advice on legal rights for faulty new car

[rosiecotton]

How did you buy the car?

 

Incidentally you have indeed given them more than reasonable opportunities to put this fault right and as they have failed to do so you should now be able to claim either:

 

- Replacement vehicle (like-for-like, same model, mileage etc, if this is possible)

 

or

 

- Rescission of the contract, they take back the car and give you a partial refund allowing for the wear and tear you have had from the vehicle.

 

You wouldn't be entitled to betterment, i.e. a brand new replacement or a replacement of a better specification.

 

I won't advise in full until I know how you paid, as this can make a difference.

[rosiecotton]

It's a hard one, rescission; ultimately only a judge can decide what constitutes a reasonable refund.

 

From my own point of view I would say that they should not expect to profit from the fact that they have sold you faulty goods. Therefore they should not offer you a partial refund which is any less than what the car is worth to them, if they re-sell it.

[rosiecotton]

That's right, if they can't offer you a like-for-like replacement and do offer you a different vehicle, they can't insist that you pay - however if rescission is a cheaper option for them they can insist that this is the course of action to follow and you can't demand a replacement if it's going to be more expensive for them than rescinding the contract, if that makes sense!

 

It would make sense to me to award you damages of whatever it would cost you to replace the car with a theoretically "identical" model.

 

If I were a judge that would indeed be my way of thinking, anyway.

[rosiecotton]

I think we did already discuss that the OP can't reject for a full refund; the advice given was that as they had had a reasonable opportunity to repair the faulty roof and had failed to do so to a satisfactory standard, the options were now either a like-for-like replacement, or if such a car cannot be sourced, then rescisson of the contract which would be a refund to equal the cost of a like for like replacement.

[rosiecotton]

Mr FP

 

I think you are missing the point. Firstly this is not uncommon with Coup Cab type cars. As stated the car was bought new so izzzy needs to be hanging out for a new car replacement. I aint no legal eagle, i just deliver the things. What i can say is that your way of the mark with your monetary workings. Izzys car will go to another part of the country,(prob south coast as it has best coupe cab sales and prices) get fixed and be flogged at a grand less than new being 1 year old. Peugeot will take the hit on replacing the car not the dealer.

If it was a washing machine you would be saying take it back to the store and get it replaced, i dont see a difference.

In my view Izzy will get a "deal" out of the dealer. I was actually speaking today to a salesman who last year had replaced a 2yr old motor for a new car as they had had a recurruring fault for 18 months.

 

She may well be able to get a "deal" but legally she would only be entitled to a like-for-like replacement or a partial refund to cover purchasing a like-for-like replacement. Rescission of the contract (getting a refund after the initial rejection period, which is only a matter of weeks in most cases) is a partial refund to allow for any wear and tear that she may have enjoyed from the product, so that's what the letter of the law would cover.

 

I think we already established that anyway

[rosiecotton]

Well if that was the case that would be very generous of them as legally they only have to do what I advised

[rosiecotton]

If it comes to it, it is my opinion that they should refund you the retail price so you are able to purchase a like-for-like replacement.

 

Otherwise you are losing out by their failure to provide you with a like-for-like replacement, and that is not right - your rights should be comparable regardless of what remedy you accept.

 

I would advise that it is reasonable to expect them to pay you the retail price, and although I am not a judge I would be amazed if any judge found otherwise.