do dealers have to offer a minimum warranty?
Discussion
i bought a car recently and on the receipt etc it says no warranty given, car checked by customer etc, i was just wondering if this is binding or if they should do something to help out on an oil leak that may become expensive to fix.
if they dont i will just get it sorted myself but if they are still obliged to do something i wouldnt mind a contribution towards the work.
thanks
if they dont i will just get it sorted myself but if they are still obliged to do something i wouldnt mind a contribution towards the work.
thanks
Sale of Goods Act applies, what ever is written on the invoice.
No specific period of warranty, but goods must be fit for purpose, and of satisfactory quality, this is a very grey area on used cars. I suspect a small oil leak would not be covered on most used cars.
Lots of dealers puts a 3 month/1,000 mile warranty on cars. This is just a cheap warranty, most of these would not cover their liabilities if the engine went pop a few days after sale.
ETA: forgot to write "not" in the oil leak sentence. Quite a crucial word in that one.
No specific period of warranty, but goods must be fit for purpose, and of satisfactory quality, this is a very grey area on used cars. I suspect a small oil leak would not be covered on most used cars.
Lots of dealers puts a 3 month/1,000 mile warranty on cars. This is just a cheap warranty, most of these would not cover their liabilities if the engine went pop a few days after sale.
ETA: forgot to write "not" in the oil leak sentence. Quite a crucial word in that one.
Edited by kentmotorcompany on Tuesday 14th September 17:23
As far as I know the Sale of Goods Act requires the seller of goods sold within the course of the sellers normal course of business to offer a 'level' of protection for up to six months. Within those six months it would be up to the seller to prove that the faults were not there at purchase..not the purchaser.
The level or seriousness of the fault that could be used to gain recompense depends on many things including original price paid, age, mileage etc..
As previously stated this IS different to a dealer/trader offering a warranty. Sold as Seen cannot be enforced and, again, as far as I am concerned is a worthless statement. 1,2 or 3 month warranties are fine BUT they do not release the seller from his or her legal obligations.
The level or seriousness of the fault that could be used to gain recompense depends on many things including original price paid, age, mileage etc..
As previously stated this IS different to a dealer/trader offering a warranty. Sold as Seen cannot be enforced and, again, as far as I am concerned is a worthless statement. 1,2 or 3 month warranties are fine BUT they do not release the seller from his or her legal obligations.
copied from another thread i started to get as much info as possibe:
so anyway, i recently bought a 1999 subaru legacy(perhaps 2 weeks ago), the receipt comprehensively says offered warranty but declined, no warranty/guarantee etc, which i signed. it was from a "sort of backstreet type" dealer.
anyway, it has an oil leak which at first i though would be rocker gaskets (£200ish) which i would just do and carry on, then it seemed like it was more likely to be the rear crank seal (£500ish) which i thought oh well i`ll just get it done i suppose. but now it is certain the head gaskets are what are at fault and are both weeping oil (£900ish).
i have spoken to the dealer and he says if i get a 2nd opinion and it is 100% the head gaskets he will make a contribution (no ideal how much of a contribution) towards the repair.
what are my options? is there someone i should log he fact that i have these problems and have tried to get something done in case they try to wriggle out of any contribution? this is a bit of a sticky one for me.
thanks in advance.
so anyway, i recently bought a 1999 subaru legacy(perhaps 2 weeks ago), the receipt comprehensively says offered warranty but declined, no warranty/guarantee etc, which i signed. it was from a "sort of backstreet type" dealer.
anyway, it has an oil leak which at first i though would be rocker gaskets (£200ish) which i would just do and carry on, then it seemed like it was more likely to be the rear crank seal (£500ish) which i thought oh well i`ll just get it done i suppose. but now it is certain the head gaskets are what are at fault and are both weeping oil (£900ish).
i have spoken to the dealer and he says if i get a 2nd opinion and it is 100% the head gaskets he will make a contribution (no ideal how much of a contribution) towards the repair.
what are my options? is there someone i should log he fact that i have these problems and have tried to get something done in case they try to wriggle out of any contribution? this is a bit of a sticky one for me.
thanks in advance.
