car in good faith can they be forced to buy back and suffer a loss or refit an airbag or whatever? Has the 'dealer' done anything wrong here?
I wonder if the consumer rights are different when buying a known damaged and repaired car?
If I was the dealer, I would be arguing that a passenger airbag being missing isn't a defect.I understand all the legal requirements for a dealer to supply a roadworthy car etc but how does the law fare when the car was declared and bought as an accident damaged and repaired vehicle?
Surely if the car is repaired and passed an MOT, the dealer declared the CAT D status, the buyer was aware of this then what is fair to expect from a damage repaired car?
Whilst the missing airbag deviates from the manufacturers safety specification and has clearly been bodged, can the dealer be held liable? (again I don't know, just posing the question thats all)!
If the dealer has bought and retailed the car in good faith can they be forced to buy back and suffer a loss or refit an airbag or whatever? Has the 'dealer' done anything wrong here?
I wonder if the consumer rights are different when buying a known damaged and repaired car?
He has clearly stated it was a CAT D repair - the only inspection on it is an MOT test, which it passed.
If some non-critical parts are missing, that should does not make a car unfit for purpose.
I would advise negotiation with the dealer.
Muzzer79 said:
If I was the dealer, I would be arguing that a passenger airbag being missing isn't a defect.
He has clearly stated it was a CAT D repair - the only inspection on it is an MOT test, which it passed.
If some non-critical parts are missing, that should does not make a car unfit for purpose.
I would advise negotiation with the dealer.
Its a case of staying true to your argument. The cat d repair is not a factor in terms of i.e. it was damaged therefore you should expect bits missing. That's not how the right to return works under the CRA. MoT is just a superficial check and again not part of the argument. I can show you a car with an MoT it got yesterday but if the seats are stuffed with asbestos you would be taking it back.He has clearly stated it was a CAT D repair - the only inspection on it is an MOT test, which it passed.
If some non-critical parts are missing, that should does not make a car unfit for purpose.
I would advise negotiation with the dealer.
The key to it is proving that the air bags are fundamental to the car (which I would deem they are) and if they are missing whether the dealer knows or not is then you have grounds to reject it.
All this was updated in the CRA from the old consumer protection act as previously it didnt give any decent level of cover. The CRA states that the defect has to be significant, as above if the car was hit and the air bag failed to deploy because it wasn't there and save the life of the person when it should be there, that would be significant. Its a grey area what is deemed significant but thats the chance you take when going through the courts.
Hifty said:
Can anybody advise whether taking/using the car back in the meantime would go against me? Whilst I'm keen to wash my hands of it, I'm still paying insurance on the car as well as having to fork out extra insurance as a named driver on another car (A 1.4 beetle no less!).
Yes it would go against you, if you are claiming the car is unfit for purpose.It would be like going to a restaurant, ordering a meal, declaring it "inedible"... but then scoffing down the whole thing anyway.
coldel said:
Muzzer79 said:
If I was the dealer, I would be arguing that a passenger airbag being missing isn't a defect.
He has clearly stated it was a CAT D repair - the only inspection on it is an MOT test, which it passed.
If some non-critical parts are missing, that should does not make a car unfit for purpose.
I would advise negotiation with the dealer.
Its a case of staying true to your argument. The cat d repair is not a factor in terms of i.e. it was damaged therefore you should expect bits missing. That's not how the right to return works under the CRA. MoT is just a superficial check and again not part of the argument. I can show you a car with an MoT it got yesterday but if the seats are stuffed with asbestos you would be taking it back.He has clearly stated it was a CAT D repair - the only inspection on it is an MOT test, which it passed.
If some non-critical parts are missing, that should does not make a car unfit for purpose.
I would advise negotiation with the dealer.
The key to it is proving that the air bags are fundamental to the car (which I would deem they are) and if they are missing whether the dealer knows or not is then you have grounds to reject it.
All this was updated in the CRA from the old consumer protection act as previously it didn't give any decent level of cover. The CRA states that the defect has to be significant, as above if the car was hit and the air bag failed to deploy because it wasn't there and save the life of the person when it should be there, that would be significant. Its a grey area what is deemed significant but thats the chance you take when going through the courts.
Also as the airbag is missing and no codes are flagging up then it's obviously been coded out. I'd want to see evidence of replacement, re coding and a safety test by a garage willing to put the above in writing and confirming what has been done and what tests have been completed.
OP said there is no airbag light on the dash at all, should that have been checked on the MOT? Somebody down the line has removed it, likely to be the repairer but I'm sure the dealership will plead ignorance to the missing light.
I can't believe that they are saying there's nothing wrong. It's missing a major safety component FFS.
ETA: just re-read and OP said the light comes on with the ignition sometimes but most of the time it doesn't, could that be coded?
I can't believe that they are saying there's nothing wrong. It's missing a major safety component FFS.
ETA: just re-read and OP said the light comes on with the ignition sometimes but most of the time it doesn't, could that be coded?
Edited by eybic on Wednesday 2nd May 08:16
Just to note, whether the dealer knows the air bag is missing is also not part of the conversation to be had, you simply have to show that the car was sold with a significant defect (I think of the three thats your best shout) as the dealer has an obligation by law to sell you a car that is of sufficient quality, fit for purpose and free of defects. If it has a significant defect you can reject the car, its then up to the dealer to sort it out and deciding what to do next.
1. The car has a significant safety defect
2. This defect has been hidden by coding of the computer
On this basis it’s not fit for purpose and could potentially have other underlying faults without significant investigation.
I’m shocked that they didn’t offer to replace the airbag free, however who knows what else is missing / needing fixed.
I’ve heard about a few unscrupulous people in the trade lightly damaging the good side of a car to get photos avoiding the serious damage in another part.
Also they use the plural “airbags” this may be a slip however a thorough diagnostic of the system would be needed before going much further.
The 2 days for inspection was a joke - what inspection!
Good luck!
2. This defect has been hidden by coding of the computer
On this basis it’s not fit for purpose and could potentially have other underlying faults without significant investigation.
I’m shocked that they didn’t offer to replace the airbag free, however who knows what else is missing / needing fixed.
I’ve heard about a few unscrupulous people in the trade lightly damaging the good side of a car to get photos avoiding the serious damage in another part.
Also they use the plural “airbags” this may be a slip however a thorough diagnostic of the system would be needed before going much further.
The 2 days for inspection was a joke - what inspection!
Good luck!
Edited by strath44 on Wednesday 2nd May 14:34
As others had said:
1) reject the car and do not drive it - it's not safe and harms your case by using it
2) take advice from the CAB - if they won't action a rejection (as they should) and you end up going small claims, you should be able to include reasonable costs in that action (e.g. hire car to cover not having a vehicle available). Again, key words here are "REASONABLE" and "TAKE ADVICE ON RECLAIM BEFORE SPENDING"
3) Do not let them just repair the car.... if they cut the corners here, they'll cut them anywhere; you want out of this car
4) Trading Standards should be informed (I know it's hassle, but it's morally right)
1) reject the car and do not drive it - it's not safe and harms your case by using it
2) take advice from the CAB - if they won't action a rejection (as they should) and you end up going small claims, you should be able to include reasonable costs in that action (e.g. hire car to cover not having a vehicle available). Again, key words here are "REASONABLE" and "TAKE ADVICE ON RECLAIM BEFORE SPENDING"
3) Do not let them just repair the car.... if they cut the corners here, they'll cut them anywhere; you want out of this car
4) Trading Standards should be informed (I know it's hassle, but it's morally right)
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff