Jump to content


Profiled Cars in Pitsea, Essex - say new 30 day rule is NOT retrospective.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2006 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi and thanks again for the forum.

 

I purchased a used car from Profiled Cars in Pitsea, Essex on the 21 of September 2015.

 

I drove the car home and went to lock the car with the remote and it would not lock or unlock from the remote.

locked the car manually and sent a text to the dealer.

 

 

He advised at this point that he was not aware the key didn't work and he advised me to change the batteries

and to reset the key as per the handbook. T

he key wouldn't reset.

 

 

I texted the dealer back and he advised me to bring the car in at the weekend but to check first when he would be there.

 

 

Saturday came and he advised me that he wouldn't look at the car.

He said that a £200 discount we had agreed before the sale covered and "niggly" faults.

He said he would only pay £20.00 towards a repair. I said I'd been quoted at least £80.00.

 

I suggested that I'll get the key fixed and bill him.

He advised me that I should not threaten him.

 

 

It then became apparent that the car had other faults which includes a lazy window motor

and knocking from the suspension over bumpy roads (not apparent on the test drive).

I've now realised the blower only sends hot air even in the cold position.

 

I emailed the dealer saying I want a full refund because he refused to fix the key.

At this point he said that I had verbally agreed to any small faults as a result of the discount.

However, this is not true because he agreed the discount before I had even viewed the car.

He's now also saying the new 30 day rule is NOT retrospective.

 

The car has a warranty,

I've booked into a local garage for the faults to be assessed.

 

 

The garage will then speak with the warranty company and they will decide if the faults are valid and if they will pay.

However, the key is not covered.

I want to return the car but naturally the dealer is refusing.

 

What next please ? Many thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

To agree to faults will not hold water

 

Get the original advert for the car, if the faults are not mentioned in the advert he can go and whistle

 

You have to give the dealer an opportunity to fix the vehicle and you are not to be left out of pocket

 

If you purchased the vehicle on the 21st september then you can still reject the vehcle. You have 3, even 4 weeks maximum but you must do it in writing and not drive it

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to give them the opportunity for them to fix the repairs, that is ALL REPAIRS to your satisfaction

 

Ask the mechanic what he thinks to the car on the QT

 

That knocking sounds like the CV Joint is on the way out

 

Remember, you are not to be left out of pocket in any way or reject the vehicle

Link to post
Share on other sites

matters not about the 30days

you informed him within 14 days

 

 

end of the matter

he can not quibble.

 

 

how did you pay?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks

- the warranty doesn't cover the key at all

I'll ask them to quote for a repair none the less.

 

 

Here's the email from the dealer.

He's waffling on about flat batteries for some reason,

I know not why.

 

Thank you for your e mail,

we would like to point out that a flat battery in a remote isn't a major fault,

we pointed out to you that even after we had given you a discount on the phone for 200 pounds

which as we explained is for any little niggles,

 

 

we gave you a warranty for any mechanical faults that could occur,

we also put a new mot on the vehicle from a rac approved garage,

this ensures to you and us the car is fit for purpose.

 

 

The consumer act you are quoting didn't come into force till 1 st October 2015 and does work retrospectively ,

then it has to be a Major mechanical fault ,and that the dealer was aware of it at the point of sale,

 

 

we suggest that if you feel the car has developed a fault take it to a reputable garage and ask them to diagnose the fault

, if it is miss use them I'm afraid we cannot be held responsible for that

, if not we then will send a warranty rep to the garage to see what we can do to rectify any fault

Link to post
Share on other sites

[Your address]

[Manager/ Owner]

[Dealership address]

 

Dear Sir/ Madam

 

Ref: [registration number of vehicle]

 

On [date] I purchased, and took delivery of, the above vehicle [make and model] from you. On [date] I discovered that it was not of satisfactory quality: [describe the problem].

 

[The Sale of Goods Act 1979 requires dealers to supply goods of satisfactory quality.]

OR

 

[The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires dealers to supply goods of satisfactory quality.]

However, the vehicle is clearly unroadworthy. You are therefore in breach of contract.

 

I am legally entitled to reject the vehicle and to be reimbursed for its full purchase price of [£xx]. I look forward to receiving your cheque for this sum within 14 days. If you fail to reimburse me I shall have no alternative but to issue a claim against you in the county court for recovery of the money without further reference to you.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

[Your name and signature]

Link to post
Share on other sites

as I informed you of the fault within 14 days

I execise my right to reject the car and wish a full refund

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It never ceases to amaze me how a small business can carry on trading and presumably do a decent job and then smash up their reputation so easily on such a silly matter.

 

Searching for Profiled Cars on the Internet, I can't find any trace of anyone making complaints – except that this thread which seems to come number two on the Google rankings.

 

Profiled Cars are absolutely wrong.

 

Although they are right about the new Consumer Rights Act not being retrospective, they are wrong in every other respect.

 

They car they sell you must be of satisfactory quality and must remain so for a reasonable period of time. This is true now under the new Consumer Rights Act and it is true under the old Sale of Goods Act.

 

Furthermore, you cannot contract out of your obligations. This means that you cannot get somebody to agree to waive their rights under the consumer legislation in return for any kind of payment. This means that a general £200 discount in respect of "niggles" is absolutely not enforceable.

 

The only defects which you would be bound to accept – under the new act and the old act would be those which had been specifically drawn to your attention at the time of the sale. This means, for instance, that if you had gone to buy the car and the dealer had said – you can have this one but be aware that the central locking doesn't work – then you wouldn't be able to complain.