Great Pretender said:
So you signed a warranty waiver and now you expect him to cough up?
SOGA is SOGA, but you've signed a binding agreement waiving the vendor of any liability.
i dont expect him to cought up, but surely i could still take the car back if it is not fit for purpose due to the headgaskets being gone. i bought a car from them with tax and m.o.t. to be honest id much rather keep the car and get the stuff done but dont really fancy spending almost what the car is worth on fixing it.SOGA is SOGA, but you've signed a binding agreement waiving the vendor of any liability.
Great Pretender said:
So you signed a warranty waiver and now you expect him to cough up?
SOGA is SOGA, but you've signed a binding agreement waiving the vendor of any liability.
I doubt very much such a waver is binding or enforceable. A "Sign this or else" agreement is certainly not legally binding.SOGA is SOGA, but you've signed a binding agreement waiving the vendor of any liability.
And as said, a warranty is not quite the same thing as responsibilities a trader should adhere too.
That said, a 99 Impreza was hardly the most expensive buy (I'd hope) and if the car is still driving fine, then I suspect there is little comeback or obligation from the seller to do anything beyond a good will gesture.
OP - if they are truly offering to help - be polite, thank them and see how you get on. Ask them is there a mechanic they'd prefer you to use for the 2nd opinion or even for the work.
As far as I'm concerned, if a dealer, particularly manufacturer's main dealer, offers no kind of meaningful warranty, I might as well buy privately a lot cheaper and not worry about solving problems that should have been solved with the car before it was sold myself for £0/hour labour, and certainly would not expect to have to do major suspension work on a three year old Approved Used car (that has been driven less than 2,000 miles by us since purchase) before the next MOT is due...
...that's what I said yesterday to the workshop manager of a VW dealership in a certain North West town who should expect a word from his boss soon about a strongly worded letter of e'hem, disdain received relating to his inability to rectify the situation and holding the car hostage until he got his money, anyway.
Needless to say, if the work does need doing they won't be getting paid for it, whether they carry it out or not.
Not recommended.
...that's what I said yesterday to the workshop manager of a VW dealership in a certain North West town who should expect a word from his boss soon about a strongly worded letter of e'hem, disdain received relating to his inability to rectify the situation and holding the car hostage until he got his money, anyway.
Needless to say, if the work does need doing they won't be getting paid for it, whether they carry it out or not.
Not recommended.
Edited by danger mouse on Thursday 16th September 15:07
300bhp/ton said:
Great Pretender said:
So you signed a warranty waiver and now you expect him to cough up?
SOGA is SOGA, but you've signed a binding agreement waiving the vendor of any liability.
I doubt very much such a waver is binding or enforceable. A "Sign this or else" agreement is certainly not legally binding.SOGA is SOGA, but you've signed a binding agreement waiving the vendor of any liability.
And as said, a warranty is not quite the same thing as responsibilities a trader should adhere too.
That said, a 99 Impreza was hardly the most expensive buy (I'd hope) and if the car is still driving fine, then I suspect there is little comeback or obligation from the seller to do anything beyond a good will gesture.
OP - if they are truly offering to help - be polite, thank them and see how you get on. Ask them is there a mechanic they'd prefer you to use for the 2nd opinion or even for the work.
rb5230 said:
300bhp/ton said:
Great Pretender said:
So you signed a warranty waiver and now you expect him to cough up?
SOGA is SOGA, but you've signed a binding agreement waiving the vendor of any liability.
I doubt very much such a waver is binding or enforceable. A "Sign this or else" agreement is certainly not legally binding.SOGA is SOGA, but you've signed a binding agreement waiving the vendor of any liability.
And as said, a warranty is not quite the same thing as responsibilities a trader should adhere too.
