Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


Baz78

Used car engine failure

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1292 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

Looking for a bit of advise on a used car i purchased, I will outline the main points.

 

27/06/16 Purchased a used 58 plate Renault Laguna 180GT from a dealer using HP for £5112 (73000 miles)

23/08/16 Car serviced at local independent at my own expense.(76000 miles)

07/10/16 Car broke down on way home from work and recovered to independent garage. Garage removed sump and found metal fillings/slivers. (77000 miles)

10/10/16 - 11/11/16 Various communications with dealer and finance company. Dealer has rejected liability so finance company sent out "independent inspector".

 

This where it gets tricky,

 

Engineers report uses words like "limited information" "further dismantling required" "likely" "not confirmed" "some time in the past". But in the conclusion is states"undoubtedly fit for purpose".

 

On this report the finance company has also refused liability and has refused to send me a full cop of the report, only an extract.

 

I can make the extract report available but don't want to post it on an open forum as it contains personal information.

 

Your help and advise on the next stage would be most welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is actually wrong with your car? Cambelt/chain failure? Big end failure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the independent engineers report.

 

"consistent with the failure and disintegration of one or more hydrodynamic oil lubricated "shell" type bearings."

 

but also states

 

"further dismantling is required before a firm diagnosis"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, your big end shells have failed and this is caused by the car having been run on low oil. It could also be due to high mileage but your car is only 70k. ........Have you had someone plug into cars ecu to verify mileage?

 

My hunch is its been not well looked after as oil checking is something you are taught for drivers test.

 

Did the car start "Knocking"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is missing a service in 2013 but all other stamps are present. MOT millage is the same as the service stamps.

 

The car started knocking as i was cresting a hill so i coasted about 150m to a layby.

 

The only low oil warning i have had was when i coasting after the failure.

 

I will try and get the garage to check the ECU millage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, if a defect occurs within the first six months of ownership then the defect is assumed to have been there when the item was purchased. Under that Act the dealer has to be given an opportunity to attempt a repair. If the repair fails or if he refuses to repair the item then you are entitled to a full refund.

 

Write to the dealer and tell him that you are giving him an opportunity to repair the fault and that if he fails to or if he refuses to then you are rejecting the car under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and that if he will not honour your rights under this new consumer law that you will sue him in the County Court.

If you are not prepared to take legal action then don't bother to make the threat but frankly I don't know what you will do because the dealer seems pretty clear that is not help you. It will be much easier than having to take on the insurer.

Starting a small claim in the County Court is straightforward although you need to do a little bit of reading either here on the forum or in our new Consumer Survival Handbook. Do not threaten to bring an action if you think that by making a bluff, you will change the dealer's mind. These people are used to getting all sorts of threats which are never carried out. If you try to bluff, you will fail and you would lose credibility.

 

If you are prepared to go ahead and take legal action – and for that kind of money I would do – then send him the letter which I have outlined above and give him 14 days to comply with your request or else take the legal action.

 

Once again, be sure in your mind that you are prepared to go ahead with this – although it's not difficult.

 

Which dealer are you talking about here? Which insurer?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a new engine you need im afraid, sorry! :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, if a defect occurs within the first six months of ownership then the defect is assumed to have been there when the item was purchased. Under that Act the dealer has to be given an opportunity to attempt a repair. If the repair fails or if he refuses to repair the item then you are entitled to a full refund.

 

Write to the dealer and tell him that you are giving him an opportunity to repair the fault and that if he fails to or if he refuses to then you are rejecting the car under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and that if he will not honour your rights under this new consumer law that you will sue him in the County Court.

If you are not prepared to take legal action then don't bother to make the threat but frankly I don't know what you will do because the dealer seems pretty clear that is not help you. It will be much easier than having to take on the insurer.

Starting a small claim in the County Court is straightforward although you need to do a little bit of reading either here on the forum or in our new Consumer Survival Handbook. Do not threaten to bring an action if you think that by making a bluff, you will change the dealer's mind. These people are used to getting all sorts of threats which are never carried out. If you try to bluff, you will fail and you would lose credibility.

 

If you are prepared to go ahead and take legal action – and for that kind of money I would do – then send him the letter which I have outlined above and give him 14 days to comply with your request or else take the legal action.

 

Once again, be sure in your mind that you are prepared to go ahead with this – although it's not difficult.

 

Which dealer are you talking about here? Which insurer?

 

I think that the dealer will use the same report which states that the car was "undoubtedly fit for purpose" at the point of sale.

 

The problem i have is that i have not been given full access to the report and what i have uses vague terms apart from the quote above. It also states numerous times that further dismantling is required before a full diagnosis could be given.

 

I didn't think it would be wise to name the companies whilst this is ongoing in case it goes against me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a new engine you need im afraid, sorry! :(

 

Yip, I have been quotes £4500 from Renault.

 

I was hoping i would have a case for fit for purpose as it only lasted 4000 miles in my ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baz, I would expect from what you stated above for the car to have been in 1st Class condition, high price paid, nearly FSH. I would expect the garage at the very least to go 50/50 with you on repairs. Personally, id be attempting to get them to pay for new bottom end off engine and its install. If you have a independent mechanic examine the sump, ask them if the gasket oN the sump looks fairly new?

The sump could have been bashed against speed hump or kerb, cracked & oil leaked out and owner continued driving.

 

Less than 4k, I would consider you have a good argument !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The report says the sump and the engine is normal condition and gasket was normal.

 

On these engines there is a lower sump and an upper sump. Only the lower sump has been removed so there is no access to the big ends or crank bearings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the report states, the engine requires further dismantling, but bigend bearing failure is either high mileage or a car being run with low oil. The reason you bought was because of its virtually full service history and you paid a premium price. A reasonable person therefore would have expected low oil to have been spotted at service. In my opinion at the very worst they should offer to at least go 50/50 on repairs, I personally would be going for more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to commission your own independent report. You also need to write to them and insist that you have complete sight of their report. Did your finance company have sight of the complete report?

 

You are the second person today that we are helping who has trouble with a dealer who won't respect the consumer rights and you are the second person today who is refusing to name the garage involved because you want to protect them.

 

With this kind of customer loyalty, garages get away with anything all over the place. You should name them. It makes no difference to anybody except the garage. It will help you and it will help other people who have the same problem.

 

I'm pleased to say that the other person we have been helping today has finally agreed to name the garage. I think that you should do the same. As long as you are honest and straight dealing about what you say then there is no possible disadvantage and there are only advantages to be had. It's all about being transparent.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You need to commission your own independent report. You also need to write to them and insist that you have complete sight of their report. Did your finance company have sight of the complete report?

 

You are the second person today that we are helping who has trouble with a dealer who won't respect the consumer rights and you are the second person today who is refusing to name the garage involved because you want to protect them.

 

With this kind of customer loyalty, garages get away with anything all over the place. You should name them. It makes no difference to anybody except the garage. It will help you and it will help other people who have the same problem.

 

I'm pleased to say that the other person we have been helping today has finally agreed to name the garage. I think that you should do the same. As long as you are honest and straight dealing about what you say then there is no possible disadvantage and there are only advantages to be had. It's all about being transparent.

 

I believe that the finance company have received the full report as it was them that arranged and paid for it.

 

The dealer is Scott Bailley cars in Glasgow

The Finance company is Advantage Finance

The inspector is Scotia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe that the finance company have received the full report as it was them that arranged and paid for it.

 

The dealer is Scott Bailley cars in Glasgow

The Finance company is Advantage Finance

The inspector is Scotia

The problem could be caused by not having used synthetic oil. You need to get the oil and filter tested. Go to Trading Standards in Glasgow for assistance.

I should stress that it may be your independent service that caused the problem and be nothing to do with the original supplying dealer.

Also worthwhile reminding others that this is Scotland and we don't have County Courts. But Sheriff Court procedure is fairly easy.

Edited by scubajoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet is that 3 factors could have contributed to the failure:

1. Wrong oil used

2. Not enough oil in the engine

3. All or most services done using the modern method of sucking the old oil out with a pump instead of draining it via the sump plug.

This practice explains the metal dust found by the guy making the report.

I have seen many engines failing prematurely because of this.

Unfortunately it's not clear cut at this point because a full engine strip is required.

The most likely reason is that your garage didn't put enough oil in the engine and as soon as some was lost (some engines require regular top up), the car broke down.

