Repair information withheld when purchasing a car

[redwell32]

Hello to all

 

My first thread here and as you might expect I need some advice please. I will try and keep this as brief and concise as possible.

 

I bought a 2nd hand car from a main dealer on the 30th June 2009. After a couple of delays and some minor points which had to be sorted out the car was finally delivered back to me and away I went finally happy with my car but not with the dealership. When I bought the car it was 9 months old with 10500 miles on the clock. I was informed by more than one member of staff of the dealership that it was a dealer car belonging to the service manager who ‘drove like Miss Daisy’ and besides the paint chip issues (a now common fault with red paint on this make and model) and the worn tyres (replaced before I took the car) the car was absolutely fine.

The car was due a service in April this year and I took it to a more local main dealership for its service. While there I mentioned the way the car at times failed to transfer power from engine to wheels while on the throttle – a slipping clutch. I agreed with this dealer to get my car booked in for a check up and was told that a number of these cars had a similar problem and that is was usually the flywheel which would be replaced under warranty. It would I was told take about 5 days maximum to sort out.

My car is still at this dealership! First let me state that this dealership and the person I am dealing with have been first rate, however once they started to try and examine my cars gearbox and clutch they started to experience problems. The bolts attaching the ‘box to the chassis were in so tight that they could not remove them and had to remove the carpets in the interior to get at the captive nut at the other side to release the bolts. Seemingly even this took a mammoth effort. What was even worse though was learning that the gearbox had been removed before and then learning that the car had already had a warranty repair against it for gearbox related problems………..

Today the repairing dealer informed me that the selling dealer had in December 2008 (only 3 months after the car was registered) replaced the entire gearbox of the car! They found this out as they can trace all warranty work done to the car during its 3 year warranty. What’s more the new ‘box was put back in such a way as to cause this over tightening of the bolts.

The manufacturer’s warranty team informed the dealership that they will pay for the cost of all the labour involved in this repair but that I must foot the bill for the part (it is worn rather than a failed part - approx £270, plus of course paying insurance cover for my courtesy car……..). Now I don’t have a huge problem with this as I intend to pursue a case with the manufacturer to get this money back (advice offered to me and will be fully backed by the repairing dealer. In fact the repairing dealer informed me that the manufacturer will probably claim the costs they are incurring back for the original supplying dealer as it is their incompetence that has caused this problem.

What I do have a huge problem with is that the fact that I was sold a car with an obvious major mechanical repair which was never declared to me, nor is there any record of it in the service book. I fact when I looked the car has no service stamps (I asked for and was told I received a minor service [oil and filter change] before I took the car) at all. It should in my opinion the minor service and oil change marked and of course the fact the gearbox was replaced.

The car is on finance, and it is still under warranty. I asked at the time of purchase was the car perfect in every way, had it ever been involved in an accident etc.? and the answer was of course yes.

So my question: Have I been mis-sold this car? Surely the supplying dealer should have informed me or any potential buyer of a major mechanical component being replaced. After all if I am honest and I had been told this at the time there is no way I would have bought the car. By the same token if I wanted to P/X this car I would have to tell the garage about its history – surely this would devalue the car and I would be at the loss of this.

I intend to make a case of this to the manufacturer asap and also send a letter to the MD of the selling dealership and to the finance company. To be honest I now have no confidence in the car at the moment – 2 gearbox related failures in less than 2 years.

Is it a legal possibility to reject this car or am I too late? Is there any other course of action open to me? How does the fact that this problem has only come to light now 10 months after I bought the car affect any potential case?

Any help or advice would be grateful before I start penning letters and making contact with the manufacturer’s warranty team to make my case.

Thank you

redwell32:)

Edited May 10, 2010 by redwell32
spelling

[heliosuk]

Not sure of what the issue is here apart from loss of confidence in the car but they seem to have put it right??

 

So whats the issue.?

 

It's not unusual to replace a box under warranty if it falls beteween a certian chassis range and should have no effect on the resale value.

 

What car and mileage please would help.

 

You'd be surprised by the the amounts of re works that go on even prior to leaving the factory gates so get all the facts before thinking about the route your thread seems to be heading.