That said, a 99 Impreza was hardly the most expensive buy (I'd hope) and if the car is still driving fine, then I suspect there is little comeback or obligation from the seller to do anything beyond a good will gesture.
OP - if they are truly offering to help - be polite, thank them and see how you get on. Ask them is there a mechanic they'd prefer you to use for the 2nd opinion or even for the work.
And I do feel your pain, but if it was leaking bad before you bought it, you always had the option to have the car privately inspected. And as it isn't actually failing or dangerous, if you took it to court (based on current info) I suspect you'd lose. Which would mean paying all the costs too.
A trader is obliged to ensure "fit for purpose" and similar. But the difficult bit is proving stuff and setting realistic expectations vs the cost, the fault and the age/type of vehicle.
Read here:
http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/before_you_buy/th...
especially the section that says:
"Some dealers may use disclaimers such as ' Sold as Seen', 'Trade sale Only' or 'No Refund' to try and limit your rights. However, these rights cannot be taken away or restricted by a dealer."
This is written by the government, so gospel IMO
http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/before_you_buy/th...
especially the section that says:
"Some dealers may use disclaimers such as ' Sold as Seen', 'Trade sale Only' or 'No Refund' to try and limit your rights. However, these rights cannot be taken away or restricted by a dealer."
This is written by the government, so gospel IMO
cmackay81 said:
Read here:
http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/before_you_buy/th...
especially the section that says:
"Some dealers may use disclaimers such as ' Sold as Seen', 'Trade sale Only' or 'No Refund' to try and limit your rights. However, these rights cannot be taken away or restricted by a dealer."
This is written by the government, so gospel IMO
thanks,that is the sort of helpful thing i am after.http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/before_you_buy/th...
especially the section that says:
"Some dealers may use disclaimers such as ' Sold as Seen', 'Trade sale Only' or 'No Refund' to try and limit your rights. However, these rights cannot be taken away or restricted by a dealer."
This is written by the government, so gospel IMO
No worries, also posted on other thread, there's what to do next...
http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/after_you_buy/kno...
http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/after_you_buy/kno...
You mentioned the repairs might be getting close to price of the car. I take this to imply that the car might be a be old/high mileage.
Fit for purpose on an older higher mileage car, is not the same as fit for purpose on a 3 year old 40k car.
No one really knows the the exact definition, because each no two situations will ever be the same. You can only find out by going to court and having the legal argument, with each side making his case, and a judge to decide what is reasonable. Which of course, no one really wants.
A dealer will of course be aware of his legal obligations. Based on limited information I would say this one is not so clear cut. If this dealer is already suggesting a contribution, my advise would be to keep it friendly rather than making threats or quoting legal jargon. He sounds like a decent enough chap, I would try to keep it that way, and simply appeal to his better nature.
Fit for purpose on an older higher mileage car, is not the same as fit for purpose on a 3 year old 40k car.
No one really knows the the exact definition, because each no two situations will ever be the same. You can only find out by going to court and having the legal argument, with each side making his case, and a judge to decide what is reasonable. Which of course, no one really wants.
A dealer will of course be aware of his legal obligations. Based on limited information I would say this one is not so clear cut. If this dealer is already suggesting a contribution, my advise would be to keep it friendly rather than making threats or quoting legal jargon. He sounds like a decent enough chap, I would try to keep it that way, and simply appeal to his better nature.
rb5230 said:
it is a legacy, and not a very expensive one, but the repair will be getting close to the price of the car. i asked them about a mechanic and they gave me a number but the guy didnt want to mess around taking an engine out. is there anyone i should log this problem with? citizens advice etc?
What Legacy is it?A basic UK spec one, i.e non-turbo, should be able to change the head gaskets in situ.
It'll still cost several hundred pounds though!
I was quoted £6-800, for mine. I paid £200 for the car, so just stripped bits off it to sell and scrapped it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff