Rejecting a new car after 2 years, fault present all this
Discussion
Car was bought new April 2015
Car was sold as having an infotainment system that should connect to any iphone or android smartphone giving google maps navigation. Buyer showed salesman his phone and he said it would work. No demo system available.
On delivery system did not work with buyers phone. Dealer confirmed.
Buyer promised software updates would bring compatibility.
After some months manufacturer released a "compatibility list" of phones that would work.
Tried one such phone, did not work
Buyer promised compatibility with software updates again
Car is in national press as having issues with the system
Buyer fobbed off by "customer services"
Buyer gets ill with serious illness and has more important thing to worry about for a while.
Fast forward to April 2017, car goes for service and I complain again about system not working.
Dealer promises to fix the system under warrnaty
Dealer has car for 3 weeks, finds system does not work with any allegedly compatible phone. Tries a similar car in the yard, system does not work either.
Manufacturer and dealer say nothing can be done to make the system work.
They want to give car back to customer.
1) the car was missold, it never became compatible with the smartphone present at purchase (or iphones)
2) the car is under a 3 year warranty, surely they should fix it or replace the car
3) system is not fit for purpose - it simply does not do what it should
Can I reject the car as not fit for purpose after 2 years?
The fault has been present since day one, and they are saying they cannot fix it.
Car was sold as having an infotainment system that should connect to any iphone or android smartphone giving google maps navigation. Buyer showed salesman his phone and he said it would work. No demo system available.
On delivery system did not work with buyers phone. Dealer confirmed.
Buyer promised software updates would bring compatibility.
After some months manufacturer released a "compatibility list" of phones that would work.
Tried one such phone, did not work
Buyer promised compatibility with software updates again
Car is in national press as having issues with the system
Buyer fobbed off by "customer services"
Buyer gets ill with serious illness and has more important thing to worry about for a while.
Fast forward to April 2017, car goes for service and I complain again about system not working.
Dealer promises to fix the system under warrnaty
Dealer has car for 3 weeks, finds system does not work with any allegedly compatible phone. Tries a similar car in the yard, system does not work either.
Manufacturer and dealer say nothing can be done to make the system work.
They want to give car back to customer.
1) the car was missold, it never became compatible with the smartphone present at purchase (or iphones)
2) the car is under a 3 year warranty, surely they should fix it or replace the car
3) system is not fit for purpose - it simply does not do what it should
Can I reject the car as not fit for purpose after 2 years?
The fault has been present since day one, and they are saying they cannot fix it.
Edited by was8v on Wednesday 12th July 09:22
They walked into the showroom and specifically asked for a car with built in sat nav.
They were told of an amazing system that you can plug your phone in and use google maps brilliant navigation on the car screen. This would be always up to date, have live traffic and be the best sat nav in the world.
There was no demo avallable, they bought it unseen as sold by the salesman.
For two years they have been fobbed off with "software update coming".
It doesn't do what they said it would.
If this car didn't have this they would have bought a different car.
They were told of an amazing system that you can plug your phone in and use google maps brilliant navigation on the car screen. This would be always up to date, have live traffic and be the best sat nav in the world.
There was no demo avallable, they bought it unseen as sold by the salesman.
For two years they have been fobbed off with "software update coming".
It doesn't do what they said it would.
If this car didn't have this they would have bought a different car.
Butter Face said:
How is it faulty? Explain your reasoning.
The system has never worked with the phone, a car with the same system will not work with the phone, it's not faulty, just not compatible.
If the manufacturer says it should be, you need to be speaking to the manufacturer, it's their f
k up.
But
It's not faulty.
2 months after purchase the manufacturer released a compatibility list of phones the system would work with - this has been added to over time.The system has never worked with the phone, a car with the same system will not work with the phone, it's not faulty, just not compatible.
If the manufacturer says it should be, you need to be speaking to the manufacturer, it's their f
k up. But
It's not faulty.
LG nexus 4 was owned at the time of purchase, this has never been added to the list and has never worked (despite promises to the contrary).
Sony Xperia Z3 Compact is on the list, was tried and the system did not work.
3 weeks ago Dealer tried Samsung S6 and Samsung S7 phones, both on the compatibility list and the system did not work,
Dealer tried Samsung S6 and S7 on a similar age car in the yard and that system did not work.
Ergo, either both the systems tried have a manufacturing fault, or the compatibility list is wrong or the system just does not do what was advertised.
Yes its insane to reject a car for a radio connectivity, but the car was chosen specifically for this connectivity as the primary deciding feature, and I cannot reject only that component as it was bought a a whole car.
The car was purchased from a dealer, not direct from the manufacturer. Therefore the contract is with the dealer and it is up to them to negotiate with the manufacturer.
Edited by was8v on Tuesday 11th July 21:22
Well the supplying dealers and manufacturer promised the purchaser endlessly that it would become compatible.
As I say, the purchaser was fobbed off for a year in this way, then fell seriously ill and the car was little used.
They have admitted the system is faulty, but refuse to provide any fix FOC. They have offered a genuine accessory integrated sat nav at a price.
For three weeks now while the car has been evaluated the purchaser has had the benefit of the dealer courtesy car. It would likely have been cheaper for them to just fit the accessory unit.
I won't name and shame until the dealer and/or manufacturer put clearly in writing why they will not fix this known fault under either the SOGA or the car warranty.
The internet is littered with buyers of the same car complaining. Some have been given the accessory integrated unit FOC.
As I say, the purchaser was fobbed off for a year in this way, then fell seriously ill and the car was little used.
They have admitted the system is faulty, but refuse to provide any fix FOC. They have offered a genuine accessory integrated sat nav at a price.
For three weeks now while the car has been evaluated the purchaser has had the benefit of the dealer courtesy car. It would likely have been cheaper for them to just fit the accessory unit.
I won't name and shame until the dealer and/or manufacturer put clearly in writing why they will not fix this known fault under either the SOGA or the car warranty.
The internet is littered with buyers of the same car complaining. Some have been given the accessory integrated unit FOC.
Edited by was8v on Tuesday 11th July 21:45
Butter Face said:
So do you want to reject it or just have the accessory unit? Because if you want the latter you need to stop banging on about the former.
Speak to the manufacturer customer services, explain the situation clearly and simply, explain that you know the accessory unit will sort the issue and that you want that fitted for free and see where you get.
I've stated this at least 20 times in telephone conversations with them. Speak to the manufacturer customer services, explain the situation clearly and simply, explain that you know the accessory unit will sort the issue and that you want that fitted for free and see where you get.
What else can I do?
Motor ombudsman?
Granfondo said:
Why are people fixating on the length of time the OP has had the car?
The system did not work from day one but was told it would be fixed and numerous phones which should pair up also don't work and it has been the manufacturers dithering and incompetence that has led to the 2 years!
P.S. The problem is that if you want to reject it you will have to give them the car back and go through the legal system fighting a manufacturer for the next few years without a car!
Sell it and move on life's to short!
Indeed. The system did not work from day one but was told it would be fixed and numerous phones which should pair up also don't work and it has been the manufacturers dithering and incompetence that has led to the 2 years!
P.S. The problem is that if you want to reject it you will have to give them the car back and go through the legal system fighting a manufacturer for the next few years without a car!
Sell it and move on life's to short!
2 years use does not indicate complete acceptance if every month you are complaining about it and asking for case updates.
Its really become a matter of principle. If it were my car I would just pay for the accessory to be fitted.
However the purchaser paid for a car with integrated navigation and should be supplied one. The manufacturer could fit the accessory system probably at a cost to them of a couple hundred, but has chosen not to.
Monkeylegend said:
What would you expect to get from the manufacturer if they did allow you to reject?
You have had 2 years use and 2 years depreciation, you surely can't be expecting to get back what you paid or near that?
Or are you?
I dunno. I once had a TV that the hdmi input broke on after 2 years. The tuner still worked.You have had 2 years use and 2 years depreciation, you surely can't be expecting to get back what you paid or near that?
Or are you?
The supplier sent me a new TV.
Is the law different because of the cost of a car vs the cost of a TV?
Or because it worked for 2 years and then broke, rather than not working from the start?
Some Gump said:
If the car is still at delivery mileage, you're right.
I suspect not though.
Also, OP is talking in both the 1st and 3rd person. IMO probable loon.
I took the car for the service as the purchaser was too ill to take it, thats how I got embroiled in taking up the case.I suspect not though.
Also, OP is talking in both the 1st and 3rd person. IMO probable loon.
Yes, I agree I am a loon for taking it up.
the car has maybe 7000 miles on it.
Edited by was8v on Tuesday 11th July 22:53
Vaud said:
Is the difference Primary function? The cars primary function is to allow you to drive from a to b? The TV is to watch something from various inputs.