[redwell32]

Not sure of what the issue is here apart from loss of confidence in the car but they seem to have put it right??

 

So whats the issue.?

 

It's not unusual to replace a box under warranty if it falls beteween a certian chassis range and should have no effect on the resale value.

 

What car and mileage please would help.

 

You'd be surprised by the the amounts of re works that go on even prior to leaving the factory gates so get all the facts before thinking about the route your thread seems to be heading.

 

The fact I wasn't told.

 

I would not have bought the car if I had known about the repalcement 'box. Plus they obviously messed the repair up by over-tightening the bolts with the (perhaps) knock on effect of now causing premature wear to the clutch.

 

I don't agree that it won't effect the resale value - any car dealer knowing this information will use it to their advantage in any potential deal.

 

The mileage of the car now is approx 22,000, any other details I am keeping to myself for now

Edited May 7, 2010 by redwell32

[heliosuk]

You don't need to be told or is there any obligation for you to be told. Plus be aware that the over tightening (correct term is over tourqing) of the bolts will have no effect on clutch wear with respect to any fixings regards to the clutch wear or even in respect of the gearbox housing to the engine.

 

Forget rejecting it unless you are in a position to burn money. Your choice though. Many cars have issues from the manufacurere and are subsequently fixed as routine. It does not detract from the value of the car in terms of retail value.

[redwell32]

You don't need to be told or is there any obligation for you to be told..

 

Why? And why not put it in the service log book if there is nothing to hide and it won't effect resale value?

 

Forget rejecting it unless you are in a position to burn money. Your choice though. Many cars have issues from the manufacurere and are subsequently fixed as routine. It does not detract from the value of the car in terms of retail value.

 

That was the reason I was asking the question my friend, to ascertain whether I had a case or not. Thanks for your input.

Edited May 8, 2010 by redwell32

[Conniff]

i second that. You have no reason at all to reject. It hasn't been misdescribed just because you weren't told there was a new box in it.

 

There a re few things that should have made you wary though, tyres after only 10,000, drove like miss daisy but had paint chips.

 

If you could get all the customers who had bought cars from dealers in the past year together and ask them who was the previous owner, I bet 75% of them would say 'The service manager'. What that usually means is that it was a trade-in that he took off the lot, (managers perks), as it probably had tax on it when it was taken in.

 

I would also like to know what make of car it is, it sounds like a Peugeot.

[redwell32]

i second that. You have no reason at all to reject. It hasn't been misdescribed just because you weren't told there was a new box in it.

 

Again (perhaps naively) why?

 

There a re few things that should have made you wary though, tyres after only 10,000, drove like miss daisy but had paint chips.

 

As I said in the OP - this make and model of car has issues with this colour of paint and other owners have had resprays because of these paint issues, some having cars with less miles and of a lower age than mine. As for the tyres who said they didn't swop them from another car on the lot. Also if this car isn't tracked and balanced correctly then tyre wear on this car can be excessive. All these issues have become more common to this make and model of car the more people have owned them and reported them.

 

If you could get all the customers who had bought cars from dealers in the past year together and ask them who was the previous owner, I bet 75% of them would say 'The service manager'. What that usually means is that it was a trade-in that he took off the lot, (managers perks), as it probably had tax on it when it was taken in..

No, it was first registered to this garage. It was their car.

 

I would also like to know what make of car it is, it sounds like a Peugeot.

A Peugeot????? - not likely. I might be stupid but not that stupid

[Hammy1962]

OK, I'll third Conniff and Heliosuk. There is absolutely no reason the garage should tell you about a new gearbox or not, even if the salesman knew!

 

Using your logic, the fact that it has a new gearbox would be a bonus, after all, it is newer (more than likely) than the one they took out, effectively increasing the resale value of your car.

 

So, it's more than perfect, it has a new gearbox.................and a worn clutch!!!!

 

Why are you keeping the make and model secret? Are you embarrassed by it?

 

Hammy

[heliosuk]

As for the tyres who said they didn't swop them from another car on the lot. Also if this car isn't tracked and balanced correctly then tyre wear on this car can be excessive. All these issues have become more common to this make and model of car the more people have owned them and reported them.

