AUC with a leak - reject or work through ?
Discussion
I'm keen to hear the collective opinions on best course of action.
- Bought an AUC in November, 4 yr old 30k miles, main dealer
- It’s been back to the dealer a couple of times to sort out some niggles, and..
- ..it has become clear it has a badly fitted replacement screen which is leaking into the interior
- Don’t know when this was done and whether it has leaked from day one or it has deteriorated over time
- Car is a relatively unusual spec so not many replacement options
- Car is in very good condition otherwise
Don’t want to name the brand or dealer, dealer has been fine so far and no complaints.
I don’t expect perfection in a used car and I’m OK spending a bit of time sorting things out, but I’m at a decision point now. Do I put more time into it, getting a new screen fitted, shaking that down and confirming the problem is now fixed, or will the history of unknown amounts of water ingress come and bite me in the a-se at a future point and I should just take the hit and reject the car ?
There’s no problem with a rejection under the AUC terms, and it’s a second car so there’s no inconvenience to be without it.
- Bought an AUC in November, 4 yr old 30k miles, main dealer
- It’s been back to the dealer a couple of times to sort out some niggles, and..
- ..it has become clear it has a badly fitted replacement screen which is leaking into the interior
- Don’t know when this was done and whether it has leaked from day one or it has deteriorated over time
- Car is a relatively unusual spec so not many replacement options
- Car is in very good condition otherwise
Don’t want to name the brand or dealer, dealer has been fine so far and no complaints.
I don’t expect perfection in a used car and I’m OK spending a bit of time sorting things out, but I’m at a decision point now. Do I put more time into it, getting a new screen fitted, shaking that down and confirming the problem is now fixed, or will the history of unknown amounts of water ingress come and bite me in the a-se at a future point and I should just take the hit and reject the car ?
There’s no problem with a rejection under the AUC terms, and it’s a second car so there’s no inconvenience to be without it.
Thanks for the comments.
The manufacturer wouldn't appear at the top of any rankings for 'highest quality electrics' in the first place, and I think that's probably what's going to swing me towards a rejection. Which is a shame, because it's a nice car and it's a problem caused by a previous owner rather than the factory. But at the moment it's the dealer's problem and if I keep it and it goes pop in six months it's going to be very much my problem.
The manufacturer wouldn't appear at the top of any rankings for 'highest quality electrics' in the first place, and I think that's probably what's going to swing me towards a rejection. Which is a shame, because it's a nice car and it's a problem caused by a previous owner rather than the factory. But at the moment it's the dealer's problem and if I keep it and it goes pop in six months it's going to be very much my problem.
Newc said:
But at the moment it's the dealer's problem and if I keep it and it goes pop in six months it's going to be very much my problem.
Not if it still presents the same, or a related, fault that was reported earlier.Beyond the six months the onus is on the consumer to prove the fault was there at the point of sale.
And you can.
Trevor555 said:
Newc said:
But at the moment it's the dealer's problem and if I keep it and it goes pop in six months it's going to be very much my problem.
Not if it still presents the same, or a related, fault that was reported earlier.Beyond the six months the onus is on the consumer to prove the fault was there at the point of sale.
And you can.
irc said:
Trevor555 said:
Newc said:
But at the moment it's the dealer's problem and if I keep it and it goes pop in six months it's going to be very much my problem.
Not if it still presents the same, or a related, fault that was reported earlier.Beyond the six months the onus is on the consumer to prove the fault was there at the point of sale.
And you can.
Any fault relating to water ingress behind the dashboard would arguably be down to that leaky screen.
The OP would have to get an independent diagnosis done if the supplying dealer didn't accept this.
As I said earlier in this thread, OP should 100% reject that car.
I've seen plenty of corroded multiplugs being the casue of electrical faults.
Reject for sure.
Mate of mine bought a 2018 Pug 308, very clean tidy car. One morning having had it less than two weeks he got into it with an inch of water around the pedals. Car wouldn’t start either.
He uses his insurance to get it recovered into the dealership, I’d have asked the dealer to recover it.
Anyway they said the scuttle panel drains had been blocked causing the flooding. They said they’d fix and dry it. I advised rejection which he did. He got his refund before Christmas once he’d got the V5 to give to dealer.
Yesterday he collected a Fiesta we test drove last week. The few minor faults on it that we highlighted had been fixed so hopefully all good now.
Mate of mine bought a 2018 Pug 308, very clean tidy car. One morning having had it less than two weeks he got into it with an inch of water around the pedals. Car wouldn’t start either.
He uses his insurance to get it recovered into the dealership, I’d have asked the dealer to recover it.
Anyway they said the scuttle panel drains had been blocked causing the flooding. They said they’d fix and dry it. I advised rejection which he did. He got his refund before Christmas once he’d got the V5 to give to dealer.
Yesterday he collected a Fiesta we test drove last week. The few minor faults on it that we highlighted had been fixed so hopefully all good now.
Trevor555 said:
Glassman said:
They could say the windscreen was not fitted by them or during their care/ownership of the car. What is their stance on it?
Doesn't matter what their stance on that is.They've retailed a car to a consumer, and it's got a fault.
Glassman said:
If I was in the OP's position I would be agreeing with this. However, from the seller's point of view, how do they protect themselves? I suppose a good solution would be to sort the leaky windscreen but they wouldn't have seen it coming if the car came into stock with a poorly fitted windscreen.
I can answer this as a retired car dealer myself.How do dealers protect them selves from buying cars with existing faults?
Buying at auction, it's pretty much the gamble we take. If only 1 in 5 cars cost us money in repairs, then that's ok.
Buying from the public, or taking cars in PX, we have to inspect them the best we can at the point of purchase.
We've all heard the person in the pub say "my car's faulty, going to cost loads to fix, I'm going to PX it"
Dealers fall victim to people offloading faulty cars.
Dealers should do thorough checks on the cars they're selling, to avoid selling problem cars.
Not all problems are spotted though, damp carpets in this case.
But that's the game dealers are in.
Sell to the public, stand by the cars, and their faults.
The CRA is one sided yes, but if people saw the disgusting behaviour of dealers 10+ years ago, they'd agree something had to be done.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff