The issue here is a measurable attribute of the car. OP says it pulls/drift. Dealer checks steering geometry but has not checked the attribute prior to this as they ASSUME it's tracking as do a lot of contributors to this posting. This is a very subjective issue and as I point out is not a case for rejection. The car needs setting up as per the specifications detailed and then measured against the attribute given. Some customers are more sensitive to the issue than others but it's a physical fact that all cars will pull or drift. The question is how much is acceptable? If it falls between the engineering released attribute then game over. The key here before rejecting the car is to determine if the car complies or not.

Notable lack of response eh????????

I haven't read the affected post Sam, but I know exactly what you are saying. Like you I've had warnings from some of the site team. Usually they are the ones who know nothing about the subject matter in any detail...sue grabbit and run seems to be the general advice. I know we have had significant differences of opinion in the past but I would say that overall your advice has been good and valued. Frankly, this forum has moved on from good advice from people in the know as it was 5 years ago with sensible questions to a farce. When things go wrong with a case they mysteriously disappear or when certain members don't like posts which criticise the site team they too go into a black hole. PM me your personal e mail if I don't already have it and best wishes for the future. You'll be missed (even if I don't agree with you)! Kindest rgds. Helios

Then perhaps the OP will state what Land Rover it is???? Perhaps also age and mileage plus price paid??? Rust is very subjective and there are clear guidelines as to what is acceptable and what is not. A general rule is excessive corrosion within a set distance of a load bearing area. Wings do not necessarily fall under this. Like I say, people jump to conclusions so perhaps a bit more from the OP first? This is a support and advice forum as you point out but it needs to be good advice and support based on more detailed facts rather than loose canons going off!!

Er...no. I don't think so! Calibrated against what? No dealer carries a rolling master so all these systems do is calibrate against each corner camera. You'd be surprised how far they are actually out let alone having the technicians that actually understand what they are measuring. It's a common fallacy that tracking on the front affects pull drift....it doesn't. It's on the rear as it determines the thrust angle of the car. The castor/camber relationship on the front is also a major influence. All tracking on the front end does is affect the steering wheel angle and tyre wear. 90+ % of pull/drift issues on new cars are steering wheel alignment related where the driver aligns the wheel to the dash panel. The wheel is set to gravity but the dash assembly is offset by anything up to 3 degrees. A driver can pick this up where the alignment is out from 1.5 degrees onwards. It's easily fixed as well and not a cause for rejection of the car.

Your missing the point King. The dealer is an AGENT of Dacia. That's the key to this. If the OP goes to court the first thing a judge will ask is the legal status of the parties involved. In your example, Tesco is not the AGENT of the toaster manufacturer. Whilst the solicitors advice may be correct or not the process that follows is the same i.e. the dealer is the supplier but can argue easily that they are not the liable partie in that they are the AGENT of the manufacturer. This is why in cases like these with new cars the manufacturer gets involved. It can get somewhat more complex than you think. There was a wonderful case on this forum a year or so ago where the OP took exactly the same action as being recommended here and ended in disaster which mysteriously disappeared and a link to another one helpfully posted by Hammy showing what can happen if the dealer defends. As has been pointed out, the dealer and Dacia need to be given the opportunity to rectify first.

Yawn......another one where there is probably nothing wrong with the car.......just a crap dealer workshop. Tracking on the front end has no effect on pull or drift. Dealer steering wheel alignment equipment in no way is 100% accurate. Just tell the dealer to set the car up properly and not to use muppets to do it.

I just love these posts from people who say get VOSA involved having never seen the car involved. If it's a Land Rover on a ladder chassis then it can have holes in the bodywork. Makes little or no effect to the rigidity of the vehicle. Which land rover is it first???????????? Again people jump to conclusions before the full facts are known.

The dealer is responsible for what they sell but they are also an Agent of Dacia being an official dealer. I wouldn't be so sure of the advice above or that given by the solicitor as it is not known what the legal relationship between the dealer and manufacturer actually is. I would have expected the solicitors advising to have determined this before writing to the dealer. Look at the Citroen DS5 case. Here the owner rejected but the settlement came from Citroen GB.

It is all manufacturers policy to repair rather than replace for all sales. Whilst your complaint might be against the dealer you need to check if the dealer is truly independent and not an actual subsidiary of Dacia UK. What you see is not always the case.

Personally I think you have rejected too early. The local dealer should have been in a position to rectify. You do though have to give them time and a bit of leeway which I suspect has not been the case. It's right that the delivery of the car was unacceptable and Citroen's response likewise, but I do feel with a less aggressive approach you might get more satisfaction and the issue resolved. Citroen UK is not the most technically apt organisation I have come across from previous dealings but the complaint you have is pretty basic and not subjective so it should be relatively straight forward. I would though be interested to know what wheel and tyre size the car is on along with whether the car has an electric steering system (EPAS), a hydraulic system driven by an electric motor(EHPAS) or a traditional system (HPAS).

