Faulty Car - Right to Reject

[Shrub]

I bought an ex demo 2017 Peugeot 5008 with about 7000 miles on the clock from a Peugeot dealer. In general I haven’t been too impressed with it, especially the mileage claims (another story entirely). Within two weeks of ownership I have noticed a fault with the massage seat. It is glitchy, doesn’t stay on, sometimes won’t come on and subsequently freezes the touchscreen. The controls become unresponsive. Under the consumer rights act 2015 do I have the right to reject the car and expect a full refund?

Edited by Shrub on Saturday 21st July 10:29

[Shrub]

I have emailed them to make them aware of the faults. No response as yet. What I’m asking though is, do I have to give them a chance or can I ask to reject straight away?

[Shrub]

With regard to repair, is that the case within the first 30 days? My research so far has made me think that that may be the case after 30 days and in the first 6 months. I’m unclear, hence posting the question here.

[Shrub]

I am very much trying to find grounds to reject. To say I am disappointed is an understatement.

[Shrub]

Haha. My back is fine. The car however isn’t. What would you do?

[Shrub]

Yes I have changed my mind about it. It’s broken after two weeks.

[Shrub]

Asking the question here is part of my research. It is difficult though when the thread quickly becomes mildly abusive. There are no official bodies I can speak to as it’s the weekend and of course I will do come Monday, but in the meantime if anyone has a definitive answer I would be very greatful.

[Shrub]

Ok. Thank you for clearing that up.

[Shrub]

Toomany2cvs thank you for taking the time to detail the procedure. Very much appreciated.

[Shrub]

TooMany2cvs said:

He's within the first 30 days, so there is a right to rejection. It's only after the 30 days that they have a right to repair. But it's still subject to whether a mildly temperamental and warranty-covered technowk frippery renders the entire used car "unfit for purpose" or not.

Edited by TooMany2cvs on Saturday 21st July 11:37

As far as I can gather the CSA 2015 is a little broader than "unfit for purpose" and states that items must be "free from minor defects" and also that if any fault at all develops within 30 days there is a right to reject.

Unsurprisingly I do find it quite hard to believe that I could reject a car based on a faulty seat and a potentially minor or major electrical problem. Maybe I'm naive. Maybe I should expect more as a consumer.

I guess that a chat with Citizens Advice etc on Monday will quickly clear up my concerns once and for all. There seem to be mixed opinions here which is kind of where I've already ended up.

And for those who offered less useful advice, I already have the car up for sale due to being deeply disappointed with it. Problem is how do I sell a car that now has a broken seat and could potentially be off the road for a while if it were to go for repair. Meanwhile I suck up monthly repayments...

Out of interest I will keep this thread updated with the progress of this issue. Definitive answers are a good thing.

[Shrub]

Willy Nilly said:

This issue is hardly a show stopper as far as the car goes, unless you massage seats that you probably won't use after about a month when the novelty wears off leaves you stranded on the side of the motorway

This is the concern! Is this a sign of bigger problems to come?

[Shrub]

Street2408 said:

————-//

“Potentially off the road for a while”

Haha, this made me laugh... from experience the car will likely be diagnosed within a day, more than likely a loose connector of some sort or faulty massage pad. Parts can the be ordered and fitted so will be 2 days of work in either one visit or two, you can ask for a loan car whilst yours is off the road so you can’t use the excuse of “suck up the monthly repayments” as hardship.

Yeah I know how repairs work. I’ve had a few crap cars in my time. On top of that, the dealer is a 140 mile round trip from me. All that aside though, no one knows anything about the underlying potential issues here, or in fact anything about the car as a whole. If we could stick to the original question it would be really helpful.

[Shrub]

BenRichards89 said:

I think we all make mistakes with car purchases some times. I certainly have done. I'm ashamed to admit I bought one of the new chinese MGs, and MG3, and within a few months I hated the bloody thing.

You're just going to have to suck it up I think. Get the seat fault done on the warranty, and sell the car privately to pay the finance off. End of the day, as a car, and the main function you use a car for, it's entirely fit for purpose.

Thanks for weighing in. What makes you think that this will be the case?

[Shrub]

Evolved said:

You don’t learn then it seems, at least you’re consistent.

You seem quite hostile or am I reading this wrong? But that’s ok. I am looking for help, not put downs.

[Shrub]

BenRichards89 said:

If the main function of the whole product was to be a massage chair, then you would be reasonable in saying its not fit for purpose.

Hah. That genuinely made me laugh. The term fit for purpose though - is that really all that applies?

What is emerging from the responses here, and on other forums that I am asking this question, is that most folks seem to be siding with the dealer/manufacturer. I can certainly see why and of course the seat (and the mpg complaint that I started on another thread) are things that I could just accept, get repaired and live with.

But my concern here is with the broader picture and my rights as a consumer. I have a product that I am well within my rights to be unhappy with. Why do you good people think otherwise? Why should I be happy with a faulty car? Why should I accept that? What makes you guys, who if you put yourselves in a similar situation, think you would roll over and just live with a faulty car.

Anyway, the original post was more of question that I hoped to get a black and white response to. Seems there may be a grey area but - still to be decided I think.

[Shrub]

SteBrown91 said:

What underlying issue? It’s just going to be either a motor in the seat, a software issue with the main headunit/air con controls or a hardware fault with the module.

Because you have a faulty seat doesn’t mean it’s going break down. Just accept the car is fine and you just have buyers remorse.

Regarding the mpg issue it’s a heavy car with a low powered engine. It’s neber going to get mega mpg. I had a fiesta with the previous version of that engine and it only did low 50s normally and that car was much lighter

One other thing that is re-emerging here is people speculating about what's wrong with the car. None of us know what's wrong with it. It could be a simple connector loose or it it could mean I'm going to have to eject the warp core soon. That isn't the reason for this thread. The original question was about the right to reject.

Of course I have buyers remorse - wouldn't you?

I really can't get in to the MPG thing again It's mental that we just accept it and roll our eyes heavenward.

[Shrub]

BenRichards89 said:

Of course you are quite within your rights to feel whatever you like about your car. However, apart from the seat, which should be easily rectified under warranty, that is after all what a warranty is for, define how exactly the vehicle is faulty?

Edited by BenRichards89 on Saturday 21st July 16:50

I think this goes well beyond how I feel about the car. It's about my rights as a consumer.

[Shrub]

Alucidnation said:

Take the fking thing back then.

You'll soon find out when you get there.

Here, will you come with me. I could do with someone like you to help convince them. "Here mate this things fked, fk you lot you bunch of s".

[Shrub]

Noted. Thank you.

[Shrub]

to3m said:

You're quite right about the right to reject, and the details of doing that - I disagree they're taking the piss, though! It's stated clearly enough that when the massage seat fks up, the touchscreen stuff stops working too. That actually sounds a bit more serious... at least, certainly sounds to me like the sort of problem that you shouldn't expect from a 7000 mile car, let alone one you bought from a dealer, and especially not something that makes itself apparent in the first 30 days.

If this dealer is in the habit of buying cheap tat, selling it at a premium, and hoping that nothing goes wrong quickly, they need to get better at their job...

I'm always surprised by these occasional car rejection threads. Huge numbers of miseryguts always come out of the woodwork to say that OP should bend over and take the punishment. This even though the whole point of buying from a dealer, and paying the premium, is that you want to buy a car that isn't going to have any significant issues given the price and age! - and you want some comeback if any such issues do appear. The purpose of the consumer rights act stuff is to motivate professional (?) vendors to sell products that don't straight away go pop, since they're no longer allowed to wash their hands of them quite so quickly as might previously have been the case.

Edited by to3m on Sunday 22 July 01:01

My Hero. Thank you.