 

Nobody has said it. Your next statement is frankly ridiculous as it applies to every car on the road today. Perhaps it is becoming more prominent but unless we know what car it is then it's hard to make a balanced judgement. Some cars will do this, for example cars with permanent fourwheel drive. Other high performance cars will knock out tyres in 5K miles. A good example is the Focus RS with the fronts. Some cars also have a specific tyre that should only be used as otherwise it changes the dynamics of the car. You can't just stick any old thing that fits on it.

 

Might be a good idea to let us know what car it is????

 

I've had to resolve these situations in the past and usually when getting to the bottom of the complaint there is actually no fault with the car at all.

[redwell32]

OK, I'll third Conniff and Heliosuk. There is absolutely no reason the garage should tell you about a new gearbox or not, even if the salesman knew!

 

Once again - why?

Why are you keeping the make and model secret? Are you embarrassed by it?

 

Hammy

 

No if it was a Peugeot I'd be embarrassed

Edited May 9, 2010 by redwell32
spelling

[redwell32]

Nobody has said it. Your next statement is frankly ridiculous as it applies to every car on the road today. Perhaps it is becoming more prominent but unless we know what car it is then it's hard to make a balanced judgement. Some cars will do this, for example cars with permanent fourwheel drive. Other high performance cars will knock out tyres in 5K miles. A good example is the Focus RS with the fronts. Some cars also have a specific tyre that should only be used as otherwise it changes the dynamics of the car. You can't just stick any old thing that fits on it.

 

Might be a good idea to let us know what car it is????

 

I've had to resolve these situations in the past and usually when getting to the bottom of the complaint there is actually no fault with the car at all.

 

If you want to read it in the way you have then yes it is. You'd be surprised at the number of people who haven't a clue about proper tracking and balancing on a car however - or maybe you wouldn't?

 

A Ford RS (Focus I assume) if driven in a spirited way with all that power going through the front wheels is bound to wear out its tyres quite quickly. My car doesn't have 200+bhp through it's front wheels.

 

The reason I said 'properly tracked and balanced' is that it has become apparant for this make and model of car the recommended manufacturers settings were not correct and many owners have had issues with excessive tyre wear on new cars with tracking settings from the factory. I only became aware of the problem because I use a forum where this make is discussed and the issues of excessive tyre wear and the paint issues have been discussed at great length.

 

I am fully aware of the correct size and load rating of the tyre of my car - I don't 'stick any old thing that fits on it' and if you remember the issue isn't with tyre wear it was with the gearbox and the clutch.

 

And finally why the need to know the car make? It makes no difference to my original and simple question which 3 of of you have now very kindly answered with the view that a case of rejection or replacement is not option.

 

I never implied that I was going to do this I merely wanted to seek some advice on the situation from people on this forum.

Edited May 8, 2010 by redwell32

[redwell32]

I've had to resolve these situations in the past and usually when getting to the bottom of the complaint there is actually no fault with the car at all.

 

I don't fully understand what you mean by this? Are you saying I am inventing a problem where none exists?

[Conniff]

Rejection is out as the sale of goods act only gives you a reasonable time in which to reject. Although that time isn't stipulated, it's very rare to for it to be longer than 2 months after which time you are deemed to have accepted it.

 

The clutch problem. Does it have a dual mass flywheel??

[Hammy1962]

Once again - why?

 

 

No if it was a Peugeot I'd be embarrassed

 

They also didn't tell you when you bought it not to go shopping naked with a traffic cone on your head.

 

The track analogy might show you know a bit about cars..................unfortunately the rest of the posts clearly indicate you don't.

 

Wouldn't you be better off directing your questions to the other forum where they discuss secret makes and models, or have you filled that forum with pointless posts as well.

 

Hammy

[redwell32]

Rejection is out as the sale of goods act only gives you a reasonable time in which to reject. Although that time isn't stipulated, it's very rare to for it to be longer than 2 months after which time you are deemed to have accepted it.

 

The clutch problem. Does it have a dual mass flywheel??

 

Ok, thanks for that information.

 

Yes the car does have a dual mass flwheel and yes I do know what the purpose of the DMF is and no the car has not had any engine modifications/remaps done to it during my ownership to increase it's bhp or torque which may induce premature clutch wear.

Edited May 9, 2010 by redwell32

[redwell32]

They also didn't tell you when you bought it not to go shopping naked with a traffic cone on your head.

 

The track analogy might show you know a bit about cars..................unfortunately the rest of the posts clearly indicate you don't.

 

Wouldn't you be better off directing your questions to the other forum where they discuss secret makes and models, or have you filled that forum with pointless posts as well.

 

Hammy

 

Thanks for the helpful and constructive reply, Hammy

[Conniff]

The major problem on your hands at the moment is the lack of any service stamps if it has reached either the service miles or period.

 

If it has been due a service in the past, then get the book stamped or you will void any remaining manufacturers warranty.

[redwell32]

The major problem on your hands at the moment is the lack of any service stamps if it has reached either the service miles or period.

 

If it has been due a service in the past, then get the book stamped or you will void any remaining manufacturers warranty.

 

It has just had it's first major service done - stamped in the book by the dealer.

 

The minor oil and filter change I mentioned was an interim one I asked for as part of the deal and was marked on my original invoice from the seller but they did not put it in the service book although I asked them to.

[my-spirit-soars-free]

Well, I know nothing about cars, other than how to start and aim them. I have just checked my service book and no repairs are in it. Not that I am hiding them, but the garage just don't put the info there. When we bought it some receipts for previous repairs were in the glove compartment (and were a selling point... "look, it has a new snorklebelt, so you know that won't go, and it has obviously been looked after, the repair was at the dealership").

 

I am really confused why anyone would need to say what repairs had been done when you buy the car, surely if it has been repaired that is it? Apart from anything else, I get the fault light on, I take car to be mended, mechanic tells me the winklegrommit has gone, I get it replaced, and instantly forget what a winklegrommit is and that I had it replaced. I certainly won't remember when I part ex the thing, if they ask me about the history they will get a very blank look - I turn the key, it makes a noise, it takes me where I want to go.

[Sambear]

I too don't get the problem here. The car you bought had a 'newer' gearbox than you thought and the fault with a slipping clutch would not be connected to gearbox replacement unless there was contamination of the plate (was there?). You are not obliged to tell a future purchaser the car has had a new gearbox, only if you know it has a current fault or has been in an accident so this will not affect future value of the car. However, I'd approach the original selling dealer for a payment towards your out of pocket expenses and goodwill and if they don't play ball, write to the manufacturer detailing your case and suggest they recompense you in some way. I doubt very much you could reject the car on the basis of this one failure which you admit was down to wear and tear even though the repair time has been drawn out with the over torqued bolts.

 

As for stamps in service books - a dealer/garage should only stamp a book if they have carried out the prescribed manufacturers' service ie an annual or 18k service or whatever is prescribed for this mystery wagon. An oil change is not a service and I for one would be most p*ssed off if I bought a car with a stamp in the service book and all it had was an oil change when I would be expecting it to have had all the other checks associated with a service. Now if they did the a proper service early ie at 9mths rather than 12mths that's a different matter - is that the case here? For additional oil changes above and beyond the service schedule, a copy of the receipt tucked in the book to show a future purchaser that it had it's oil changed a bit more regular than needed would suffice but its not a full service and shouldn't be stamped in the book to imply it is.

 

Sorry if that's not what you wanted to hear but just because you have lost confidence in a car (though why, I'm not sure) doesn't make it a bad car. Get it back from the repairer and drive it, I'm sure you'll fall in love again after a few miles. I was in a similar situation a few years ago but it will only spoil the car for you if you dwell on it.

[LancerQRL]

unfortunately sir, having checked the records, the drive shaft seal/ injector seal/ door lock motor/ headlight bulb etc, that was repaired on xx/xx/xxxx under warrenty may have been from the production date xx/xx/xxxx to xx/xx/xxxx, therefore your car is actually worth 65% less than the normal trade in value, especially as its RED !!