Car rejection - VWFS
Discussion
Our MY25 ID.Buzz LWB GTX died on 24th November and was recovered to a dealership at 4,000 miles and 4 months old
It has a fault dubbed "sensor cascade" and it seems that this is a relatively common issue with no known fix
Esentially, the dashboard lights up with every error possible and it is undrivable, in our case after jamming on the brakes and then full throttle which was nice
After a couple of weeks, the dealer said the testing required will take 12 weeks and require 80% of the interior removing to replace ECUs and wiring looms
Others have trodden this path already - to no avail
So, rejected in writing the car with VWFS as it is a lease on 15th December, but they are hiding behind an FCA SLA of 8 weeks for "resolution"
VW customer care want to close the case and as of today, no case handler or response from VWFS, which is frustrating
Anyone else rejected a lease car through VWFS? What was the outcome / timeframe?
It has a fault dubbed "sensor cascade" and it seems that this is a relatively common issue with no known fix
Esentially, the dashboard lights up with every error possible and it is undrivable, in our case after jamming on the brakes and then full throttle which was nice
After a couple of weeks, the dealer said the testing required will take 12 weeks and require 80% of the interior removing to replace ECUs and wiring looms
Others have trodden this path already - to no avail
So, rejected in writing the car with VWFS as it is a lease on 15th December, but they are hiding behind an FCA SLA of 8 weeks for "resolution"
VW customer care want to close the case and as of today, no case handler or response from VWFS, which is frustrating
Anyone else rejected a lease car through VWFS? What was the outcome / timeframe?
My mum did (or rather I did).
She was actually in to an informal extension. Car had been faulty a few times during the 2 year lease, and was off road for two weeks at a time. The last time it was faulty it was off road for over a month, and vwfs wouldn't provide a hire car due to age (over 75). We complained to be able to hand the lease back, they were adamant the car can't be returned faulty even though under warranty.
Had to go through the complaints process which took 8 weeks, they said as a gesture of goodwill they'd accept it back, and gave a refund of half a month's rental.
Cba to argue, just wanted it gone.
Will never ever get another VAG car. Good luck, you'll need it.
She was actually in to an informal extension. Car had been faulty a few times during the 2 year lease, and was off road for two weeks at a time. The last time it was faulty it was off road for over a month, and vwfs wouldn't provide a hire car due to age (over 75). We complained to be able to hand the lease back, they were adamant the car can't be returned faulty even though under warranty.
Had to go through the complaints process which took 8 weeks, they said as a gesture of goodwill they'd accept it back, and gave a refund of half a month's rental.
Cba to argue, just wanted it gone.
Will never ever get another VAG car. Good luck, you'll need it.
You need to give them at least 3 tries at fixing the same fault.
I had a 2019 brand new car where the digital display kept going blank and a loom fault with the gearbox - tried to reject it 6 months later without success after 2 repairs. On the 3rd repair attempt 10 months in I refused to collect it and emailed the dealer/finance with notice of rejection again.
The dealership tried to charge for storage etc but then I had contact from VWFS finance that they had accepted the rejected car. Only because the dealership wanted it off their lot.
Took 12 months in total however VWFS once accepted it as rejected it was a very smooth process and refunded the deposit and some lease hire charges. I wasn't expecting any money back - simply to hand the car back and write off any remaining lease payments!
It didn't put me off VWFS because of the unexpected refunds (and have since another car with them) although you need to deal with the VWFS finance rather then the dealership. It was just a 1 off lemon car for me!
I had a 2019 brand new car where the digital display kept going blank and a loom fault with the gearbox - tried to reject it 6 months later without success after 2 repairs. On the 3rd repair attempt 10 months in I refused to collect it and emailed the dealer/finance with notice of rejection again.
The dealership tried to charge for storage etc but then I had contact from VWFS finance that they had accepted the rejected car. Only because the dealership wanted it off their lot.
Took 12 months in total however VWFS once accepted it as rejected it was a very smooth process and refunded the deposit and some lease hire charges. I wasn't expecting any money back - simply to hand the car back and write off any remaining lease payments!