I found this post rather interesting so to clear up some misdemeanours read on. 1. Any brand new car damaged over and above minor cosmetic damage is not allowed to be sold as a new car. It has to be registered and then sold as a used unit with delivery mileage. 2. Tracking does not cause the vehicle to drift. Steering wheel miss alignment does. What happens is that the customer aligns the steering wheel with aspects of the instrument panel which might not have been set to gravity and thus points the steering in one way or another. Hence the manufacturer sets the tracking bang on but does not align with the variability of the IP. So in this case it's probably the IP which is out, not the tracking. If the dealer then sets the steering wheel to the IP, then the tracking will show as being out. It's a common problem for all manufacturers but should have been picked up on PDI. If the steering wheel is aligned to the IP and the tracking is then reset then the car does not drift. Most dealers cannot get their head around this and is explained as a tracking issue when in fact it is not. 3. From the OP's description this is a classic front hub run out problem. Wheel balance occasionally can cure but unlikely to do so. Dealer should examine hub run out after wheel balance, tightening torque of drive shafts and finally disc run out. All of this should have been picked up on the PDI but is easily fixed. Root cause is usually found to be a tolerance stack. Every now and again you get one of these but ****reon should know how to go about fixing this. From experience once the factory get involved you are on a hiding to nothing. Scania knows the score with ****reon.

This is how it works with repairs of this type. The parts are usually guaranteed for a period of time. The labour is also guaranteed for a period of time. They are not the same thing under one guarantee. Parts from a franchised dealer will normally be covered for a minimum of 12 months and include labour. Parts bought outside of the franchised dealer i.e. not an approved dealer or franchised service agent, be they genuine, pattern or re-manufactured would normally be covered for a period of 1/3/6 or 12 months. This does not though cover the labour. Labour is covered by the garage fitting the part and is generally accepted to be 3 months. This is derived on the basis that if it was a fault based on the original fitment then it would manifest itself within the 3 months they give. In the OP's case, the likelihood is that it is a graded part, not remanufactured that has failed. Hence the cheap price paid. OP needs to check guarantees given with the original fitment and not necessarily rely on the supply of goods and services as this could well have been complied with. Rule of thumb is that cheap is not necessarily the best option.

I'm not sure but I don't think TINY applies to used/second hand goods does it?

But Conniff, it might be "Fantastic Condition" for a £995 4X4 of indeterminable age and mileage advertised as "A part exchange to clear". Why does a subjective report from a garage make it un roadworthy? Tyres need changing...why? Drivetrain leaks.....well to be expected on any car as you know as well as I do it's impossible to seal. By their nature they leak from new. Objectively...how much are they leaking by? I've seen many sweating/weeping seals reported as leaking to the extent it cost one dealer their franchise and a claw back of £500K. Fuel tank leaking....again what's the objective evidence. Spring broken.....well one would need to see this as is often misinterpreted. SOGA etc clearly states that it has to consider age and mileage and condition in any case and at the moment we just don't know however no dealer advertises a pristine car and outs it for scrap money. Unless the OP can supply what car it is, age and mileage then this will keep going around in circles. What we have here is someone who thought they were buying a 1968 Chateau La Tour for £10 only to find it tastes like vinegar. Well that's how I see it. As with many posts, one can speculate as to the rights and wrongs of what has gone on but unless they volunteer the info it's very hard to get and give any objective view.

Please explain DX as selling and sales are pretty much the same after all they share the same acronym.

Hold on Conniff. Lets look at the facts. Car advertised as" to clear"....the dubious bit is the fantastic condition. So perhaps there is something to go on with respect to mis representation but then again this is subjective as we don't know what 4X4 the OP has bought. True though as the seller is obviously a trader they cannot hide behind the sold as seen supposed disclaimer. Then we see the statement the car is only fit for the scrap yard. Well that's an unqualified opinion isn't it. All of the issues raised are subjective but remember it was advertised as to clear. So is it unroadworthy or not? What it does show though is an abuse of the spirit of the law and this is clearly shown by the OP in that the ash tray was full! In addition to this, perhaps the site team can again explain why a post has mysteriously disappeared, namely one that referred to a house purchase and an I phone.

Er....you did DX in post #4 . And this is the bit I love about this post......."and also there was cigarette butts and ash still in the ash tray" Optional extra perhaps? Next thing we know it'll be a complaint that it wasn't a full packet of cigarettes.

