2nd Hand Car Problems

[GrassMuncher]

Hi,

Bought a car which has had several problems:
1) Radio satellite not working.
2) Climate control display not functional.
3) Snapped Aerial.
4) Asked for wheel balancing (car gets noisy above 50mph).
5) Missing bush from shock absorber.
6) Duff EGR valve (could not drive home properly).
7) Leak from bottom gasket (oil stains on drive).

All issues were noted within first two weeks of owning car.

Dealer rectified issue 5 by replacing shock absorber ("For your own piece of mind....".

However, wheel arch lining has been cut to get at top shock absorber bolt and now the other shock absorber is leaking. Presumably this is a result of the dealer not replacing both shock absorbers at the same time.

Dealer is adamant that he has not cut the wheelarch liner but there is no other reason for the cuts being there other than getting at the top bolt!!

I gather that the sale of goods act applies in this case as the wheel arch state is such that it would not occur with fair ware and tear on a second hand car. The wheel arch has two parallel cuts and a piece of liner missing.

As the second shock absorber is now dying as a result of his botched fix am I right in assuming that both issues have to be rectified at his expense under the sale of goods act??

What's the situation with the warranty he took out with a warranty company...?

Finally, if he gets grumpy, what do I do?

I've already had two visits to his garage to rectify faults and on the second visit came back with an extra fault provided by his good self.

Suggestions would be appreciated as I am working on a timescale. I am a farmer and if things are not resolved by Mid April I will have to get the faults rectified at my own expense.

Grass Muncher

[Conniff]

Hi Muncher

I think your priority is No6.

The top mount for shockers is usually on the wing top in the boot, I can't see any reason to cut the arch liner for that.

I think you should give him the list and ask that they are all taken care of or you will reject the car under the sale of goods act and have your money back.

I've just re-read, you don't actually say the rear, but the front shouldn't require cutting for removal either.

Replacing only one shocker wont cause the other to start leaking. It is always prudence to change both sides at the same time, they will have both done the same mileage so if one goes the other probably wont be far behind.

[GrassMuncher]

Conniff,

Thanks for your very promt reply!

Sorry.. got it wrong, it was the Mass Air Flow sensor that was replaced not the EGR valve.

I need to think about getting the EGR valve cleaned but this is a wear and tear issue rather than a point of sale problem.

The only issues that need rectifying at the moment are the wheel arch liner, bottom gasket leak and shock absorber leak.

>Replacing only one shocker wont cause the other to start leaking. It is always prudence to change both sides at the same time, they will have both done the same mileage so if one goes the other probably wont be far behind.

With the shock absorber I was told that Renault had changed their design and shock absorbers no longer came with bushes. In fact Renault still manufature shock absorbers with bushes. The reason my shock absorber got changed was that Renault do not supply bushes without shock absorbers and I was provided with an after market shock absorber of a different type to the Renault shock absorber as it was cheaper.

The aftermarket (new) shock absorber has a different diameter (1cm smaller) to the Renault shock absorber. As the Renault shock absorber has a larger cross sectional area than the new one it is probably getting worked harder than before. The car has only done 64,000 miles so it is more than likely that the new shock absorber has lead to early failure of the other.

The replaced shock absorber was not replaced because it was failing but had a missing bush. As I need to go off road and tow when I've got a towhitch fitted the car is not currently fit for use.

Do you think I've got a strong case..??

Muncher.

[Ragdog]

If I was in your position, I would be looking for a refund. Cars that have a list of problems like that tend to be trouble.

[WizardWheels]

Hi Muncher

You don't say how long you've had the car or how old it is or how many miles it has covered as this could be relavent when relying on SOGA.

In any case if you've had the car less than a month then I would be taking it back with the complete list of problems. If the car returns with some problems unrectified or even new ones inflicted by the garage then I would be pressing the dealer for a refund.

[GrassMuncher]

Ho Hum,

Car was at 63,000 miles, car now at 64,440 miles. Have had car for <7 weeks.

