I messed up.

[Boydie88]

Needed a second car, found a nice looking Giulietta from a used car dealership, the first time I could see it was at night and in the pissing rain so I didn't get down on the floor to have a proper look - unfortunately let the previous good reviews of the place and first impressions of the guys swing me. All seemed well, drove very nicely, no warning signs any where so I bought it. In hindsight, a terrible decision, should have gone back in the day.

A week later I've manged to get the car off the ground and to my horror discovered the car has been in a small crash, hitting a very small post perhaps as the radiator and the bumper beam are bent. Things I probably should have spotted when looking around the car, but with it being a car dealer I stupidly believed they had some sort of responsibility to provide straight cars.

They say they have serviced the car (inc stamp in the book), which would mean they will have seen the damage yet there was no mention of it at all.
Apart from the slating I deserve from here, would a damaged crash beam constitute not "fit for purpose" or will these be classed as damage a buyer should have spotted.

Thanks for any help.

[Boydie88]

Alfa Workshop, are local to me so I'll be heading there for an 'engineers report' to see if there's anything else this bump has caused before contacting the trade seller. Though part of me feels I should email them before so they can't say it was Alfa Workshop that did the damage.

[Boydie88]

warch said:

Sounds like fairly minor damage to me, I don't think I'd worry overmuch if it was me.

I'll get a picture up tomorrow, but it's quite a whack to the radiator, amazed it isn't leaking.

I'd like to think they didn't know, but they'd have to have taken off the broken under tray to drain the oil from what I've read.

It doesn't look like the dent in the bumper beam has caused any damage to the crash beams it's connected to at least.

[Boydie88]

My thoughts too, unfortunately. It is a diesel.

[Boydie88]

I found this on the AA site:

Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations
Dealers must also comply with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (2008), which prohibit them from engaging in unfair business practices:

1. Giving false information – either verbally, visually or in writing, for example misrepresenting the vehicle's specification or history at any time before, during or after the transaction.
2. Giving insufficient information – leaving out or hiding important information for example not disclosing the existence and results of all checks carried out on the vehicle's mechanical condition, history and mileage or failing to draw your attention to the key elements of any warranty, eg what's covered, claim limits and conditions to be followed.
3. Acting aggressively for example using high pressure selling techniques to sell a vehicle or associated finance or warranty.
4. Failing to act in accordance with reasonable expectations of what's acceptable.
5. 31 specific practices are banned outright including: falsely claiming to be a signatory to a Code of Practice; falsely claiming to be approved, endorsed or authorised by a public or private body; falsely stating that a vehicle will only be available for a very limited time in order to elicit an immediate decision to buy.

I feel like 2 was broken which supports what sheepshanks said.

Had another look this morning and it appears its a radiator in front of the main radiator that has been damaged, possibly the inter cooler? (it's a 2.0 jtdm). Though with this being my first Turbo car, I don't know much.

[Boydie88]

Could well be the aircon rad.

Here's a picture of the damage.

|https://thumbsnap.com/NWbCV2gu[/url]

The reason you can see into the area is because half of the front under tray is missing. It's this under tray that fixes to the fixings on the car and those on the rear under tray, so that tray must be flapping around as I drive.[url]

Edited by Boydie88 on Sunday 14th January 20:16

[Boydie88]

timrud said:

How can the dealer be sure you didn't do the damage?

That's the defense I suspect they'll use. But to do the damage that has been done it would have had to go through the front bumper. Going by a bit of peeling it appears the front bumper has been resprayed at some point.

But is the rejection a possibility? I can't find any British law regarding finding accident damage on a trade sold car.

I'm hoping an Alfa Works report shows that off to be the only damage as a result of whatever was hit.

[Boydie88]

ColinM50 said:

I'm going to be a bit provocative here and say I think, and hope, you haven't got a leg to stand on.

You had a look at the car but couldn't be bothered to look under it? Then you drove it for a week before having a look and all of a sudden found what you claim is major damage? Hidden by the dealer? And now you want a full refund? Hmm, do the words caveat emptor mean anything to you?

If I were the seller I'd deny all liability and put the ball back firmly in your court. There's no proof that you didn't drive over this post you seem to know so much about eh? I reckon you're trying it on and I really do hope the dealer tells you to foff

Don't want full refund at all. Would love for it to be straight, it's a great car aside from finding damage.

To my understanding of the law, it is down to the seller to prove the fault wasn't there.

[Boydie88]

Joeguard1990 said:

Boydie88 said:

Don't want full refund at all. Would love for it to be straight, it's a great car aside from finding damage.

To my understanding of the law, it is down to the seller to prove the fault wasn't there.

Not sure where you got that info from?

If I sold you a car and a week later you phoned me up and noticed a bit of damage, I would tell you to sling your hook!

That's the difference between a private purchase and one from a trade.

https://www.theaa.com/car-buying/legal-rights

[Boydie88]

snotrag said:

Yep, thats an intercooler.

Thanks.

[Boydie88]

Red 4 said:

It's damage - difficult to prove when it happened.

You had the car for a week - the law won't be with you on this one.

Is that not the same as anything mechanical that goes wrong in the first 3 months?

[Boydie88]

Red 4 said:

Boydie88 said:

Red 4 said:

It's damage - difficult to prove when it happened.

You had the car for a week - the law won't be with you on this one.

Is that not the same as anything mechanical that goes wrong in the first 3 months?

No.

It's physical damage that appears to have been caused by driving over/ hitting something.

Don't go back to the dealer with all guns blazing and quoting the law/ your rights.

Keep him on-side. You want him to put it right/ give you a contribution.

It's easy for the dealer to say you caused the damage in the week you've had the car- I'm not saying you did, btw.

No intention of the all guns blazing approach. Just trying to work out what the fairest result is here and what info to present to them.

It's that that I'm trying to work out how to address if that is the defense they go with.

[Boydie88]

sgtBerbatov said:

I know it's an Italian car, but there's rust on that impact damage.

It wouldn't rust in a week.

The beam behind the rad? That's rust.

[Boydie88]

Managed to get it booked in this week with Alfa Workshop, hopefully they'll be able to age it older than 2 weeks and see if there's anything else that should have set alarm bells off on the car.

[Boydie88]

esxste said:

Boydie88 said:

Managed to get it booked in this week with Alfa Workshop, hopefully they'll be able to age it older than 2 weeks and see if there's anything else that should have set alarm bells off on the car.

Be aware that the CRA requires that you give the dealer the first opportunity to fix.

Have you actually spoken to the dealer yet about this issue?

It's booked in for a report but not any work. I wasn't going to approach them until I knew the full extent in case there's more that my eyes can't see but I guess it's best to let them know where I stand. Thanks.

esxste said:

Understand your rights, "sold as seen" only applies to private sales between individuals.

Edited by esxste on Monday 15th January 15:42

That's the part I'm trying to get my head around regarding mechanical damage as I can't see anything that determines whether this is a 'fault'.

Edited by Boydie88 on Monday 15th January 15:49

[Boydie88]

Been away a bit but I did get in contact with them.

They're saying as they believe it is all cosmetic they don't have any responsibility.

carinaman said:

I hope you get it resolved. I've bought lemons when I should've known better. You're not the first nor the last to do it. It doesn't mean the rest of the car isn't sound.

Hoping that is the case. They sounded surprised at the damage, then they had only had it in one day so could well have missed it.

Roll on the Alfa Works report.

Edited by Boydie88 on Wednesday 17th January 12:56

[Boydie88]

xstian said:

No mention of the age of the car?

I'm not sure why you're not speaking to the dealer here? I'd want a leak down test done to make sure the intercooler isn't leaking and get the tray fitted properly. If it wasn't leaking, I don't think I would expect them to replace it (although personally it would be annoying).

On a side note, the inspection with Alfa Workshop might have gone a long way to buying a new intercooler, the dealer might have fitted that free as a good will gesture. It sounds like you maybe hoping they find something so you can reject it.

It's a 2011, 90000 mile, 2.0 jtdm.

I don't want to reject it. The dealer say it looks like only cosmetic so won't have anything to do with it. Sort of sounded like he'd source a used intercooler if it is shown to be leaking when I mentioned I doubt the warranty would pay out for a turbo with the intercooler in the state it is.

Edited by Boydie88 on Thursday 18th January 09:48