Relying on oil light is never a good idea; it comes on when it's too late, possibly a deliberate glitch used by ALL manufacturers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you need to protect your position. Whatever the situation in the end, I think that you should write to the dealer and put him on notice that under the Consumer Rights Act, because the purchase is still within the first six months, you are giving him the opportunity to carry out a repair or to give you a refund. Say to him that you are considering legal action against him and so the letter that you are sending him now, giving him this option under the 2015 Act will be shown to the court in the event that he refuses.

 

I'm extremely concerned that the finance company is withholding the full report. Have you written to them about this? If they refuse to do this in writing? On what basis have they refused?

 

I have had a look at the Advantage Finance website https://www.advantage-finance.co.uk/home/ and I'm a bit mystified because they don't seem to be regulated by the FCA so I'm not quite sure how they work.

 

I think that you need to start unravelling it a bit. Does the finance come from Advantage Finance or does it come from someone else? It would be interesting to find the element in the finance operation which is regulated by the FCA because they have to treat you fairly. If it turns out to be Advantage Finance then it seems to me that by withholding the report from you yet making a decision against you is not fair communication and in that respect they are in breach of their legal obligations.

 

You really do need to get hold of that entire report – but you really also need to get an independent report on the fault. However, as I have said, the presumption is that the defect existed when you bought the car and at the end of the day it is for the dealer to prove to you and to the court that the defect was not there.

 

Can you tell us a bit more about how your access to the report has been refused


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that you need to protect your position. Whatever the situation in the end, I think that you should write to the dealer and put him on notice that under the Consumer Rights Act, because the purchase is still within the first six months, you are giving him the opportunity to carry out a repair or to give you a refund. Say to him that you are considering legal action against him and so the letter that you are sending him now, giving him this option under the 2015 Act will be shown to the court in the event that he refuses.

 

I'm extremely concerned that the finance company is withholding the full report. Have you written to them about this? If they refuse to do this in writing? On what basis have they refused?

 

I have had a look at the Advantage Finance website https://www.advantage-finance.co.uk/home/ and I'm a bit mystified because they don't seem to be regulated by the FCA so I'm not quite sure how they work.

 

I think that you need to start unravelling it a bit. Does the finance come from Advantage Finance or does it come from someone else? It would be interesting to find the element in the finance operation which is regulated by the FCA because they have to treat you fairly. If it turns out to be Advantage Finance then it seems to me that by withholding the report from you yet making a decision against you is not fair communication and in that respect they are in breach of their legal obligations.

 

You really do need to get hold of that entire report – but you really also need to get an independent report on the fault. However, as I have said, the presumption is that the defect existed when you bought the car and at the end of the day it is for the dealer to prove to you and to the court that the defect was not there.

 

Can you tell us a bit more about how your access to the report has been refused

 

BankFodder, on this occasion I disagree with you.

The presumption that the fault was present when the op bought the car is on very shaky ground imo.

The cra must be interpreted in consideration of the goods purchased, their expected lifespan, maintenance and usual wear and tear.

If this wasn't the case, the second hand car market would not exist: smart asses could go to a dealer, run a nice car for 5 months, then drain a bit of oil and destroy the engine so to ask a refund.

Not reasonable.

In this case, most likely the fault will be not enough oil in the engine or incorrect oil grade.

How could the dealer be responsible for this?

The most reasonable (and unfortunately costly) option is to have the engine stripped to find the cause of the failure.

The op could then address his claim to the dealer or the garage that carried out the service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

 

A quick update for you.

 

I have spoken to the local trading standards about my concerns with the report.

 

I have also emailed the finance company expressing my concerns and stating that the fault is covered under the CRA.

 

Fingers crossed that they re-asses the claim in my favour.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever, I would still put the dealer on notice formally that you are invoking your rights under the first six months of purchase as per the Consumer Rights Act. At least that way, if the matter goes beyond six months and eventually it turns out that you are in the right, then you will be covered.

 

So far as I understand it, the presumption is that the defect existed at the time of sale. It is for the dealer to prove otherwise. I think it is extremely unfair if the insurer will not let you see the entire report. And I mean unfair within the meaning of ICOBS


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...