Good Afternoon,

Looking for a bit of advice.

I bought a new car in July last year.

It stutters and hesitates and can be quite dangerous when overtaking

never knowing when your going to loose power.

Fault is intermittent.

After 3 months placed into approved dealer.

They looked at it for about 5 minutes, never found fault (of course).

Just before the 6 month mark I complained to the finance company and informed them I sought remedy of the fault.

(Pretty much the exact words. I never said I wanted it Repaired or Replaced but 'sought remedy)

Finance company contacted the garage I went to 3 months previous and on this information closed down my complaint because on the basis of that visit deemed there was no fault with the vehicle.

They also stated their point of sale liability had expired which it had not because the contract was still under 6 months old.

Their conclusion was that I now get the fault repaired under the terms of my warranty.

I gave them an opportunity to review their position.

They maintained it and stated that this response formed their final response on my complaint.

I rejected the vehicle and raised a court action to enforce this.

Finance company are stating that the court action was raised prematurely and they were not given an opportunity to repair or replace the vehicle (under the 2015 act).

My argument however is that I did.

I sought remedy of the fault and they completely shutdown my complaint pushing the liability for getting it repaired on to me.

before I go on too much, thoughts?

Should the Finance Company have offered to have the car checked and attempt to repair the fault?

I think I am trying to work out the following.

Is the onus on me to find the fault or is the onus on the Finance Company as the trader (under the 2015act) to attempt to find and repair the fault when a complaint is raised?

Thanks

under the CRA act its their problem to investigate the faults FOC

under the CRA act its their problem to investigate the faults FOC

Which is what I would have thought too but it does not really say that in the CRA 2015. The most relevant section I can see is 23(2) as below.

(2)If the consumer requires the trader to repair or replace the goods, the trader must—

(a)do so within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer, and

(b)bear any necessary costs incurred in doing so (including in particular the cost of any labour, materials or postage).

This places a burden on the trader to repair it but not to investigate any complaint of a fault themselves. In my case they took a garages word from 3 months previous that they could not find a fault (that I stated in my complaint was intermittent) and used this to close down my complaint.

See what I mean?

well that's their problem.

bottom line is under 6mts is for the retailer to investigate it FOC

outside of 6mts

you have to pay for an independent report which get refunded later.

I think you case is very good here

who are the fleecers?

Finance company in their first letter to my complaint said their point of sale liability had expired because it was over 6 months.

I reminded the of the maths (I was about 2 weeks under the 6 month period) and offered a chance to change their position which they refused.

They stated in the reply that any repairs required were now mine to carry out under the terms of the warranty.

I see it as a big cop out and they just wanted to make sure any fault found was after the 6 month mark as I was only about 2 weeks away from that.

It is GMAC I have raised an action against in court.

nothing to do with any warranty expiry

that's in addition to your rights under CRA does not replace them.

I completely agree. My concern just is that I never specifically requested a repair/replacement,. I never stated that under S23 of the CRA 2015 I demand a repair or replacement of vehicle XXXXX etc..... What I did do was raise a complaint stating all the symptoms, that it was intermittent and that I had previously tried to have it repaired by my closest approved dealership.

To me that is enough to raise the issue to the trader (GMAC) who then are obliged to investigate and attempt a repair of the vehicle. To do this I would expect GMAC to arrange someone to inspect the vehicle on THEIR behalf and report from there.

its not for you to poke whoever with the correct legislation IMHO

they are a worldwide trader and should know their responsibilities inside out.

and ofcourse the seller was an approved dealership too and par chance happened to use GMAC finances how strange....

you weer sold a pup on expensive finance

its theirs totally until your last payment

you wouldn't go and hire a taxi that broke down 10miles into a 100mls journey and be asked to pay the full fare

neither should you on a HP car.

dx

I'm not an expert by any means but I've spent a lot of hours on a similar question.

I would suggest you buy The Consumer Survival Handbook (Ebook) advertised above and also the Pearl & Goodman book usually advertised left - make sure you get the latest edition ( mine was 2008!).

I expect that you will soon meet Lawgisitics a solicitors firm which will try to bully you. Be careful if they ask you to return the vehicle because it's a ploy to prevent you recovering your money. They will say that you have "deemed to have it repaired."

They are dreadful bullies against consumers and usually win and brag about it on the Internet. Don't give in to them but be polite or a judge won't like it.

I'm off to court soon with my retailer and Lawgistics have disappeared. Look them up - they're all over the Internet bragging.

Good luck!

Sorry! I mistyped Lawgistics. Try Googling them - they brag all over about how they've saved garages.

nothing to do with this case though this is gmac maindealer not a back street cowboy reseller

Agreed but a lot of folks read this site and it's worth warning them.

If you reported the fault and they did nothing about it, I wonder if the six month repair or replacement window kicks into "waiting time" like with the 30 day rejection period?