No reply from garage about issues raised so now have had Renault main dealership look over car and found that vehicle needs:

New Propshaft.
New driveshaft.
Sump and End plate engine leak.
Power stearing leak.
Gearbox leak.

Total price (dealership..) for fix £2,800.

Have got documentation about other issues. Namely statement from garage about tape being wrapped around bottom shock absorber bush after MOT passed.

Obviously things to go wrong with second hand cars but not I believe to the point that all the above need rectifying at once!

Have sent letter to garage giving 14 day for repair, replacement or refund.

Have I got a good case if it goes to court??

Ta,

Muncher

[Conniff]

What vehicle is this muncher ?

Three oil leaks! It's an offence to foul the highway so the car is not roadworthy.

[GrassMuncher]

Renault Megan Scenic RX4 (Y Reg)

[Hammy1962]

Originally Posted by Conniff

What vehicle is this muncher ?

Three oil leaks! It's an offence to foul the highway so the car is not roadworthy.

Nice one Conniff, I've heard many excuses from people trying to descibe unroadworthyness.

But never that one.

Hammy

[Conniff]

I haven't either Hammy, it came to me as I was reading and must surely have some standing.

And if it is dropping oil on land, especially agricultural land then it will probably come under the
Environmental Protection Act 1990 (c. 43) as well.

[Hammy1962]

And if it does, and some beaureacratically insane public servant successfully obtains a prosecution then God help us all.

Hammy

[GrassMuncher]

Anyone any ideas where I stand (other than wrapping the engine in a large nappy to stop fouling the road!) ...??

[Hammy1962]

GrassMuncher. Go back to the dealer and accuse them of breaching the enviromental protecttion act. Post their response here.

Conniff. You need to get out more.

Hammy

[WizardWheels]

you have automatic 30 day warranty with dealer during which time you can initiate a complaint direct to the dealer you bought it from.

It doesn't matter if the complaint isn't resolved in that time as long as you started the complaint within 30 days, (unless you have extended warranty, then the extended terms apply)

If a further warranty was taken out then any complaint instigated after 30 days would be taken up by the warranty company. You would have to contact them. Presumably you will have their details if you have a warranty.

Under these conditions I'd say you had a good chance in court.

---------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm. This is what the writer would do in the contemplated circumstances. It is placed freely in the public domain on the basis that if it is used no liability of any kind attaches to the writer and/or the publisher. Any person relying on this information does so entirely at their own risk.

[GrassMuncher]

Hi,

Nothing written down I'm afraid. Although I did get the tracking sorted out at the local garage. They did the wheels on the 14/02/2008 and the 15/02/2008 which is less than 4 weeks after purchase.

Thinking about it the garage said absolutely nothing about the vibration other than they had balanced the wheels. Only the front wheels got weights fitted.

They told me the oil leak came from the pulley seals and had used "Conditioner" (such stuff really exists!) to help sort out the leak.

Guess they were hoping that the conditioner would cure all the engine oil leak problems....

[GrassMuncher]

Had car RAC inspected.

Amongst other things there was no evidence of anti freeze .. was stated by dealer as being present.

[gwc1000]

Originally Posted by GrassMuncher

No reply from garage about issues raised so now have had Renault main dealership look over car and found that vehicle needs:

New Propshaft.
New driveshaft.
Sump and End plate engine leak.
Power stearing leak.
Gearbox leak.

Total price (dealership..) for fix £2,800.

Er, new propshaft and driveshaft? That doesn't make sense to me, or am I missing something? I thought these Renaults were FWD

[GrassMuncher]

The propshaft goes to the rear differential. The driveshaft is I think from a differential to a wheel.

[gwc1000]

But my point is that these Renaults are FWD. There is no diff to the rear, it's up the front. Drive to the front wheels is through a driveshaft, one on each side at the front. As far as I am aware there is no prop