It didn't put me off VWFS because of the unexpected refunds (and have since another car with them) although you need to deal with the VWFS finance rather then the dealership. It was just a 1 off lemon car for me!
t at software?Don’t think it’s limited to vw. I’ve just got a brand new transit custom off work. Within a 1000 miles I’ve done it’s had numerous faults show up. Front camera malfunction, collision assist malfunction, rear door fault, parking brake malfunction etc. Other guys who’ve got them have this happen too. All new vans but constantly flagging up faults but then most just appear randomly.
Mercedes321 said:
You need to give them at least 3 tries at fixing the same fault.
I had a 2019 brand new car where the digital display kept going blank and a loom fault with the gearbox - tried to reject it 6 months later without success after 2 repairs. On the 3rd repair attempt 10 months in I refused to collect it and emailed the dealer/finance with notice of rejection again.
The dealership tried to charge for storage etc but then I had contact from VWFS finance that they had accepted the rejected car. Only because the dealership wanted it off their lot.
Took 12 months in total however VWFS once accepted it as rejected it was a very smooth process and refunded the deposit and some lease hire charges. I wasn't expecting any money back - simply to hand the car back and write off any remaining lease payments!
It didn't put me off VWFS because of the unexpected refunds (and have since another car with them) although you need to deal with the VWFS finance rather then the dealership. It was just a 1 off lemon car for me!
the law says one try I had a 2019 brand new car where the digital display kept going blank and a loom fault with the gearbox - tried to reject it 6 months later without success after 2 repairs. On the 3rd repair attempt 10 months in I refused to collect it and emailed the dealer/finance with notice of rejection again.
The dealership tried to charge for storage etc but then I had contact from VWFS finance that they had accepted the rejected car. Only because the dealership wanted it off their lot.
Took 12 months in total however VWFS once accepted it as rejected it was a very smooth process and refunded the deposit and some lease hire charges. I wasn't expecting any money back - simply to hand the car back and write off any remaining lease payments!
It didn't put me off VWFS because of the unexpected refunds (and have since another car with them) although you need to deal with the VWFS finance rather then the dealership. It was just a 1 off lemon car for me!
andymc said:
the law says one try
This is where this situation becomes protracted. You are correct when you say ‘the law says one try’ and the law you quote is the CRA(2015).
However, the vehicle is leased to the OP under a lease agreement. The OP holds no legal title to the vehicle so he therefore does not meet the test for being a consumer, as in, he has not purchased the vehicle and therefore holds no contract with VW.
In essence, VWFS will call all the shots here and not the OP.
As VWFS are a financial institution - which is why the eight week SLA is now in play - but ultimately they’re working to a very different rule book I’m afraid.
The OP has, and can, and should continue to complain to VWFS as they’re not supplying him with the vehicle they should be doing under his lease agreement, but this is not a basic consumer rights issue.
ADJimbo said:
This is where this situation becomes protracted.
You are correct when you say the law says one try and the law you quote is the CRA(2015).
However, the vehicle is leased to the OP under a lease agreement. The OP holds no legal title to the vehicle so he therefore does not meet the test for being a consumer, as in, he has not purchased the vehicle and therefore holds no contract with VW.
In essence, VWFS will call all the shots here and not the OP.
As VWFS are a financial institution - which is why the eight week SLA is now in play - but ultimately they re working to a very different rule book I m afraid.
The OP has, and can, and should continue to complain to VWFS as they re not supplying him with the vehicle they should be doing under his lease agreement, but this is not a basic consumer rights issue.
I rejected car with WVFS after one fix attempt which didn't solve the problem. Got response to my rejection letter within 3 weeks and was refunded decent money. In the end, it costed me only £1000 to drive brand new car for 9 months. You are correct when you say the law says one try and the law you quote is the CRA(2015).
However, the vehicle is leased to the OP under a lease agreement. The OP holds no legal title to the vehicle so he therefore does not meet the test for being a consumer, as in, he has not purchased the vehicle and therefore holds no contract with VW.
In essence, VWFS will call all the shots here and not the OP.
As VWFS are a financial institution - which is why the eight week SLA is now in play - but ultimately they re working to a very different rule book I m afraid.
The OP has, and can, and should continue to complain to VWFS as they re not supplying him with the vehicle they should be doing under his lease agreement, but this is not a basic consumer rights issue.
ADJimbo said:
This is where this situation becomes protracted.
You are correct when you say the law says one try and the law you quote is the CRA(2015).
