Totally agree with Hammy's sound advice. Other things to look at are the air con system if fitted as these can give similar smell issues and water ingress . However Hammy is ultra knowledgeable about Fords more so than most posters so I'd tend to be guided by him for a technical solution. By design though, wherever there is a "flexible roof" involved inherently there will be leakage issues along with fuel consumption ones, something often overlooked. Nice in the sun but in our climate perhaps a no, no.

One of the problems here is that the OP's opinion is that it is faulty without stating what he thinks the faults are. Irrespective of the new regulations the sellar still has to be given the right to rectify and so far we don't know what is wrong. It's all pointing to buyer remorse at the moment !!

This won't necessarily be correct as customer cars would most likely be covered along with business stock but nothing else. I have a rule of thumb that any car in my possession I insure for fire and theft when they are on SORN which I suggest yours might be??? However you won't be a customer as staff. Whilst not condoning it, if you are insured as above think carefully about the claim form especially as you are mentioning welding in order to fix the car. They will most probably jump to the wrong conclusion. I think on balance from what I have read you won't be covered and need to handle very carefully as garage owners still live in the age of dinosaurs and won't take lightly to an employee suing them especially when they are helping you out by giving you use of premises and equipment.

Wouldn't be a Vauxhall by any chance would it???

Would the initial failure described be for the turbos failing by any chance or a bottom end seizure?

I can see what the OP is saying but we need to clarify a couple of things. If the car was bought from a non affiliated Vauxhall dealer then the OP has nowhere to go as the dealer would not have access to whether or not the car was affected or not. If the car was bought from a recognised Vauxhall affiliated dealer then there would be grounds to complain however the OP would have to prove that the dealer had not carried out the recall already. It can take a few months to show on database records. As per previous advice, take it to a Vauxhall dealer who will confirm if it's needed or not, if not then get on with your life.

That's quite true Conniff but on a TT it's not that straight forward.

Actually on an Audi TT it's not!!!

Well on my search this doesn't appear but you also have to consider the time line . Further, the OP doesn't think he is a dealer. There is a big difference between a dealer in the motor trade and a dealer on e bay with other items. I believe as far as trading standards are concerned a dealer is one who sells in excess of x number of cars over a period of x number of months irrespective of the medium they are sold through. Further, one would have to prove he is a trader in motor vehicles. He might well be a trader in other items but the law is very different depending on the item for sale.

I'm not so sure you are correct Conniff as if what you say is true a dealer could take in part ex a wreck, spend a load of money on it and sell it at a small profit and then under the law as you portray it the original owner 5 months later can reject and claim the profit,.....I don't think so???

As a private buyer and private seller unfortunately it's a case of caveat emptor, buyer beware which basically means no recourse unless grossly mis advertised. However it might not be as bad as it seems. You need to describe the warning light that flashes on under acceleration. There could be multiple reasons for this such as low brake fluid which will flash under these circumstances, if the car is euro 6 emissions, the ad blue light, if been standing and a diesel it might need a DPF regeneration ( very fast run up a motorway) Other aspects for the fuel light can be just a blocked fuel filter or the water in fuel indicator if fitted. Blocked fuel filters have been an issue across all manufacturers for the last few years especially if the car has stood for a while. I think you need to either describe exactly what lights flash up and when and take it to someone who can read the DTC codes that are registered when this happens. Until you do this it's very much a case of much ado about nothing but as usual some members think they are experts in this field who actually know nothing and are far too quick to jump to conclusions which leads to mis interpretation.

There is absolutely no evidence on his e bay record that he is a car dealer or e bay dealer come to that. It all looks perfectly reasonable to me. He buys far more than he sells. A retired Detective Chief Inspector once told me "just because you see a man in a pub throw an empty packet of cigarettes on the fire does not mean he smokes". Think about it!!!

I believe that they are within their rights to charge for betterment but I cannot see that they could have valeted or cleaned the car within the alleged hour. Ask them to prove it. Of course it is area dependent so if central London this would not be unreasonable as opposed to say north Yorkshire. You need to be a bit careful about the MOT as it sounds like advisories which are not the same as fails. Advisories can go on for a number of years depending on what they are. For example, my Focus gets the same advisories every year but it has yet to fail. One day it will but until they do or the tester considers them too bad to continue that is what they will be, advisory.

That is a possibility but to prove it would cost a lot more than the cost of just replacing it anyway. If for example the cam belt change was part of a routine service then it won't necessarily show on the service records as would be a normal operation. You would need access to the actual invoices to prove it. Further it is highly unlikely that an authorised dealer stamped the book as being changed and it had not.

Possibly and possibly not. If your supplying dealer is not VAG affiliated then how would they have any inkling the service book was not a true reflection of what had actually happened in its service life. Further you might not be entitled to data held by the dealerships you have rung. Think you might be on dodgy ground with this one as you would have to prove your supplying dealer knew the records are allegedly false.

You can read many complaints about dealers from any franchise, the problem being is that you don't ever hear about the good ones as this is a site for people in trouble who are looking for help. Despite people advising you what to do you seem to ignore the advice. Why have you not taken the dealers offer to take the car back in??? Given what you have posted I'm not surprised the service manager is ignoring you. You need to get pff your high horse that every dealer is out to screw you. They have regulations to work to and are closely monitored which is why you end up with a list of work required to keep within the manufacturers specifications. You don't have to buy it, it's just advisory but you seem to think it's mandatory. It seems to me that no matter what advised to do you have your own set agenda yet admit you are ignorant but then go on to advise other people as to what they should do. Frankly I think given that you admit to having no automotive industry knowledge you should shut up and take the advice of people in the know who have tried to help you . If you take that advice on board or not is your choice but don't then come back moaning you think you have been hard done by.

Audi, VAG UK or even Germany won't entertain such a claim. You are where you are unfortunately. Shame you didn't post a year ago.

Well have you tried???? I cannot believe this thread. People with the knowledge and experience are trying to assist you. So let's cut to the chase. what do you want out of this? Frankly if you were a customer of mine I'd be telling you where to go and not in any polite terms either and be willing to pay any court judgement just to get rid of you. You sound wholly unreasonable and ignorant.

But from what you know are the two linked as bearing failure ? A bearing failure would not normally be linked to excessive movement of the gear shift unless the bearing you are referring to is actually a bush often referred to as a bearing which probably wont be covered and cannot be covered.

Extended warranties are usually insurance policies against mechanical failure and are not usually transferable without a fee so double check. Statutory rights will also be neglible if any at all given the age. On Vauxhauls previous record I personally think you are on a hiding to nothing and pursuing it just isn't worth the time and trouble. Go to a non franchised dealer and get a rebuilt box with a guarantee if that indeed turns out to be the required action to fix the issue. Arnold Clark has a notorious history of mis diagnosis and customer service .It's the legal status of the warranty and actually what has failed which will be key here and until it's stripped by an approved person you're not to know what the problem actually is.

That's what I thought lol.

I think on balance you should take up their offer and go back and ask them to show why the parts need changing. Whilst ATS have confirmed the tyres look ok the dealer should be working to the manufacturers specification. So it might be that they have seen something they are required to report but a less knowledgeable company like ATS might not know about. An example of this would be if the car was operated in the UAE where you are not allowed to use cars on tyres outside 3 years from the date stamp for example. Further, brake checks would include a check on the disc thickness and condition. Whilst the pads could well have many miles left it doesn't necessarily run true that the disc condition follows. I come across this often with cars used for primarily motorway use where the brakes are seldom used. Pads are ok but the disc is knackered. Interestingly, some manufacturers are now insisting on disc changes every time the pads are changed or every major service (two years) which seems absurd. The fluid change every two years is a standard item as is hydroscopic but there is no requirement to measure water content, but then that requires samples larger than the capacity of the brake sytem anyway and some seriously specialist equipment which dealers just wont have.

What car for a start and since owing have you ever had a tyre replaced? Plus mileage would help.

OK, firstly you need to know that this is a commercial vehicle so normal consumer rights won't necessarily apply. Secondly, warranty does not apply on warranty i.e if during the initial period of warranty a part is replaced the warranty expires on the date of the original warranty. As the post suggests it is a semi automatic equipped gearbox your best bet is to take it to a Renault approved commercial dealer as there are many software updates they have which will not be available outside of the dealer network. It also puts you in a stronger position as opposed to dealing with an independent. I would recommend it goes to another approved dealer to verify the fault and then take it from there. Unless it's with an approved dealer you have no chance of even entering into any dialogue with Renault about a good will claim.

If you look at the pictures there is no evidence of kerbing but one picture does indicate possible previous damage as corrosion is clearly there. However, there is also another picture showing new damage with evidence in same spot of tyre fitting lubricant. I think this is a 50/50 call and you should negotiate as such.