Used car dealer sold really dodgy car
Discussion
Has this been resolved?
Incorrectly repairing the safety systems on a car is far from OK and the dealer should be facing a full refund and the dodgy repairer should be chased down by trading standards or similar. This kind of dishonesty appears to flourish because all to often it is tolerated or they get away with it.
I don't believe the dealer was unaware for a moment - and there are a number of "tells" that will hint to any competent mechanic that a car might have some history.
Incorrectly repairing the safety systems on a car is far from OK and the dealer should be facing a full refund and the dodgy repairer should be chased down by trading standards or similar. This kind of dishonesty appears to flourish because all to often it is tolerated or they get away with it.
I don't believe the dealer was unaware for a moment - and there are a number of "tells" that will hint to any competent mechanic that a car might have some history.
Apologies for not coming back with an update on this, have been meaning too
TL;DR: Dealer has refunded full deposit minus £500. Finance Company to refund the payments that have been made on finance.
So my sister has lost £500 +£450 garage costs.
Picking up where I left off. Dealer wanted to take car back for inspection before offering any refund of sorts. I said that would be fine if the finance company said it was fine to do so - in case finance company wanted to inspect the car before the dealer got their hands on it.
Also sent all the info to the finance company.
Got a call from the finance company (FC) who said they have spoken to dealer and agreed to take the car back and offer refund minus use.
The FC said ordinarily the dealer is entitled to deduct 45p/mile, but they have negotiated this down to 35p/mile. The car had done 13,000 miles which would cost my sister £4,550. This would be their Final Response and if we weren't happy we could take it to the Financial Ombudsman.
That is a massive amount to lose and no way would a car have lost that much value in the space of 5-7 months (given it was first complained to FC in May).
I rang the dealer, tbf to the dealer, he was a nice and pleasant person to talk to and seemed quite reasonable. I explained to him that it was just too much, he said it was the FC that came up with 35p/mile. I was shocked, I said didn't the FC try to attempt to get a full refund or near enough a full refund. He replied No. The FC didn't even attempt to fight our corner. Seemed like the FC was on the side of the dealer more than the victim. The dealer said he will take on my concerns and see what he can do.
I got a call later from the FC and said the dealer has now offered 25p/mile, which now bought the figure down to £3,250.
Back in July, my sister had rung FC to relay her concerns about the car, the FC had sent out an independent engineer to assess the car and they had produced a report. My sister finally got round to sending me the report. The report was damning! - citing a long list of issues including previous accident damage:
Report findings:
"In our opinion based on the visible evidence we would conclude that we were able
to identify and demonstrate multiple faults with the vehicle at the time Of our
inspection. There were body defects to the vehicle, which we noted in the form Of
the body being distorted, sanding marks to the paint, overspray and scratches in
the filler which has been put on the vehicle.
The daytime running lights and sidelights were inoperable on the vehicle's
headlights. There was also an airbag light illumination on the vehicle.
[b]We would highly advise that the vehicle is not to be used under any circumstance
and as such should be taken out of in-service use immediately.[/b]"
Read the last 2 lines above and then wonder how in the very next paragraph, the Report Conclusion was:
"We would conclude that although we were able to identify and demonstrate faults
with the vehicle at the time of our inspection, we do not consider these faults to
have been present or in development at the point of finance inception and are not
the selling agents' responsibility in our opinion.
We do consider however that the vehicle should not be driven under any
circumstance and should subsequently be taken out of in-service use immediately."
How on earth they can reach that conclusion - "we do not consider these faults to have been present at the point of finance..." - without even providing any evidence on how they have reached this conclusion. The FC used this to reject my sister's complaint and then having the gall to say that all these issues developed under my sister's ownership! Let that sink in, this from one of the top Banks! To add insult to injury, then saying, this car is so dangerous that it should be immediately taken off the road!
I replied back to the dealer with the report findings and saying I'm now more livid than before. The report clearly states the car is very dangerous and highlights a long list of faults. No one in their right mind would believe all these faults occurred after the point of sale. The evidence of the MOT failure and the salvage yard pics would provide the hard evidence. After another phone call, all very pleasant mind, just expressing the depth of the issues etc He said he will see what he can do to make it as fair as possible.
The Dealer replied, using CAP prices on what the depreciation would have been if it were not a CAT S. So his final figure was £1250.
With the £450 garage costs, this would have been £1650.
I said this is not acceptable and the most we are willing to accept is a £500 loss. The dealer replied back and accepted!
I was then kicking myself for not having stuck to my guns and should have held out for a full refund and garage costs.
So now my sister is down £500+£450=£950.
That's where we have left things.
The Dealer proved to be more reasonable than the FC. I was absolutely shocked by the behaviour of the FC and I'm not sure if they have got round to refunding my sister the money as yet.
