Gearbox Fault Evoque @ 22000 miles

[BankFodder]

I'm afraid that there is no ombudsman for this kind of thing – or at least nothing of any use. Forget it.

Yes you can certainly take them to court as long as you are prepared to do it yourself, we will help you.

You say that they have offered 40%. You should understand that you have bought a second-hand car and although you are entitled to expect it to be in satisfactory condition and to remain this way for a reasonable period of time, it would probably unreasonable for them to provide you with a new gearbox. You would be entitled, in my view, to the value of the gearbox – -22,000 miles value.

In simple terms (for my benefit) if it is reasonable to say that a gearbox would last you for 88,000 miles, then you would be entitled to the value three quarters of the cost of a new one – which equals the remaining 66,000 miles. Does that make sense to you?

Of course one would expect any reasonable garage not to penny pinch like this and simply to sort out the gearbox – but if in the end they offered you a value which reflected the fact that it was a second-hand gearbox anyway, then you would Poppy have to accept.

I don't know how long a gearbox might be expected to last. If it is carefully driven then I would certainly expect it to last well over 120,000 miles – but maybe somebody else will come along with better information.

I think what I'm coming down to is that an offer a 40% is quite unreasonable. I think you would be entitled to expect at least 80% of the value of the gearbox plus installation.

Additionally, you would be entitled to claim any ancillary losses such as towing charges et cetera.

Have you got written quotations for the replacement of the gearbox? It might also be prudent to do a bit of research to find out how many miles a gearbox for that car – that model – might reasonably last.

[BankFodder]

£9600 is huge!! This is an extraordinary figure. Is that really what it cost?

What is the value of the vehicle?

 

Also, who supplied the vehicle?

[BankFodder]

Well I'm afraid that the fact that you bought the car from a private seller  changes things a great deal. You are not entitled to benefit from the usual consumer protection legislation and if the car does not carry any warranty then I'm afraid that you have no action at all against the manufacturer.
You say you bought it from a private seller. What representations were made by the private seller? Are you sure that it was a private seller and not a trader masquerading as a private seller?

Do you happen to know the private seller? Might you be a friend of that person?

I'm afraid that my first instinct is that if JLR have offered you 40% on the gearbox then you have probably better take it – but please answer the questions I have put first

[BankFodder]

I'm afraid in that case given the length of time you have had the car – not overly long I know – but still, long enough. Given the fact that you have probably put on 10,000 miles or more – not a huge amount – but enough. Given the fact that it is from a private seller who obviously sold it in good faith because the problem has only materialised one and 1/2 years later, I think that your chances of success in a county court claim are no better than 60% and these are not odds that I like.

Given the fact that you have been offered 40% towards the cost which means that you could get the repair done immediately and without being off the road for very too much longer and given the fact that the repair would be done to a high standard – I'm afraid I think that you should take the money.

If you decided to bring an action against the seller, it would take you at least six months to get any kind of result. There is a high chance of failure and with that comes the prospect of having to pay the cost of issuing the claim plus the hearing fee plus the reasonable costs of travel of the other side if you won – plus the stress and hassle and also being off the road for most of that time.

It's up to you – but I think you are going to have to bite the bullet. There is certainly no action at all against the manufacturer or the dealer and if they are offering you a goodwill contribution of 40% and I think there is an extremely generous offer in the circumstances.

[BankFodder]

I agree with you completely in respect of your expectations. However, I've given you the view that I have formed and about 24 hours later, I don't think I've changed my mind.

If you want to take some action – then good for you – but I think you are embarking on a risky strategy. Anyway, your action would be against the seller and if you try to take an action against the manufacturer or the original dealer of the vehicle then I would estimate your chances at less than 10%. Not only that you will lose their goodwill offer of 40%.

You could decide to accept the 40% offer, get it repaired and then tried to sue the seller for the balance. That might give you a better chance. I don't think there is much else to say

[BankFodder]

OP = original poster – that means You – the owner of the thread.

 

[BankFodder]

22 minutes ago, oddjobbob said:

I'm sorry I can't for the life of me see how this can possibly be anything whatsoever to do with the seller after 18 months use and ownership by the OP?

 

I think I've already indicated that it would be hard work to establish liability against the private seller – but it certainly is possible. It's not a moral issue. It's an issue based merely on what was the term of the contract at the time. At what point can be said that a private seller has carried out his side of the bargain to the extent that he has complied with the reasonable expectations of both parties to the contract.

Personally I believe that they would be a chance of success in the County Court but I don't expect it would be very high.

[BankFodder]

It is now

[BankFodder]

You would have to say that you made a contract on XXX date and that it was a term or at least an implied term of the contract that the vehicle was in good condition and would remain that way for a reasonable period of time and that in breach of that implied term, the gearbox has failed and needs replacing.

I think your chances are extremely slim. I think the judge is likely to look quite favourably upon a private seller, 18 months down the line, who is able to say that he had no expertise as regards vehicles or their mechanical operation, that he looked after the vehicle and had it properly serviced et cetera and then sold it in good faith and had no reason to believe that the express or implied promises that he made to you at the time the contract was entered into were at all inaccurate or even false and that you knew he was a private seller and you took the benefit of that by paying less than you might have done from a car showroom and there is now no reason why he as a private seller should be shouldered with the burdens that might reasonably be expected to be carried by a professional dealer.
All of that.

[BankFodder]

Let me ask you a bit more – when you bought the vehicle, did you have it inspected? After you bought it, have you had it checked or serviced?

[BankFodder]

4 minutes ago, oddjobbob said:

OP you need to live in the real world.

 

after 18 months use there are no circumstances under which you can attribute any problem to the seller. You'd have great difficulty getting anything after 18 months even if you had bought it from a main dealer, let alone a private seller, where the presumption is 'buyer beware'

 

And how on earth can you sue for depreciation? depeciation is part of car owenrship!!

 

Are you on medication by any chance?

 

Apart from the fact that you are completely wrong in some of the things you say, this insulting attitude is wholly unnecessary and it's not what we do on this forum.

There will be comparatively little difficulty suing dealer. The issue here is arising only because we are dealing with a private seller. In terms of measuring depreciation and its effect on a claim – the courts do it all the time. It's only people who have no legal experience and who are generally out of touch you might have difficulty with this.

 

oddjobbob - banned from this thread

[BankFodder]

Just now, dx100uk said:

raises an interesting point too.

had the car been purchased new direct from a land rover dealership, I wonder what comeback the owner would have with this type of fault.

a gearbox shouldnt fail within 3yrs.

most cars are covered by some form of warranty ...that doesn't replace the consumer rights act but would certainly support the fact that the manu expected parts to last longer than that if one did originally exist

 

Absolutely – I think that the purchaser would have no difficulty getting a new replacement gearbox from a dealer. The issue here of course is that we are dealing with a good-faith private seller 18 months later.

[BankFodder]

1 minute ago, kotewala said:

Hi ,

I have never once said I would sue for depreciation, I was merely pointing out how much I would be losing in total in 18 months. 

I am looking at the original advert which, I think,  said it had no faults on its test. I had no independent inspection other than the HPI check.

However , within 6 months , I did point out gear problems to the garage when it went in for Service . They said they could not find anything wrong. It was serviced without fail. Now garage deny , I ever mentioned to them. They must have a recording on the phone.

 

This is new information. I'm not sure that you mentioned this before that you had experience gear problems in the first six months of ownership. That would raise your chances of success are considerably higher – but as you clearly seem to be aware, you got no evidence that you raise the matter – and of course I think that a court would have expected you to alert the seller immediately rather than 12 months later.

Once again, I don't think you should look a gift horse in the mouth. Take the 40%. Also, if they sell you a new gearbox then it will come with all of your consumer rights which will effectively guarantee it for at least 100,000 miles or so.

[BankFodder]

Yes, I'm sorry. I'm sure it must be a very unpleasant surprise. However I'm sure that taking the 40% is the prudent thing to do in the circumstances.
 

Maybe you can get JLR to up their offer to 50% and also to give you a finance deal on the rest that frankly I think that they are being pretty generous.

[BankFodder]

Well you had better say yes before the offer goes away

[BankFodder]

Well I think that is a reasonable request but you can't force them to give you the information – and frankly they don't need to rely on GDPR to refuse you.

If you were to discover that there were Gearbox faults and that the private seller must have known about them then you are home and dry on that issue. However, I would say that you are probably looking at the long haul on that. Mitigate your loss. Take the 40%. Get the gearbox fixed and get the car back on the road. If you can then begin to investigate to find out if there had been any Gearbox faults reported before you bought the car then we can help you. In that case I would have no hesitation in suing the private seller for the portion of the money which you will have paid out in order to replace the gearbox.

However, get it sorted straightaway and treat the issue of pre-existing force as separate matter.

[BankFodder]

This definitely needs checking up.

Of course it could lead you to the next issue as to whether it needs formally to be transferred or it simply passes with ownership of the vehicle.

[BankFodder]

1 minute ago, buyer-beware said:

As advised in the OP’s first post its 4.5 years old. 

 

Well spotted.  I had thought that it was only 1.5 years old when it was bought.

 

Definitely no action against the seller and the JLR offer is very generous