 

I'm afraid that when you come across a second-hand car dealer who tries to impose the kind of rules that are happening in this case, then I would steer clear of them. In other words it doesn't sound to me as if Profiled Cars is the kind of second hand car dealer that I would want to do business with.

 

I would say that you have a cast-iron case against them. I think that a central locking system is pretty fundamental nowadays. It's not a luxury any more.

 

I would write to Profiled Cars and tell them that you either want your money back or you want all of the problems made good and you want this sorted out within 14 days or else you will sue.

 

I rate your chances of success as better than 90%. Bringing a small claims in the County Court is extremely easy and we have lots of advice and guidance on it here. We will help you.

 

Send your letter. Don't get into any protracted discussions or compromises about it. A company which treats you in this way should not be trusted. While you're waiting for the 14 days to expire, start looking up about how to begin a small claim and also open up a free account on the MoneyClaim service and start preparing your claim document. It is very easy. It doesn't need any formal language.

 

Only send your letter and make the threat if you intend to go through with it. It's not worth bluffing. On day 15, if nothing has happened, then simply issue the action. I can imagine that Profiled Cars will cave in after they receive the court documents if they haven't decided before, to change their mind and to give you some proper lawful customer service.

 

If you want to put a little extra pressure on Profiled Cars then drop them a note and tell them that they can search themselves on Google and see what it produces.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Much of this depends on the age of the car, price paid and whether the car can in fact be locked by using the key rather than the remote.

 

Because if it CAN be locked using the keys then the dealer is right - it is not a major mechanical fault. Like wise with a slow electric window.

 

also did the advert say 'remote central locking?' - if it did then the OP has a case. If it didn't and just said 'central locking' and the c/ locking can be used with a key then the OP got what was advertised.

 

If this car is sub £2000 or over 8yo then it will absolutely have minor faults.

 

we need to know!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Vehicle has to be as described and fit for purpose

 

I do not think a Knocking sound when turning is fit for purpose or a minor condition/Fault

 

In other words if faults were not listed in the advert it will be reasonable to conclude the vehicle does not have these "Minor so called faults"

 

The purchaser would not be expected to know if he was not previously informed that the vehicle had these faults.

 

To Conclude

 

The faults cannot be minor if the purchaser had no knowledge of them at time of sale and the vehicle is then not of satisfactory quality and can be rejected under he SOGA

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't be naïve and come and live in the real world.

 

If the car was described as having central locking rather than remote locking then that's what the OP bought, similarly a slow electric window is a minor fault on an aging car.

 

It all depends on how old the car is and how much it was - if it didn't then new cars wouldn't cost any more than secondhand ones. A faulty key fob and a slow electric window does not make the car unfit for purpose, and I don't think it would be a valid reason for rejection under the new legislation even if it did apply in this case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you saying, for example that a car which was £20,000 new and is now 12yo and on sale for £999 should not only start, run and be able to be used as a car (which it should) but also be free of minor faults?

 

it won't happen in my lifetime, or yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
please don't be naïve and come and live in the real world.

 

What you have just stated is ridiculous

 

These kinds of comments are unhelpful. The opinions of both of you are valued but not this kind of remark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, no worries

 

However the basic question remains unanswered.

 

I have NEVER said or thought that it is ok to sell an unsafe or unroadworthy car. Even a £500 banger should be 'fit for purpose'. And what is that purpose? It's to get you from A to B, safely.

 

But at what point does it become of unsatisfactory quality and not fit for purpose?

 

On a brand new car- everything should and must work properly

On a car up to 3yo - as above, but eg maybe the aircon isn't quite as cold as it should be and one of the elements in the rear screen heater has failed

3to 7 yo - most things all ok, drives and performs well,, but showing a few minor faults

7yo to 10y - will undoubtedly have minor faults and slight oil leaks, a sluggish elec window etc, aircon needing expensive parts perhaps

10yo + - if it starts, drives, passes the MOT and is reliable, then that is all you should reasonably expect.

 

IMHO a slow window and broken remote fob would not be valid reasons to reject a sub £2000 car, but we don't yet know how much the OP paid yet

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one has claimed it is an unsafe or unroadworthy car, the knocking could be the exhaust or a bush but unlikely to be a failure as it has just been given a certificate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Much of this depends on the age of the car, price paid and whether the car can in fact be locked by using the key rather than the remote.

 

Because if it CAN be locked using the keys then the dealer is right - it is not a major mechanical fault. Like wise with a slow electric window.

 

also did the advert say 'remote central locking?' - if it did then the OP has a case. If it didn't and just said 'central locking' and the c/ locking can be used with a key then the OP got what was advertised.

 

If this car is sub £2000 or over 8yo then it will absolutely have minor faults.

 

we need to know!

 

I paid £2800 and you could be right,the advert may not have said remote central locking,but it didn't say it was broken either.

 

It's an 06 but 40k

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, there are limits to what you can reject on and if it is just the central locking, (not stopping the car being used) and a slow window, that will come low down the 'not fit for purpose' scale.

 

But he is entitled to have these things put right as he wasn't advised that they were faulty at the time of purchase. Mind you, the regulations do also say "or that should have been noticed", and those two problems should have been noticed without being told about them.

 

I always say do a minimum of 10 miles using all types of road and at least one steep hill which will more than likely show up any faults.

 

There are a lot of assumptions made and allowed in the regulations and if it said central locking, you would be right in assuming that it worked. I don't think the wording of 'remote' makes a difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

at £2800 I think the dealer should do the decEnt thing and give you half towards a new key fob. the window is actually working and is just life.

 

the dealer should DEF investigate the knocking as it might be safety related

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...