1. The FC being Santander, their conclusion of the "independent" engineer report was shocking - there is no way they can reach a conclusion to say none of these faults were present at point of sale.
2. Report finding that the car is dangerous and should be taken out of use - and just leaving my sister to deal with it and providing no help whatsoever
3. After the 35p/mile debacle - it had become quite clear that the FC is not on our side - it was very much trying to help the dealer - no doubt to protect revenue streams
4. When I spoke to the FC - the chap I spoke to - and he put this in the Final Reponse letter - that the deposit was paid to the dealer and we will then have to negotiate with the dealer to get this back and that Santander has no responsibility for the deposit. - Which goes against the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
Not only had we have to deal with a Dealer selling a dangerous Cat S car, we then have to deal with a seemingly corrupt Finance Company!
TL;DR: Dealer has refunded full deposit minus £500. Finance Company to refund the payments that have been made on finance.
So my sister has lost £500 +£450 garage costs.
Picking up where I left off. Dealer wanted to take car back for inspection before offering any refund of sorts. I said that would be fine if the finance company said it was fine to do so - in case finance company wanted to inspect the car before the dealer got their hands on it.
Also sent all the info to the finance company.
Got a call from the finance company (FC) who said they have spoken to dealer and agreed to take the car back and offer refund minus use.
The FC said ordinarily the dealer is entitled to deduct 45p/mile, but they have negotiated this down to 35p/mile. The car had done 13,000 miles which would cost my sister £4,550. This would be their Final Response and if we weren't happy we could take it to the Financial Ombudsman.
That is a massive amount to lose and no way would a car have lost that much value in the space of 5-7 months (given it was first complained to FC in May).
I rang the dealer, tbf to the dealer, he was a nice and pleasant person to talk to and seemed quite reasonable. I explained to him that it was just too much, he said it was the FC that came up with 35p/mile. I was shocked, I said didn't the FC try to attempt to get a full refund or near enough a full refund. He replied No. The FC didn't even attempt to fight our corner. Seemed like the FC was on the side of the dealer more than the victim. The dealer said he will take on my concerns and see what he can do.
I got a call later from the FC and said the dealer has now offered 25p/mile, which now bought the figure down to £3,250.
Back in July, my sister had rung FC to relay her concerns about the car, the FC had sent out an independent engineer to assess the car and they had produced a report. My sister finally got round to sending me the report. The report was damning! - citing a long list of issues including previous accident damage:
Report findings:
"In our opinion based on the visible evidence we would conclude that we were able
to identify and demonstrate multiple faults with the vehicle at the time Of our
inspection. There were body defects to the vehicle, which we noted in the form Of
the body being distorted, sanding marks to the paint, overspray and scratches in
the filler which has been put on the vehicle.
The daytime running lights and sidelights were inoperable on the vehicle's
headlights. There was also an airbag light illumination on the vehicle.
[b]We would highly advise that the vehicle is not to be used under any circumstance
and as such should be taken out of in-service use immediately.[/b]"
Read the last 2 lines above and then wonder how in the very next paragraph, the Report Conclusion was:
"We would conclude that although we were able to identify and demonstrate faults
with the vehicle at the time of our inspection, we do not consider these faults to
have been present or in development at the point of finance inception and are not
the selling agents' responsibility in our opinion.
We do consider however that the vehicle should not be driven under any
circumstance and should subsequently be taken out of in-service use immediately."
How on earth they can reach that conclusion - "we do not consider these faults to have been present at the point of finance..." - without even providing any evidence on how they have reached this conclusion. The FC used this to reject my sister's complaint and then having the gall to say that all these issues developed under my sister's ownership! Let that sink in, this from one of the top Banks! To add insult to injury, then saying, this car is so dangerous that it should be immediately taken off the road!
I replied back to the dealer with the report findings and saying I'm now more livid than before. The report clearly states the car is very dangerous and highlights a long list of faults. No one in their right mind would believe all these faults occurred after the point of sale. The evidence of the MOT failure and the salvage yard pics would provide the hard evidence. After another phone call, all very pleasant mind, just expressing the depth of the issues etc He said he will see what he can do to make it as fair as possible.
The Dealer replied, using CAP prices on what the depreciation would have been if it were not a CAT S. So his final figure was £1250.
With the £450 garage costs, this would have been £1650.
I said this is not acceptable and the most we are willing to accept is a £500 loss. The dealer replied back and accepted!
I was then kicking myself for not having stuck to my guns and should have held out for a full refund and garage costs.
So now my sister is down £500+£450=£950.
That's where we have left things.
The Dealer proved to be more reasonable than the FC. I was absolutely shocked by the behaviour of the FC and I'm not sure if they have got round to refunding my sister the money as yet.
1. The FC being Santander, their conclusion of the "independent" engineer report was shocking - there is no way they can reach a conclusion to say none of these faults were present at point of sale.