Well I bought the TV to watch TV not a blu ray player. They still fixed it.In this case when the purchaser bought the car, a primary deciding factor that swung it to that car was the amazing navigation provided by google maps via smartphone. To them it is a major safety feature - allowing them to concentrate on driving rather than navigating. And it had to be integrated, nobody likes trailing wires or worrying if the stick on unit will get nicked.
So yes the navigation is a primary function of the car to them.
DaGuv said:
Get an iPhone, that will work.
No iPhone is on the compatibility list.It's not me that's trying to connect the phones, it's the manufacturer's own trained technicians.
It's the very absence of a key feature that was a major selling point (integrated nav) that is the problem.
Yes the cost paid for the option back would be ok. The purchaser specifically paid extra for a higher trim level to get this feature.
OverSteery said:
You need to show that the car isn't fit for purpose. Surely the very fact that you have used it for 2 years would suggest that it IS fit for purpose.
You may have a breach of contract with the dealer, but you said he has made a reasonable offer to fit an after market device. that would cover his obligations, I would think
Life is so terribly cruel, but I really would move one.
The integrated nav accessory was not at "reasonable cost", it was almost 10% of the whole purchase price of the vehicle. A tom tom type sat nav was offered FOC, but is not an acceptable solution. You may have a breach of contract with the dealer, but you said he has made a reasonable offer to fit an after market device. that would cover his obligations, I would think
Life is so terribly cruel, but I really would move one.
If your FM radio was not working, would you accept a "warranty" fix that involved screwing a kitchen radio to your dash?
Edited by was8v on Wednesday 12th July 08:57
OverSteery said:
You need to show that the car isn't fit for purpose. Surely the very fact that you have used it for 2 years would suggest that it IS fit for purpose.
Hmmm.The integrated nav hasn't been used at all because its never worked.
That part alone is not fit for purpose.
The owner believed the dealer when they kept saying "we are having some problems, there is a software fix coming".
I told them to stop with the BS and thats when the took the car in 3 weeks ago, themselves tested it and then admitted the system is not fit for purpose - they are now refusing to do anything about it.
daniel1920 said:
There are 2 different issues here;
1) Owners phone isn't compatible
2) Compatible phones cannot connect to car.
Is #2 what the car is in the garage for at the moment? 2 years old so I assume a warranty, don't accept car back until #2 is sorted, then upgrade phone. See if they will contribute towards the price of a compatible one, even indirectly through free services.
Without writing that the dealer promised #1 it has no hope of going anywhere I would think
yes, #2 is what the car is in for.1) Owners phone isn't compatible
2) Compatible phones cannot connect to car.
Is #2 what the car is in the garage for at the moment? 2 years old so I assume a warranty, don't accept car back until #2 is sorted, then upgrade phone. See if they will contribute towards the price of a compatible one, even indirectly through free services.
Without writing that the dealer promised #1 it has no hope of going anywhere I would think
They have rung me every day for the last 4 or 5 asking for their courtesy car back.
I simply say: "not until you either a) fix the car so it is demonstrated working with phones on the compatibility list" (even though no such list existed at purchase and they know that) or b) provide some other integrated navigation solution"
They then mumble about that not being possible, and then say they will go and speak to someone more senior.
I know for a fact the cost price the dealer would pay for the accessory integrated nav is £250, because they let it slip. The manufacturer offered me this for close to 10% of vehicle cost.
TooMany2cvs said:
The integrated nav doesn't work AT ALL? Or one part of it - the mobile phone connection?
Without the phone, it has zero functionality - nav or anything else - at all?
Without the phone the only function of the screen is a radio/cd/mp3 player.Without the phone, it has zero functionality - nav or anything else - at all?
Edited by TooMany2cvs on Wednesday 12th July 09:12
Monkeylegend said:
So what would the couple accept as a rejection offer, you/they seem very vague on this.
Are they expecting a new car, trade price for their car, a full refund, a like for like replacement with a system that works?
They/you must have an idea of what you are hoping for to resolve to your satisfaction.
The purchaser wants THEIR car with integrated nav which is what they originally walked into the showroom and asked for.Are they expecting a new car, trade price for their car, a full refund, a like for like replacement with a system that works?
They/you must have an idea of what you are hoping for to resolve to your satisfaction.
A like for like with a system that works would be acceptable.
They do not particularly want to reject the car as otherwise its great.
They do not expect any "betterment"
Edited by was8v on Wednesday 12th July 09:20
Edited by was8v on Wednesday 12th July 09:21
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff