Jump to content
techie09

Dealer refuses refund after failed repair attempts

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 341 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, looking for some help please.

 

Me and my wife purchased a Peugeot 207 on the 29/1/18 from a New and Used car dealer in Saxmundum near Ipswich

 

.It was advertised on ebay as spares or repair so we contacted them to find out what problems it had, the dealer said we just put that on the advert as it has no warranty and selling on behalf of a customer, but it just needs 2 new tyres!

 

After having the car for a few days we noticed something odd when accelerating from a cold start, the revs appear to drop for a second or so then go back to normal.

 

We took the car back to the dealer and they said they could not find anything wrong as ECU did not show any errors !

 

After a another week we took it back telling them it was dangerous to move off from junctions if revs die, they still said nothing wrong and even blamed our driving as it has a electric clutch, but they replaced a hose as said was slightly split, but appear to make no difference.

 

We now find it has a gearbox oil leak, we took it in on the 31/03/18 to have this repaired, on collection the dealer said he thought it was the clutch housing so they put mastic around it to stop the leak, he said may not last and would cost £500 to fix.

 

Of course the oil leak is still present and have now lost patience with them and asking for a full refund which he has refused and said any further work will be chargeable.

I plan to send the letter below with photos of the oil leak:

 

Complaint about faulty goods

 

On 29/01/2018 we purchased and took delivery of a used Peugeot 207 Registration ..... from you. We paid a total of £1000.00 on a debit card for the vehicle.

 

We now find the vehicle has the following faults:

 

Gear box oil leak and oil leak from engine, also revs drop when accelerating, more severe when cold engine.

 

Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 dealers must supplier goods fit for purpose and satisfactory quality. As there was a problem with the vehicle when we bought it, you are therefore in breach of contract.

 

The vehicle was taken to yourselves on the 03/02/18 to fix the bad running when cold and on the 31/03/18 to fix the oil leak, but you have not been able to rectify either problem.

 

We are now legally entitled to reject the vehicle and to be reimbursed for its full purchase price of £1000.00.I look forward to receiving this amount onto the debit card account that was used for the purchase within the next 14 days.

 

I have attached photos of the oil leaks in support of my claim.

The vehicle is now no longer in use.

 

Please respond within 14 days of receiving this letter.

 

Would it be best to send it by post or email it, i would need to email the photos of course.

 

I have attached advert.

 

Many Thanks

CarAdvert.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
Formatting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

1. Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

2. Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

3. Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

4. The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid that you might have some difficulty here. The car was advertised "for spares or repair" and so from that point of view it conforms to its description and was fit for its purpose.

 

Of course you should be saved by the fact that the dealer told you that all it needed was a couple of new tyres but do you have any evidence of this? If you can prove that this is what was claim for the vehicle when you actually entered into the contract then you are in a very good position. If this representation was made to you over the telephone then if you had recorded the call, you would be home and dry. However I have a sense that you may not have recorded the call in which case it will be up to the honesty of the dealer and now they know that you are challenging them and it may cost them some money, they may deny that they said anything of the sort.

 

You've been here since 2009 – did you record the call?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No recording unfortunately, but the dealer did replace the tyres before we collected it, not sure if thats enough evidence ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I doubt it. It was advertised as spares or repair. What didn't you understand about that phrase?

 

If it was advertised spares or repair then that's what is was.....scrap or spend, your choice.

 

I'm afraid you can't have the penny and the bun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No recording unfortunately, but the dealer did replace the tyres before we collected it, not sure if thats enough evidence ?

 

I'm afraid that I don't think it is. I think you are saddled with it – and it's not often that I give this kind of advice!

 

You really should be recording your calls – but you know that now.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if any thing is advertised as spares or repair and the faults are told to you in black and white, i.e just requires new tyres, ignore it as they are allowed to hide the other problems.......... :!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not at all what I said. In fact you are quite wrong. If something is advertised as being for spares or repair and yet the dealer goes on to give you a different story and you make the contract on that basis, then you are entitled to rely on the representation from the dealer and to disregard what has been said in the advertisement.

What I have said – or implied is that you don't have any evidence of what the dealer said. If you can get the dealer to repeat what he said that it simply needed two new tyres and that the car would then be okay, then you have him bang to rights. If you had recorded the call – and we have been encouraging everyone to do this for well over 10 years – then you would have had evidence and I would have been very confident on recommending that you took an action in the Small Claims Court. As it is, I'm going to assume that the dealer will deny and on that basis I think the chances of you winning any claim are probably no better than 25%. Not the kind of odds but I would want to run with.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So basically if any thing is advertised as spares or repair and the faults are told to you in black and white, i.e just requires new tyres, ignore it as they are allowed to hide the other problems.......... :!:

 

Yep, that's about right.

 

I refer you to my previous answer, spares or repair = scrap or spend, your choice.

 

You can't have the penny and the bun...ie you can't buy a £1000 'spares or repairs' car and not expect it to be exactly that: break it for spares or repair the faults. That's what it means.

 

£1000 is banger money anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep, that's about right.

 

I refer you to my previous answer, spares or repair = scrap or spend, your choice.

 

You can't have the penny and the bun...ie you can't buy a £1000 'spares or repairs' car and not expect it to be exactly that: break it for spares or repair the faults. That's what it means.

 

£1000 is banger money anyway.

 

I'm afraid that's not what I said either.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm afraid that's not what I said either.

 

No I know it isn't...the reply was to the op.

 

Basically ANYTHING on ebay sold spares or repair = trouble.

 

I completely agree with you that if the op had evidence that it only needed tyres then that's a different ball game.

 

But I'll bet that wasn't quite what was said. The dealer won't be an idiot. It will most likely have been 'well we are selling it spares or repair on behalf of a customer...it does need a couple of tyres though, so we will do them....'

 

I expect the receipt says spares or repair too.

 

Not good for the op....but spares or repair means, well, break it or repair it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point, lack of evidence the issue here. Even though the advert does indicate no faults, spares or repair has to be taken as everything wrong with the car unless dealer gives to you in writing all is ok apart from tyres ?

 

oddjobbob you are spot on what we were told 'well we are selling it spares or repair on behalf of a customer...it does need a couple of tyres though, so we will do them....'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, almost. If a dealer is selling car then you can presume it is roadworthy, safe, and will fairly reliably get you from a to b...bearing in mind the price paid. That doesn't need to be in writing, it's a given in consumer law.

 

the difference here is that is was advertised as 'spares or repair'...that is, sold on the basis that you will either use the parts from it for spares or spend money doing the repairs that are required.

 

and you weren't quite told 'it just needs a couple of tyres'...sad but true. sorry!

 

no doubt your receipt says spares / repairs also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you bought the car, did you drive it away, or did you / the dealer have to put it on a trailer?

 

If you were able to drive it away, and the dealer's been doing repairs as well, I find it hard to believe a judge would see "spares and repairs" as anything but the dealer trying to weasel out of their CRA duties.

 

If on the off-chance it'd been recently MOT'd, or the dealer had it washed and valeted, the porkies really start mounting up.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

great post mttm...:thumb::thumb:


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

1. Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

2. Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

3. Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

4. The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the revs dropping while stationary try resetting the ecu by putting ignition on without starting the car and then leave it for 2 minutes.

Then start the car.

It works on VW and Audi, so maybe it will work on French cars too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or it could be the throttle valve stuck.

A good pull in 2nd and 3rd gear usually sorts it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This highlights something that I have noticed that is being used more and more in trade ads

 

. Dealers are stating "Sold as spares & repairs" or even "even though it starts we have no knowledge of the condition and advise it is taken away on a trailer.

..Sold spares & repairsr" .

 

Does this then absolve the dealer of any responsibility under the CPA?

 

Sorry if I've hijacked the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The car was driven from the dealer, it looked as the car was cleaned and engine compartment plastic covers polished up ! he was very keen to replace the tyres before we collected it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This highlights something that I have noticed that is being used more and more in trade ads

 

. Dealers are stating "Sold as spares & repairs" or even "even though it starts we have no knowledge of the condition and advise it is taken away on a trailer.

..Sold spares & repairsr" .

 

Does this then absolve the dealer of any responsibility under the CPA?

 

Sorry if I've hijacked the thread.

 

Yes, I think it probably does.

 

These spares / repairs things do have a value of some kind and it would be absurd to say thy cannot be sold.

 

Spares / repairs = trouble, every time.

 

I am a retired car dealer, and if I ever took a px that was trouble I simply sent it to auction, sold as seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The car was driven from the dealer, it looked as the car was cleaned and engine compartment plastic covers polished up ! he was very keen to replace the tyres before we collected it.

 

Good stuff, I think you stand an excellent chance of arguing that this wasn't a true sales 'n' repairs sale, and that the dealer's trying it on.

 

This highlights something that I have noticed that is being used more and more in trade ads

 

. Dealers are stating "Sold as spares & repairs" or even "even though it starts we have no knowledge of the condition and advise it is taken away on a trailer.

..Sold spares & repairsr" .

 

Does this then absolve the dealer of any responsibility under the CPA?

 

Sorry if I've hijacked the thread.

 

If you're selling cars to the general public, advertised on consumer websites, valeted, repaired, taxed, and suitable to drive away on the day, you're going to have a hard time arguing that the words "spares and repairs" or "sold as seen" are anything but trying to avoid your responsibilities to consumers.

 

Instead, the traders use these magic words because writing "I don't want to honour the CRA" would harm sales, and writing them helps the traders bully people out of their rights.

 

Even the idea that there are legions of consumers desperate to buy _entire cars_ for spare parts is an insult to the entire industry.

 

Yes, I think it probably does.

 

These spares / repairs things do have a value of some kind and it would be absurd to say thy cannot be sold.

 

Spares / repairs = trouble, every time.

 

No-one's saying that cars can't be sold for spares/repairs/as seen. The problem comes when you dress a car up as anything but that. It shouldn't be that difficult either; tell people why the car's not a runner, get customers to trailer it away, and don't invest money in making them better!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great reply, thanks.

 

I've seen a few cars that look in good nick etc, however they have the caveat "not tested, spares & repairs" I suppose it should act more as a indicator of the level of after sales care to be expected.

 

Thanks again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff, I think you stand an excellent chance of arguing that this wasn't a true sales 'n' repairs sale, and that the dealer's trying it on.

No, I don't, the ad specifically states spares / repairs twice and does not mention if it drives ok or if anything works. They got what was described in the ad.

 

If you're selling cars to the general public, advertised on consumer websites, valeted, repaired, taxed, and suitable to drive away on the day, you're going to have a hard time arguing that the words "spares and repairs" or "sold as seen" are anything but trying to avoid your responsibilities to consumers.

 

Instead, the traders use these magic words because writing "I don't want to honour the CRAicon" would harm sales, and writing them helps the traders bully people out of their rights.

Even the idea that there are legions of consumers desperate to buy _entire cars_ for spare parts is an insult to the entire industry.

Spares / repairs is fine and involves no comeback, as long as the ad is absolutely clear. Sold as seen is a big no no. Consumers see only what they want to see, which in this case was a bright looking modern car for £1000. I do agree slightly sticky ground allowing it to be driven away, but the ad is as solid as a rock, it couldn't be plainer.

 

No-one's saying that cars can't be sold for spares/repairs/as seen. The problem comes when you dress a car up as anything but that. It shouldn't be that difficult either; tell people why the car's not a runner, get customers to trailer it away, and don't invest money in making them better!

This one wasn't dressed up though...yes its been cleaned, but the ad could not be clearer. 'Sold for spares or repairs on behalf of a customer' And why not clean it? People buy with their eyes and not their brain sometimes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great reply, thanks.

 

I've seen a few cars that look in good nick etc, however they have the caveat "not tested, spares & repairs" I suppose it should act more as a indicator of the level of after sales care to be expected.

 

Thanks again.

 

Not the after sales care....there will be none, it's sold for spares! AVOID!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good stuff, I think you stand an excellent chance of arguing that this wasn't a true sales 'n' repairs sale, and that the dealer's trying it on.

No, I don't, the ad specifically states spares / repairs twice and does not mention if it drives ok or if anything works. They got what was described in the ad.

 

If you're selling cars to the general public, advertised on consumer websites, valeted, repaired, taxed, and suitable to drive away on the day, you're going to have a hard time arguing that the words "spares and repairs" or "sold as seen" are anything but trying to avoid your responsibilities to consumers.

 

Instead, the traders use these magic words because writing "I don't want to honour the CRAicon" would harm sales, and writing them helps the traders bully people out of their rights.

Even the idea that there are legions of consumers desperate to buy _entire cars_ for spare parts is an insult to the entire industry.

Spares / repairs is fine and involves no comeback, as long as the ad is absolutely clear. Sold as seen is a big no no. Consumers see only what they want to see, which in this case was a bright looking modern car for £1000. I do agree slightly sticky ground allowing it to be driven away, but the ad is as solid as a rock, it couldn't be plainer.

 

No-one's saying that cars can't be sold for spares/repairs/as seen. The problem comes when you dress a car up as anything but that. It shouldn't be that difficult either; tell people why the car's not a runner, get customers to trailer it away, and don't invest money in making them better!

This one wasn't dressed up though...yes its been cleaned, but the ad could not be clearer. 'Sold for spares or repairs on behalf of a customer' And why not clean it? People buy with their eyes and not their brain sometimes!

 

You're not the OP, and writing in the first person is not helpful.

 

The whole reason that consumer legislation exists is because of stuff like you've written here. Thankfully we no longer live in that world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?




  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • can i put anything in the LBA about seeking any costs at this stage, for the amount of effort in trying to resolve?
    • if this is too long, basically i sent it in, they checked it over, they agreed with the store again, they sent it back, now i'm onto letter before action - as you suspected would happen       ok so i got hold of someone in customer services who asked for the bag to be sent in.   their response is, predictably:   I would like to confirm that I have now inspected your backpack and it is our belief that the issue is due to natural wear and tear and not an inherent manufacturing fault.   I will today return your backpack to you at our cost.   Please accept my sincere apologies for any disappointment caused.   to which i replied:   For a bag to suffer from natural wear and tear to the point of ripping in multiple places after only four months of use would surely suggest it was not of satisfactory quality nor fit for it's intended purpose?!?!   The Consumer Rights Act states:   (3)The quality of goods includes their state and condition; and the following aspects (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—   (a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are usually supplied;   (b)appearance and finish;   (c)freedom from minor defects;   (d)safety;   (e)durability.     I would suggest the bag has been used in line with part 3a but that it has failed under part 3e and arguably part 3c.   Please reconsider your position on this. I would much prefer to avoid drawing this issue out any longer and do not relish the pursuit for costs should we be unable to reach an agreement without further action.   fast forward three days later i received the bag back and no reply.
    • Thanks for all your points above. Given me a little bit of an insight into what I am up against. My son moved into the property in August 2016 so it’s been nearly 3 years. Passed several inspections with minor ‘issues’ that have been put right and re-inspected fine.  I just feel the labour for a room to be decorated is going to be £20+ per hour and a new carpet will swallow the £500 deposit. are we legally entitled to obtain our own quotes as she is seemingly reluctant to allow us the keys back.  Have requested a photo of said stain in living room as it was wet when I left the property. 
  • Our picks

    • This is a bit of a lengthy one but I’ll summerise best as possible.
       
      THIS IS HOW THE PHONECALL WENT 
       
      I was contacted by future comms by phone, they stated that they could beat any phone contract I have , (I am a limited company but just myself that needs a business phone and I am the only worker) 
      I told future comms my deal, £110 per month with a phone and a virtual landline, they confirmed that they could beat that, £90 per month with a phone , virtual landline  they also confirmed they would pay Vodafone (previous provider) the termination fee. As I am in business, naturally I was open to making a deal. So we proceeded. 
      Future comms then revealed that the contract would be with PLAN.COM and the airtime would be provided by 02, I instantly told them that this would break the deal as I have poor 02 signal in the house where I live as my partner is on 02 and constantly complaining about bad signal
      the salesman assured me he would send a signal booster box out with the phone so I would have perfect signal.
      so far so good.....
      i then explained this is the only mobile phone I use for business and pleasure, so therefore I didn’t want any disconnection time in the slightest between the switchover from Vodafone to 02
      the salesman then confirmed that the existing phone would only be disconnected once the new phone was switched on.
      so far so good....
      • 14 replies
    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
    • The FSA has announced large fines against DB UK Bank Limited (trading as DB Mortgages) - DeutscheBank and also against Redstone for their unfair treatment of their customers.
      Please see the links below for summaries and full details from the FSA website.
      It is now completely clear that any arrears charges which exceed actual administrative costs are unfair and therefore unlawful.
      Furthemore, irresponsible lending practices are also unfair and unlawful.
      Additionally there are other unfair practices including unarranged counsellor visits - even if they have been attempted.
      You are entitled to refuse counsellor visits and not incur any charges.
      Any charges for counsellor visits must not seek to make profits. The cost of the visits must be passed on to you at cost price.
      We are hearing stories of people being charged for counsellor visits for which there is no evidence that they were even attempted.
      It is clear that some mortgage lenders are trying to cheat you out of your money.
      You should ascertain how much has been taken from you and claim it back. The chances of winning are better than 90%. It is highly likely that the lender will attempt to avoid court action and offer you back your money.
      However, you should ensure that you receive a proper rate of interest and this means that you should be seeking at least restitutionary damages - which would be much higher than the statutory 8%.
      Furthermore, you should assess whether the paying of demands for unlawful excessive charges has also out you further into arrears and if this has caused you further penalties in terms of extra interest or any other prejudice. This should be claimed as well.
      If excessive unlawful charges have resulted in your credit file being affected, then you should take this into account also when working out exactly what you want by way of remedy from the lender.
      You should consult others on these forums when considering any offer.
      You must not make any complaint through the Ombudsman. your time will be wasted, you will wait up to 2 yrs and there will be a minimal 8% award of interest and no account will be taken of any other damage you have suffered.
      You must make your complaint through the County Court for a rapid and effective remedy.

      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2010/120.shtml
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/redstone.pdf
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/db_uk.pdf
       
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/consumerinformation/firmnews/2011/db_mortgages.shtml
      Do you have a mortage arears claim to make? Then post your story on the forum here
        • Like
      • 0 replies
    • 30 Day Right To Reject - Vehicle Casualty Report. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415585-30-day-right-to-reject-vehicle-casualty-report/
      • 57 replies
×
×
  • Create New...