Rejecting vehicle from dealer within 30 days.
Discussion
Monkeylegend said:
LarsG said:
Oh and not forgetting this in the 2015 Consumer Act:
Faults, repairs and refunds
Under the new act, if a fault renders the product not of satisfactory quality, not fit for purpose or not as described, then the buyer is entitled to reject it within the first 30 days.
I doubt the OP would have bought it if the dealer said "It will fail its MOT, it has suspension problems that male it unsafe and to fix it it will probably cost in excess of £600."
That's an assumption.
From that 'guy on the internet'.
You are learning at least, last week you were still referring to the SOGA despite all your fancy qualifications Faults, repairs and refunds
Under the new act, if a fault renders the product not of satisfactory quality, not fit for purpose or not as described, then the buyer is entitled to reject it within the first 30 days.
I doubt the OP would have bought it if the dealer said "It will fail its MOT, it has suspension problems that male it unsafe and to fix it it will probably cost in excess of £600."
That's an assumption.
From that 'guy on the internet'.
Edited by LarsG on Saturday 26th May 17:56
You are correct in your quoting of the Act, but it is merely guidelines and has lots of flexibility in the real world.
For instance, what is a ‘fault’? Are worn components on a 9 year old car that’s done nearly 100k a ‘fault’?
The OP bought the car knowing there was a short time before the MOT was due (I assume) and it would be reasonable to expect that a car with a short MOT at the age and mileage it has covered would need some rectification would it not?
The act itself says:
2)The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of—
(a)any description of the goods,
(b)the price or other consideration for the goods (if relevant), and
(c)all the other relevant circumstances (see subsection (5)).
So so the goods meet the expectations of a reasonable person buying a used vehicle that has covered many miles and has a short MOT? Possibly.
I’m pretty sure the act doesn’t state anywhere in black/white terms what is included as a ‘fault’ (and I don’t think that word is included anywhere in the act IIRC)
The OP has had an inspection post purchase, if he is not confident in his abilities to check a car pre purchase then he should have arranged this beforehand.
Your post detailing the steps he should follow technically had nothing wrong with it, except for the initial ‘fault’ aspect. The price he paid for the goods (like a 1p biro ), condition, age, mileage and many other factors need to be taken into account.
Also, he has had word from just one garage (who has likely a vested interest in him spending £1000 with them on repairs) and should in reality get the car checked by an independent party with nothing to gain (RAC, AA, council MOT station) and progress from there.
The process of rejecting a car, issuing court proceedings etc is hard work and an absolute last resort, there is no guarantee in winning.
I appreciate your experience in these matters but I have first hand and experience and have sold/bought some 4000+ cars over the years.
No animosity and I apologise if my post came across condescending. It’s very easy to take the word of an OP at face value and give out advice without actually knowing any of the material facts of their actual situation.
For instance, what is a ‘fault’? Are worn components on a 9 year old car that’s done nearly 100k a ‘fault’?
The OP bought the car knowing there was a short time before the MOT was due (I assume) and it would be reasonable to expect that a car with a short MOT at the age and mileage it has covered would need some rectification would it not?
The act itself says:
2)The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of—
(a)any description of the goods,
(b)the price or other consideration for the goods (if relevant), and
(c)all the other relevant circumstances (see subsection (5)).
So so the goods meet the expectations of a reasonable person buying a used vehicle that has covered many miles and has a short MOT? Possibly.
I’m pretty sure the act doesn’t state anywhere in black/white terms what is included as a ‘fault’ (and I don’t think that word is included anywhere in the act IIRC)
The OP has had an inspection post purchase, if he is not confident in his abilities to check a car pre purchase then he should have arranged this beforehand.
Your post detailing the steps he should follow technically had nothing wrong with it, except for the initial ‘fault’ aspect. The price he paid for the goods (like a 1p biro
), condition, age, mileage and many other factors need to be taken into account.Also, he has had word from just one garage (who has likely a vested interest in him spending £1000 with them on repairs) and should in reality get the car checked by an independent party with nothing to gain (RAC, AA, council MOT station) and progress from there.
The process of rejecting a car, issuing court proceedings etc is hard work and an absolute last resort, there is no guarantee in winning.
I appreciate your experience in these matters but I have first hand and experience and have sold/bought some 4000+ cars over the years.
No animosity and I apologise if my post came across condescending. It’s very easy to take the word of an OP at face value and give out advice without actually knowing any of the material facts of their actual situation.
Butter Face said:
You are correct in your quoting of the Act, but it is merely guidelines and has lots of flexibility in the real world.
For instance, what is a ‘fault’? Are worn components on a 9 year old car that’s done nearly 100k a ‘fault’?