2. Report finding that the car is dangerous and should be taken out of use - and just leaving my sister to deal with it and providing no help whatsoever
3. After the 35p/mile debacle - it had become quite clear that the FC is not on our side - it was very much trying to help the dealer - no doubt to protect revenue streams
4. When I spoke to the FC - the chap I spoke to - and he put this in the Final Reponse letter - that the deposit was paid to the dealer and we will then have to negotiate with the dealer to get this back and that Santander has no responsibility for the deposit. - Which goes against the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
Not only had we have to deal with a Dealer selling a dangerous Cat S car, we then have to deal with a seemingly corrupt Finance Company!
So the dealer has settled for refund minus £600 for usage? Sounds like a brilliant result all around to me.
You're on a hiding to nothing wanting all usage costs and unauthorised garage work refunded.
For usage, whether or not you're happy with the car at the point of rejection fact remains that it was used and by extension devalued in those thousands of miles your sister has been using it for. See as it a much cheaper alternative to a hire car for all those months and relax.
As for the garage fees: You should have contacted the dealer immediately and sort their advice for diagnosing and repairing the vehicle in the first incidence. I can understand why you/your sister didn't, but that's the expected process to the point where I'd say there's a good chance that it may even be on the sales invoice/receipt (depending on how legally savvy the dealer is
). You cannot expect somebody to pay for work that they haven't authorised, much less work that didn't even fix the fault. In future if a fault arises with a vehicle still within a plausible time that it might have been present on purchase its worth a least a friendly call to the dealer to see what they suggest.
As good will he may consider going halves or something, but given the massive reduction in usage charges he has offered 'good will' has already been offered imho.
Finally, is there any more to the engineers report? Of course they will be giving the stop drive advice on the airbag light being on (which was an intermittent fault to begin with) and the lights not working (is that a new fault not noticed previously?) but put it this way, if that was the only car the engineer had keys to and he had run out of milk for his breakfast he wouldn't think twice about nipping to the shops in it - Unless there are more dangerous defects to the vehicle than a bit of overspray and sanding marks else where in the report?
Genuinely sorry if I seem harsh, I totally sympathise with the personal and financial stress involved, but I'm just looking at things logically/legally as opposed to emotionally. Mistakes were made as well as lessons learned all round.
You're on a hiding to nothing wanting all usage costs and unauthorised garage work refunded.
For usage, whether or not you're happy with the car at the point of rejection fact remains that it was used and by extension devalued in those thousands of miles your sister has been using it for. See as it a much cheaper alternative to a hire car for all those months and relax.
As for the garage fees: You should have contacted the dealer immediately and sort their advice for diagnosing and repairing the vehicle in the first incidence. I can understand why you/your sister didn't, but that's the expected process to the point where I'd say there's a good chance that it may even be on the sales invoice/receipt (depending on how legally savvy the dealer is
). You cannot expect somebody to pay for work that they haven't authorised, much less work that didn't even fix the fault. In future if a fault arises with a vehicle still within a plausible time that it might have been present on purchase its worth a least a friendly call to the dealer to see what they suggest.As good will he may consider going halves or something, but given the massive reduction in usage charges he has offered 'good will' has already been offered imho.
Finally, is there any more to the engineers report? Of course they will be giving the stop drive advice on the airbag light being on (which was an intermittent fault to begin with) and the lights not working (is that a new fault not noticed previously?) but put it this way, if that was the only car the engineer had keys to and he had run out of milk for his breakfast he wouldn't think twice about nipping to the shops in it - Unless there are more dangerous defects to the vehicle than a bit of overspray and sanding marks else where in the report?
Genuinely sorry if I seem harsh, I totally sympathise with the personal and financial stress involved, but I'm just looking at things logically/legally as opposed to emotionally. Mistakes were made as well as lessons learned all round.
13,000 miles in 5-7 months, and it hasn't crashed - the car doesn't seem all that dangerous then? And your sister can't have been that distressed driving it to use it that much?
However OP does make some excellent points about the finance company that deserve answering, I shall await an industry chap to chime in ITT to explain what on earth Santander were up to, because that does sound crap.
However OP does make some excellent points about the finance company that deserve answering, I shall await an industry chap to chime in ITT to explain what on earth Santander were up to, because that does sound crap.
OP I think the dealer has been fair your garage costs are yours, I'd say that you've actually broken even.
Your sister has added 13k in mileage to the car, I understand your frustration at the situation but you need to recognise when your coming out of a terrible situation in a good place.
Remember the car would've devalued more than £500 in 13k.
Your sister has added 13k in mileage to the car, I understand your frustration at the situation but you need to recognise when your coming out of a terrible situation in a good place.
Remember the car would've devalued more than £500 in 13k.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff