Response from dealer today as follows. Where do I stand. Do I need to file a complaint with the Ombudsman prior to court proceedings ?
"We write further to your email of 8 March 2019. 1. If we go by the information provided by *** Garage Services, no fault codes were visible in the diagnostics and the car still drives. *** Garage Services advised that there is potential the issue worsens which is obvious for a ‘thirteen-year old’ car. In addition, there is no evidence that the gear box oil was replaced to Mercedes specifications which is crucial in this case.
2. In judging whether a recently bought ‘thirteen-year old’ car was of satisfactory quality it would be ‘reasonable’ to take account of the price you paid for the car. This could be far too less than for a new vehicle and so expectations should be lower. It would also be reasonable to assume that the performance might not be as good, and the condition could fall far short of new condition. For that reason, you have not judged in accordance with the standard and performance that was reasonable to expect in a similar car of that age, mileage and model.
3. We cannot agree that *** Garage Services report gives a right of rejection or rights pursuant to the consumer’s rights under the code or the CRA as being due because if you are asking for a refund under the 30 Day Right To Reject, the onus is on you to prove there is a fault, the fault is worthy of a refund and the fault was present at the time of sale.
4. We do not seem to be any closer to reaching an agreement. We do not believe either party will benefit from further exchanges of communications. Please register your complaint with The Motor Ombudsman: https://www.themotorombudsman.org/consumers/make-a-complaint
The Motor Ombudsman is a certified Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) provider, is fully impartial and listens to both sides to deliver consistently fair outcomes. If you decide to continue with a court claim without any consideration to The Motor Ombudsman’s Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) decision, we reserve the right to a cost order against you.
We refer you to the PREACTION CONDUCT AND PROTOCOLS: 11. If proceedings are issued, the parties may be required by the court to provide evidence that ADR has been considered. A party’s silence in response to an invitation to participate or a refusal to participate in ADR might be considered unreasonable by the court and could lead to the court ordering that party to pay additional court costs. Yours faithfully, EMC Car Sales– Complaints"