This is standard response from Herr Winterkorns office but what it does do is get it on the big boys radar at VW GB in Milton Keynes. Now a case file will have been raised and they will be talking to the dealer and engineering departments to get the true picture. This is the problem with VW/Audi group in the UK. When there is a problem you don't get to talk with them unless you follow this route. What is likely to follow next is a call from the executive customer relationship centre offering a percentage repair. If the car has never been out of the dealer network then stand your ground. If it has then you need to concede a bit. It's not really clear as to what the fault actually is from the description given so perhaps a bit more detailed info??? The good news is that it's now being taken seriously at a very high level. Other factors to bear in mind are to not push your luck and steer well clear of advice about SOGA etc at the moment. Mention that and you'll end up with little or nothing.

Winterkorn's secretary usually takes a couple of days to reply so if you can, hold back from taking the car away from the VW dealership. Once you do that you are not going to get anywhere. What happens is you get a note from her and a very quick phone call from VW GB. I don't think to date you have been dealing with VW GB themselves but a subcontracted organisation who in reality know Jack **it and are not in a position to assess exactly what has gone on. Ford tried the same thing a few years ago and withdrew the contract pretty quickly if I remember rightly.

This is another example of what is wrong with SOGA and the public wanting champagne with beer money! It's a £1K car so will need work and the service report is very, very subjective. Given the standard of some of garage technicians these days and the way the industry works the reality is there is probably nothing wrong with it. It would also help if the OP stated what the car was, age and mileage as rather than quote chapter and verse about SOGA it needs to be born in mind that SOGA also takes into account "commensurate with age and mileage". So if the car bought is a 4X4 Landrover Defender which is 15 years old, one has to be reasonable. It ain't going to be great is it?

Very interesting post Rex. The MOT is only a visual inspection so whether or not it was picked up is debatable and you have to separate MOT testing from the issue. As frequently pointed out, the test is only really valid at the time of inspection so any time after can technically be discounted. It really does depend on the amount of "bend" in the drive shaft also. The fact it has been bent indicates something else as well. I take it you had a full HPI check done when you bought it? If the car is under a Ford warranty, then there should be no problem in replacing the cylinder head, though to warp the block would entail some serious overheating. Personally I'd play this one out at the moment with the dealership but be very clear with the direction that you want the faults rectified. Steer clear of threatening court action as you will no doubt be advised at some point as it will only get their backs up and slow things down. Action such as this should only be used as a last resort.

The query here would be if they did indeed replace the box under the first repair. If it was repaired then the onus for the repair now would lie with the dealer who repaired it however the VW warranty given by dealers is transferable to other dealers in the UK only. If it's a particular part that has failed again then that would be covered by VW's parts warranty so there should not be any issue at all. Being cynical about the skills level of technicians today I'd bet the dealer has cocked something up and doesn't want to foot the bill. In order to move this forward you need to do the following: Look up VW GMBH on Goofle and look around the site where you will find Martin Winterkorns e mail address. Write to him telling him the car is crap and you want a new box, not a repair. What this does is trigger a response from VW GB, not the sub contracted idiots paid to fend customers off who you have been dealing with at the moment. Then you start getting results!!

Yes it is indeed. It's not helped either by some members of CAG steaming in with SOGA or the supply of goods and services. These legal tools should be used as a last resort. Most garages are in fact decent businesses the problem being we only hear about the bad ones which tarnishes the reputation of the good ones. Personally I'd like to see some sort of registration/regulation for the industry and those who work on cars. For example there are more computer programs and control systems in a New Range Rover than an Airbus A380 yet in a few years to come would you book your a A380 into an unregistered repairer and then fly on it? I don't think so. Current dealers are not much better either but most manufactures are on the case now with graded technicians only allowed to do certain jobs. Good result though and just goes to prove that sometimes things can work out for the better if dealt with in a non confrontational manner.

Er sorry... if you believe what you are reading here you will be mistaken. The garage gives a quote based on an assumption usually dictated by a book time. The book time given makes no allowance for difficulties which might be experienced due to the conditions the car might have operated in and would be entitled to charge more if they so wished to overcome the problem. However, good practice would be that they gave you a heads up that this would be the case and the option as to whether or not you wanted to continue. If you stick to the letter of the law then you have an estimate, not a quote and there are limits which apply to estimates. Estimates are given on what is known at the time and usually subject some degree of flexibility. It is not true that having the correct tools will make the job easy. Correct tools only work when there is not a problem. Personally as the garage concerned seems to be acting in a reasonable way at the moment I'd be inclined to actively engage with them without being confrontational as this will put them on the back foot. As you seem to have a good relationship with them ask them to explain the problem and ask where you stand. Things don't always go to plan through no fault of anyone so the responsibility needs to be shared.