The OP bought the car knowing there was a short time before the MOT was due (I assume) and it would be reasonable to expect that a car with a short MOT at the age and mileage it has covered would need some rectification would it not?
The act itself says:
2)The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of—
(a)any description of the goods,
(b)the price or other consideration for the goods (if relevant), and
(c)all the other relevant circumstances (see subsection (5)).
So so the goods meet the expectations of a reasonable person buying a used vehicle that has covered many miles and has a short MOT? Possibly.
I’m pretty sure the act doesn’t state anywhere in black/white terms what is included as a ‘fault’ (and I don’t think that word is included anywhere in the act IIRC)
The OP has had an inspection post purchase, if he is not confident in his abilities to check a car pre purchase then he should have arranged this beforehand.
Your post detailing the steps he should follow technically had nothing wrong with it, except for the initial ‘fault’ aspect. The price he paid for the goods (like a 1p biro ), condition, age, mileage and many other factors need to be taken into account.
Also, he has had word from just one garage (who has likely a vested interest in him spending £1000 with them on repairs) and should in reality get the car checked by an independent party with nothing to gain (RAC, AA, council MOT station) and progress from there.
The process of rejecting a car, issuing court proceedings etc is hard work and an absolute last resort, there is no guarantee in winning.
I appreciate your experience in these matters but I have first hand and experience and have sold/bought some 4000+ cars over the years.
No animosity and I apologise if my post came across condescending. It’s very easy to take the word of an OP at face value and give out advice without actually knowing any of the material facts of their actual situation.
No problem and not offended, and you have valid points. I just like to give the OP the benefit of the doubt that they are telling the truth, unless it is to do with an accident.... in which case I take it all with a pinch of salt.For instance, what is a ‘fault’? Are worn components on a 9 year old car that’s done nearly 100k a ‘fault’?
The OP bought the car knowing there was a short time before the MOT was due (I assume) and it would be reasonable to expect that a car with a short MOT at the age and mileage it has covered would need some rectification would it not?
The act itself says:
2)The quality of goods is satisfactory if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would consider satisfactory, taking account of—
(a)any description of the goods,
(b)the price or other consideration for the goods (if relevant), and
(c)all the other relevant circumstances (see subsection (5)).
So so the goods meet the expectations of a reasonable person buying a used vehicle that has covered many miles and has a short MOT? Possibly.
I’m pretty sure the act doesn’t state anywhere in black/white terms what is included as a ‘fault’ (and I don’t think that word is included anywhere in the act IIRC)
The OP has had an inspection post purchase, if he is not confident in his abilities to check a car pre purchase then he should have arranged this beforehand.
Your post detailing the steps he should follow technically had nothing wrong with it, except for the initial ‘fault’ aspect. The price he paid for the goods (like a 1p biro
), condition, age, mileage and many other factors need to be taken into account.Also, he has had word from just one garage (who has likely a vested interest in him spending £1000 with them on repairs) and should in reality get the car checked by an independent party with nothing to gain (RAC, AA, council MOT station) and progress from there.
The process of rejecting a car, issuing court proceedings etc is hard work and an absolute last resort, there is no guarantee in winning.
I appreciate your experience in these matters but I have first hand and experience and have sold/bought some 4000+ cars over the years.
No animosity and I apologise if my post came across condescending. It’s very easy to take the word of an OP at face value and give out advice without actually knowing any of the material facts of their actual situation.
I do agree that he should get two or three opinions as I have seen how a Ford dealership has tried it on a couple of times. In relation to my dads C-Max a Ford Dealership wanted to do £800 of repairs for the MOT. My local garage looked at it and no work was necessary and it sailed through three subsequent MOT's without issue.
There are caveats I know, and nothing is completely cut and dried, but he has the 30 clause to reject the car if what he says and the garage he had the car checked out is true.
mac132 said:
Got it checked over at my local garage, its a seat ibiza petrol 09 plate with 85k mileage 1.4. Just checked mpg and its showing 19.6 down from 24 , this is dropping even when car is IDLE. I know for a fact there is a problem with fuel consumption. Avg is 47 on auto trader for these vehicles.
Why didn't you get it checked before you bought it?
k would you buy a car with 2 months test????mac132 said:
Got it checked over at my local garage, its a seat ibiza petrol 09 plate with 85k mileage 1.4. Just checked mpg and its showing 19.6 down from 24 , this is dropping even when car is IDLE. I know for a fact there is a problem with fuel consumption. Avg is 47 on auto trader for these vehicles.
Erm.... it will do that, its burning fuel and going nowhere. Take no notice of autotrader mpg and work it out for real not going off the trip computer.Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff