Volvo used car warranty

[cleethorpes1972]

Could someone give me some advice as to what steps I need to take. Details of my situation are in the letter below ..




For the attention of :
xxxxxxxxxxx

21 February 2008

Volvo V70 xxxxxxxxx ‘ the vehicle ‘

Supply of Goods ( Implied Terms ) Act 1973
Sale of Goods Act 1994

I write further to my conversation in respect of the Warranty on the above vehicle purchased on 6 January 2008. The car purchase included a 1 year / 20,000 mile warranty whichever came soonest.

At the time of purchase xxxxxxxxx Motors were fully aware that the vehicle was to be used as a private hire car. My trade in vehicle namely Skoda Octavia xxxxxxxxxxxxxx was xxxxxxxxxxxx plated at the time of appraisal and also had the associated radio and taxi meter fitted. Since the purchase date I have taken the vehicle to xxxxxxx Motors on several occasions (the vehicle is xxxxxxxxxxx council plated, and also has a taxi radio and meter fitted) for remedial work to be carried out and this was completed on those occasions.

An issue arose when I first attempted to use the ‘ Cruise Control ‘ feature, as detailed in the sale particulars, and returned the vehicle to xxxxxxx Motors Ltd who agreed that a diagnostic fault was present indicating that the cruise control brake light switch was faulty. Also at this time I advised of my concerns as the car ‘ wandered ‘ on the motorway at cruising speed and xxxxxxxxx Motors arranged for the cars alignment to be checked at xxxxx Tyres xxxxx at their expense. This alignment check confirmed that the front offside wheel was outside the acceptable parameters. xxxx tyres were unable to adjust the alignment due to a badly corroded and seized track rod and the car was returned to xxxxxxxxxx Motors Ltd.

My conversation today with xxxxxxxx Motors Service department concluded with me being informed that my car ‘ did not ‘ have a warranty, contrary to the description at the point of sale that it was being supplied with a 1 year / 20,000 mile warranty. I was informed that the warranty did cover the brake light switch but did not cover the track rod as this is classed as a wear and tear item. I was quoted a price of over £120.00 for the switch and over £220.00 for replacement of the track rod arm.

As these faults were present at the time of purchase the car was ‘not of satisfactory quality‘ under the Sale of Goods Act 1994.

I conclude that both the Supply of Goods ( Implied Terms ) Act 1973 and the Sale of Goods Act 1994 contracts have been breached in respect of my purchase of the vehicle and as such I shall be pursuing full retribution.

All future finance payments in respect of the vehicle will be made under protest.


Is this letter ok, or did I miss anything out?

[Struggling_Simon]

Seems fine to me, but I'm not an expert, I'm sure others on here will advise you in due course.

[cleethorpes1972]

I was thinking maybe ' Retribution ' might be a bit strong.. but I do think it sounds impressive ! .

There was a point I read somewhere that mentiones that within six months or purchase the dealer has to prove the item was not defective, which I imagine is very hard to do, so the onus is all on them not me. I think the best route is to leave that argument until I recive a reply to this letter, If I recive a reply that is.

Should I put a time limit for reply in ??

[ReasonableRon]

Couple of questions.

1. Is the warranty listed as a separate item of the sales invoice and if so have you been charged anything for it.
2. Are you saying that the warranty will not cover the car because it is being used as a private hire car?
3. If both of the above are true then you have clearly been mis-sold the warranty and the premium should be refunded.
4. If you have actually been given a dealer 'guarantee' (which is different to a 3rd party warranty) then there should be no such excuse not to cover the car.
5. Regardless of the vehicle use if the problems were clearly there at the time of sale then the dealer should fix them - invoke the SOGA.
6. I can't see the point in telling the dealer that you will be making the finance payments 'under protest' - I doubt they give a to$$ whether you pay the finance company or not

[cleethorpes1972]

The car as far as I was aware came with a volvo approved used car warranty - at no aditional charge, and this was the only reason I purchased from a main dealer. I could have bought the same car at an independent for easily £1000 less. The dealer arranged the finance through black horse and trading standards informed me that as such I have really purchased the car from the finance company and so I need to make it clear I am not happy with my ' under protest ' comment. Don't get me wrong, I love the car, and up to this point the dealer service has been superb.

The warranty company do not cover taxi's or private hire vehicles.

The problem is they use a third party for the warranty, and the dealer obviously did not know the car would not be covered, I do not see why I should now face all the costs.

[Helford]

Hi,

The Dealer has 'sold' a warranty regardless of whether money changes hands or not.

A warranty is an insurance contract and as such is governed by the FSA rules. The dealer is either FSA regulated themselves or the warranty company takes responsibility for the dealers actions if they sell only one type of warranty. You should have been issued with a warranty 'Key Facts' document when you bought the vehicle which should have shown cover is not operative for private hire vehicles. It seems that the dealer did not know the relevant exclusions of the contract that they were selling. This is a very similar scenario to the mis-selling of PPI insurance. A formal complaint appears to be called for.

H

[cleethorpes1972]

I may well add a section in respect of the FSA involvement. At no point was I told the warranty was a third party provider, and I didn't recieve any documents in that respect. This is assuming that the service dept has told me the correct info as the volvo website does not refer to any third party cover.

WHY WHY WHY would I but from a dealer at their inflated price for any other reason than the warranty and dealer facilities?