Bought car from dealer - now found to have significant faults ***Settled by CC Claim***

[Conniff]

Ok, so we have a car that developed a fault or a previous fault re-appeared before it had even left the forecourt. That fault was reported at the time but the buyer was told to 'see how it goes'.

 

Now further problems have appeared or re-appeared so who is the responsible party.

 

Irrespective of age, mileage and price paid, the purchase should be of satisfactory quality, how it was described and should be fit for the purpose. The depth of those points, however, are governed by the age, mileage and price paid, so is it reasonable to expect the buyer to contribute to repairs he is 'seeing how they go' and just 300 miles down the road.

 

The problem now is who do we trust. Without knowing that particular Jaguar, I would say that there are Lambda sensors on the cats and probably before and after at that. So are the cats at fault and need replacing or is it the Lambda sensors that need changing. I would say that we are probabley looking at a twin exhaust system with 2 cats as the op seems to indicate such, so how likely is it that both have failed at the same time. It is probably because of the high cost of replacement why the seller feels it should be shared, especially if used are hard to find and recons aren't available, that would more than likely take the car above it highest retail worth.

Betterment must also be taken into consideration when deciding who pays what.

 

Going by what has been said by the op, and given the fault appearing, and being reported, before the car left the forecourt, i feel the seller should shoulder the biggest part of the repair cost or offer the buyer his money back. The car is obviously not of the quality that a reasonable person would expect even if it was only £2,500.

 

Then, of course, we come the the Sale of Goods Act. As we know, this say that any faults that appear within the first six months are assumed to have been there at purchase. If the cats are indeed past their best, then that didn't happen in 300 miles.

 

So much depends on the 'real' condition of the car at point of sale, so, unless this garage in the middle of nowhere has the equipment to test and give a confident failure of those items, it must be taken with a pinch of salt and every effort made to have a true diagnosis made and at this timeframe, that would be up to the seller.

[robster234]

Hi,

So to update everyone on what happened - nothing basically up to now! After my last post I sent the dealer a letter before action threatening legal action. I never heard from him and to be honest I haven't had the time or energy to pursue him as I have been flat out with work and house issues up to this point in time.

I intended to change the inlet manifold seals and imt seals as I have read that these can give problems on this car, however with all the bad weather we have had I haven't had a chance yet.

However today I went to swap the back wheels to the front and what I found shocked me, both driver and passenger side sills are absolutely rotten, there has no way these have got this bad in six months since it was mot'd by the dealer and if you look back at my early posts you will see that I had my doubts with regards to the validity of the mot pass. In the intervening months I have also uncovered evidence that the car has suffered side and rear impacts.

I am going to contact trading standards tommorow and see what they say and also organise someone to inspect the car. At this present stage I am thinking of issuing a county court summons for the purchase price of the car and hopefully this will scare the dealer into giving at least some of my money back.

I am so annoyed with this dealer and he has effectively ripped me off, the car is to be honest only now suitable for breaking.

Has anyone got anymore advice or opinions?

[sailor sam]

Now you have left it this long you will have been deemed to have accepted the car. Game over in my opinion.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Conniff
typo

[robster234]

So sale of goods act doesn't apply anymore? Think I will take up a bit of used car dealing on the side as judging by this and many other posts on this forum it is perfectly OK to sell unroadworthy, unmerchantable quality vehicles with dodgy mots ?!

[sailor sam]

In my opinion you had a good case. But since you sent the seller an LBA almost 6 months ago and didn't follow it through, if you issued a claim now he would produce the letter in court as a defense. You could try CAB to see what they say but I am not confident that you now have a good chance of success. You only have a certain amount of time to pursue these matters and I'm not sure that leaving it in abeyance for 6 months would be deemed reasonable. Please try CAB tomorrow... I am happy to be proved wrong as like you, I am totally anti-rouge car dealers.

[Conniff]

Irrespective of what you believe, you are over the six months period of proof and 'you' will have to show that any of the faults you have were present at the time of sale.

[sailor sam]

Irrespective of what you believe, you are over the six months period of proof and 'you' will have to show that any of the faults you have were present at the time of sale.

 

Not sure that is the case either Conniff. The seller would no doubt produce the OP's LBA in court pointing out that 6 months has elapsed from the time of the letter and as such, the seller believes that the OP has now accepted the car as it is. Obviously the judge may think otherwise but I certainly think that the OP is now prejudiced his case by not perusing it. As I said though, I am happy to be proven wrong.

[Conniff]

I think the statements compliment each other Sam.

[sailor sam]

I think the statements compliment each other Sam.

 

Steady Conniff, Steady!

[robster234]

Just a quick update for anyone who is interested....

I spoke to the credit card company which I used to purchase the car with. This time they were more helpful, they asked me to get an independent specialist report which they are reimbursing me for. The specialist I contracted acts as a witness in legal disputes / court cases and is an ex police vehicle inspector. He inspected the car and produced a written report which completely backs up my description of faults, he stated that the corrosion was advanced to such an extent that it would have been at a severe stage when the car was sold and that the vehicle is not capable of passing an MOT.

 

The inspector I used stated to me that the corrosion was some of the worse he had seen in a long time and that in his opinion I should report the dealer to Trading Standards and the MOT testing station to VOSA as the vehicle could not have passed a properly conducted MOT at time of sale.

 

I have sent his report plus copies of a written communication I have had with the dealer to the credit card company, now that the credit card company have received my paperwork + report they have written to the dealer giving him 14 days to respond. I now have to wait and see what happens.

[sailor sam]

Well that sounds promising. Certainly above what I was expecting from the CC company. Hopefully you will get a result from them without going to court even if the seller dosn't play ball. Fingers crossed!

[robster234]

Just a quick update on this - I got all of my money back from the Credit Card company!!

 

Took many phone calls, emails, and the evidence of an expert witness who deals with litigation claims in the motor trade but eventually the CC company paid me back all of the purchase price paid.

 

My advice to anyone else in this situation is don't give up! The CC company will try and fob you off but eventually you can succeed.!

[sailor sam]

Greta news! Lets hope that the CC now pursues the seller!

[MARTIN3030]

Yes good news will mark the thread title in reflection.