However, the vehicle is leased to the OP under a lease agreement. The OP holds no legal title to the vehicle so he therefore does not meet the test for being a consumer, as in, he has not purchased the vehicle and therefore holds no contract with VW.
In essence, VWFS will call all the shots here and not the OP.
As VWFS are a financial institution - which is why the eight week SLA is now in play - but ultimately they re working to a very different rule book I m afraid.
The OP has, and can, and should continue to complain to VWFS as they re not supplying him with the vehicle they should be doing under his lease agreement, but this is not a basic consumer rights issue.
Just out of interest, where do the consumer rights sit? Between the OP and VFWS? Or more complex than that?You are correct when you say the law says one try and the law you quote is the CRA(2015).
However, the vehicle is leased to the OP under a lease agreement. The OP holds no legal title to the vehicle so he therefore does not meet the test for being a consumer, as in, he has not purchased the vehicle and therefore holds no contract with VW.
In essence, VWFS will call all the shots here and not the OP.
As VWFS are a financial institution - which is why the eight week SLA is now in play - but ultimately they re working to a very different rule book I m afraid.
The OP has, and can, and should continue to complain to VWFS as they re not supplying him with the vehicle they should be doing under his lease agreement, but this is not a basic consumer rights issue.
ADJimbo said:
This is where this situation becomes protracted.
You are correct when you say the law says one try and the law you quote is the CRA(2015).
However, the vehicle is leased to the OP under a lease agreement. The OP holds no legal title to the vehicle so he therefore does not meet the test for being a consumer, as in, he has not purchased the vehicle and therefore holds no contract with VW.
In essence, VWFS will call all the shots here and not the OP.
As VWFS are a financial institution - which is why the eight week SLA is now in play - but ultimately they re working to a very different rule book I m afraid.
The OP has, and can, and should continue to complain to VWFS as they re not supplying him with the vehicle they should be doing under his lease agreement, but this is not a basic consumer rights issue.
I would have thought Consumer Rights Act section 3 (2) (b) applies, ie a lease is interpreted as a contract for the hire of goods. You are correct when you say the law says one try and the law you quote is the CRA(2015).
However, the vehicle is leased to the OP under a lease agreement. The OP holds no legal title to the vehicle so he therefore does not meet the test for being a consumer, as in, he has not purchased the vehicle and therefore holds no contract with VW.
In essence, VWFS will call all the shots here and not the OP.
As VWFS are a financial institution - which is why the eight week SLA is now in play - but ultimately they re working to a very different rule book I m afraid.
The OP has, and can, and should continue to complain to VWFS as they re not supplying him with the vehicle they should be doing under his lease agreement, but this is not a basic consumer rights issue.
In other words, it does not NEED to be an outright purchase to be covered by CRA. (Hire purchase agreements are also covered).
paul_c123 said:
I would have thought Consumer Rights Act section 3 (2) (b) applies, ie a lease is interpreted as a contract for the hire of goods.
In other words, it does not NEED to be an outright purchase to be covered by CRA. (Hire purchase agreements are also covered).
Agreed - 3 (2) (b) would apply and thus make it a Chapter One claim. In other words, it does not NEED to be an outright purchase to be covered by CRA. (Hire purchase agreements are also covered).
The point of my post was that contrary to other posters that preached ‘reject’ ‘reject’ ‘reject’ - was that you’re trying to enforce against a financial institution opposed to the vendor/manufacturer - which makes it a totally different set of rules to achieve that rejection - as the OP is finding here.
It was more real world advice to explain the decisions VWFS were taking opposed to the letter of the law.
BertBert said:
Just out of interest, where do the consumer rights sit? Between the OP and VFWS? Or more complex than that?
The consumer rights sit between the OP and VWFS for the supply of the vehicle, under the terms of their lease agreement.If the vehicle does not work, then the OP has the CRA to remedy his position.
The issue then becomes enforcing those rights - as VWFS are a financial institution, then they will rely / funnel on the draconian and protracted financial conduct rules - which they are doing here - opposed to dealing direct with the vendor which is a lot less complicated to enforce.
The OP can reject the vehicle, but the hoops to jump through are different.
Mr Peel said:
andrewpandrew said:
119 said:
After the Golf 7 fiasco...
Out of interest, what was this? I had three MK7/7.5 Golf s and can t remember there being software problems with that generation of car Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff