Advice Re Used Car & Issues - bought from used car sales centre

[kregrs]

At the beginning of September I bought a car from a used car sales centre local to me. The car is a Seat Alhambra, it cost £2500, of which I paid £1900 and traded in a 2004 Mondeo to cover the rest. Having taken the car for a test drive before leaving a deposit, I could find no faults aprt from some loose trim, however within a few hours of collecting the car (5 days later) I had noticed a few faults. I was told when signing the paperwork that there was a 3 month warranty, I wasn't made aware of any exclusions of any kind, and was told that anything needing to be done would be sorted. So I sent the car back in for the work to be done a week later. The faults I had found were -

Knocking from o/s/f suspension,

Rear wash wipe not working,

Squeal from power steering at low revs,

Aux heater not working,

Air con not working, (advised it needed regassing)

 

All the issues bar the knocking noise had been sorted within a week, the suspension issue was taken care of by another local garage at my request (the garage used by the sales centre were unable to rectify the fault). In the meantime, another couple of faults appeared, a faulty brake pad sensor and faulty wiper mechanism or motor, along with the air con issue being diagnosed as a fractured pipe.

So, I requested that the sales centre rectify these last few faults under warranty, only to be told that they (the manager) was not prepared to be spending much more money on the car, as it is 11yrs old and they cant justify spending the sums required. The 'sums' in question are £167 wiper mech, £155 Aircon pipe, £16 brake pad sensor, although he offered to source and fit a recon wiper mech, but is only prepared to supply and fit the air con pipe and wiper mech as new parts if I make a contribution to the cost, which I'm not prepared to do.

It has been 2 weeks since I spoke to the manager about the parts, it being left that he would look into the matter and get back to me. My question is, where do I stand here? I was planning on visiting the manager and finding out what is happening, but given that I have now waited 2 weeks, (parts are available new and recon and able to be supplied within days) and nothing has been done, I was wondering if I can verbally give him a time limit to rectify the problems (followed by a letter), then take further action? And if so, what is the next course of action? Court?

 

The bit that gets to me is his comment 'its 11yrs old and I cant justify spending too much money on it', I bought the vehicle in good faith with the understanding that any faults would be fixed under warranty, and now he's trying to go back on what was said. It states on the sales receipt that there is 3 months warranty, but gives no exclusions, although I assume the usual consumables aren't covered - tyres, brake pads, clutch etc.

[heliosuk]

He's actually in the right here. On a car of this age with a new part he would be entitled to a betterment contribution. He could of course fit a used part with no contribution from yourself and he would have met his obligations. I'd go for the re-con option as these usually carry the same guarantee as a new part and are better than second hand parts. It seems he is acting quite reasonably here.

[kregrs]

Ok, so I can see where he's coming from now. Having visited them earlier, it seems they haven't ordered any parts, recon or otherwise, and I'm getting the impression they're now looking to use the condition of my trade in as an excuse to not carry out any more work. The car I traded in, 2004 54 reg Mondeo Titanium X 2.2tdci Estate, 148k, wasn't in great condition, book price in A1 condition £1400, (trade in price) so for them to value it at £600 trade in gives an impression of its condition. Its fair to say it needed work, nothing was hidden, they had every opportunity to inspect the car prior to agreeing a price. When I contact them Monday to see what's happening re parts and work, I'm fully expecting them to use the condition of my trade in as an excuse to get out of repairing the car I bought from them. So should that happen, what do I do?

[Nagasis]

The trade in should not affect your warranty or rights unless it stated so in your contract or warranty which I doubt very much.

 

I would wait the few days to see what the dealer says and then you will have a better picture of their position.

[heliosuk]

The trade in price is irrelevant and is down to the dealer. How the dealer shows it on the books is also down to them so don't worry about that. They won't order any parts until you give them the direction you want them to take and I have outlined the options they have.

 

If you want a new OEM part then you have to pay a contribution, if you don't want to pay anything they can do what they want to fix the issue to return the car to a state that is commensurate with it's age and mileage including the use of used parts if need be. They would even be within their rights to ask for a betterment figure with the use of a recon part but haven't.

 

At the moment they seem to be reacting to fulfill their obligations but there will become a point when a buyer has to realise that an 11 year old car is not going to be as good or have the reliability of a new one.

 

And that's the problem with the advocates of the SOGA act which does not make clear enough what is acceptable and what is not.

[kregrs]

I don't expect the car to be in the condition of, or have the reliability of, a new car. But when it's been advertised as having air con, it'd be nice if it actually worked! I don't buy a car and then expect to have to spend more money fixing issues, there are a few things which have been left, namely condition of the interior, its 11yrs old and has covered 128k so I don't expect it to be like a new car, far from it, but the issues the car has aren't minor, niggling faults. I don't see though, how they're fulfilling their obligations, by dragging their feet over sourcing replacement parts. But I'll wait and see what happens this week.

[kregrs]

It seems that now as well as the brake warning sensor failing, another sensor has decided to make its presence known, and randomly make an appearance on the dash, this being a temp sensor, warning me of a lack of coolant and to stop the car, although stopping the car and restarting gets rid of it, until it decides to make yet another appearance. Having checked the coolant I know it isn't low, hopefully it is just a sensor, although within 3 days of buying the car, it did lose all its coolant, and overheated. This resulted in a 'thorough' check of the cooling system, water pump was found to be ok, along with the rest of the system, although there was no thermostat so one was fitted. Since then, its lost a bit of coolant, but having topped up a couple of weeks ago, I haven't noticed any more loss.

[heliosuk]

It seems to me that they have given you the options and are awaiting instructions. New, recon or used and you need to tell them what you want. And as regards the air con.........you could have tried this before you bought.

 

I'm not having a pop here but the impression you are starting to give is somewhat contradictory.

[kregrs]

As I had stated to them that I am not prepared to pay for parts to put right a vehicle I bought from them, they are visiting the local scrap yard over the weekend to locate the parts required, so not new or recon parts, just used and potentially untested parts that I am supposed to let them fit to the vehicle, not knowing if it will cure the issue or not. These are the parts they were supposed to source 2 weeks ago. I assumed that the purpose of a warranty was to put right faults found after the sale? Am I supposed to just accept some of these faults, because its an 11yr old car? Because if that's your view, I'm afraid I don't agree. £2.5k may not be a lot to you, but it is to me, that is what my budget was, and it was only vehicles of that age, of that type (Galaxy, Sharan, Alhambra) that were available in that budget.

As for the air con, it didn't work on the test drive, the display was flashing on start up, which I was later told is indicative of a fault. I was told by the salesman that it simply needed regassing and would be done prior to me collecting the vehicle, along with a service and any other items they found upon checking the car to bring it up to standard. Unfortunately, while I looked under the bonnet, I did not notice the pipe from the back of the compressor was fractured otherwise I would have made them aware. If the service had been carried out, and the vehicle had been up on the ramp, then due to the location of the pipe, it would have been noticed. Nothing contadictory there.

Edited October 14, 2012 by kregrs

[kregrs]

And another question, would I be unreasonable in asking for advisories on the MOT to be sorted? They had the car tested a month prior to me buying it, it failed on headlight aim which was sorted, but there are 3 advisories.

[heliosuk]

They have to put the vehicle back to a condition where it is not faulty but commensurate with the age and mileage at the time of of purchase. So this means you are not entitled to new or reconditioned parts though that is the best and obvious thing to do from an engineering perspective.

 

If they fit new or re-conditioned parts which are expected to be better than the condition that the original ones then by definition they are entitled to betterment.

 

Your hypothesis suggests that by buying a used car at or towards the end of it's design life such as yours, the dealer is obliged to put brand new parts on at no cost to you which is simply not the case.

 

As regards the advisories then again no. You buy the car as is, warts and all and anything on the advisories should be part of the cost negotiations at the point of sale. However, I recognise that this is often not shown but you need to bare in mind that they are indeed advisories and that the MOT test is subjective.

 

You seem to me to be pushing your luck a bit so to speak on this one.

[sailor sam]

As I see it, a lot will depend on how the vehicle was advertised. For example, if it was advertised as having aircon, then it would be reasonable for you to expect it to be working. Personally having paid £2.5k for an 11 year old people carrier with 128k on the clock, I would expect it to be in good condition without the faults listed here. The warranty btw, is irrelevant as it is only an extension of your statutory rights. It would probably not be for the warranty co to pay out on existing faults anyway.

 

I would say to the seller that you will expect nothing less than re-con parts.

[oddjobbob]

If it was advertsied with aircon then the aircon should work, if it wasn't then the dealer might well claim he never even knew it had aircon - he WILL know, but say he didn't and there's not much you can do if /c was not advertised.

 

As for the MOT advisories, no, they are advisories only, the fact remains that the car still passed a MOT test, advisories are NOT failures - I don't know what the advisories were in this cae but things like 'brake pads wearing thin 'exhaust rusty' 'rear tyres tread only 3mm' and things like that are passes on an MOT, just things to note for the future.

 

Out of goodwill they ought to go some way toward nmaking you happy.

 

Tht rather depends on if they've got any brains or not though!

[kregrs]

Ok, points taken on board.

Now, when I got the car, within 3 days it had overheated and lost all its coolant. It was returned, and checked over, a missing thermostat was fitted, waterpump was checked, and apparently the head gasket was checked, and all found to be fine. The small bit of mayonaise on the oil filler cap was explained away as condensation.

Since then I've had to top up the coolant twice, with a total of 2 litres, the 1st time I topped up was just through idly checking the level, the 2nd time because a low coolant warning flashed up on the dash, and the mayonaise still remains, although no evidence anywhere else, ie, dipstick. Having done some research on this online, apparently a cracked head is a common problem on these, and costly to rectify. Bearing in mind that they were made aware of this issue within days of collecting the car, and have supposedly checked everything else, and it has repeatedly lost coolant since I've had it, what are my options here? If, as they say, they have checked everything, then there is something still amiss, and obviously it needs to be investigated, but I understand it could get expensive, even more so if it is the head, and with his reluctance to spend too much money on it...

The other issues have been identified and are being dealt with, which I am happy with, but this is the biggest issue of them all, and probably the costliest.

What can I expect here? I fully understand that repair could be uneconomical considering the cars value.

[heliosuk]

Why have you only just declared this issue?

 

It's more important than any of the other faults you have stated.

 

On balance now you need to reject it.

 

As Sailor Sam on this he's pretty clued up on the process. The down side is you have to stop using it.

[sailor sam]

'Mayonnaise' on either the coolant or oil filler cap is a sure sign of head gasket failure and will only get worse. If it is evident after the short while you have had the car then you need to do one of 2 things; insist the seller puts it right by possibly using the warranty (but it is for him to deal with) or formally reject the car as being not fit for the purpose and of unsatisfactory quality. If you do the latter, then as Helio says, you must not use the car once you post the rejection letter.

[kregrs]

Right, the above issues have still to be solved by the company I bought the car from, but another issue has arisen. Halfway across a roundabout today, the car lost all drive, followed by a grinding noise. The RAC have diagnosed this as being the driveshaft has failed, and possible gearbox damage. On speaking to the car sales company, they're refusing to deal with the issue under warranty, using the mileage as a get out, by saying that as the vehicle has covered more than 2000 miles since I purchased it (had it 2 months, and its taken us on holiday around Wales in last week, as well as usual commuting, shopping etc) they won't cover the repair. I have no recollection of any mention of a mileage limit, and can't remember seeing any mention of it on the receipt, which I can't find.

So what can I do? At the moment I'm left with a car I can't use, I'm about to have it recovered back to the car sales company, but what can I expect them to do? Surely a repair isn't too unreasonable?

[sailor sam]

Did you not take the previous advice offered?

[Kiki1]

A holiday abroad was more important than the advice given here and the money.

[kregrs]

Yes the advice was taken on board, and agreement was made to repair the car, although the work is still outstanding.

And Kiki, since when has Wales been abroad? Not that it matters but the holiday was booked and paid for before I got the car. The holiday was mentioned as that contributed to raising my mileage covered significantly. Nice pointless post, thanks.

As an aside, the coolant issue wasn't headgasket related, but a gasket on the side of the block, which had become mishapen and was leaking.

I do not want to reject the car, so will not be taking that course of action.

[sailor sam]

As I pointed out previously, the warranty is only an extension of your statutory rights under the SOGA. I also pointed out that rejection was one option although personally, thats the route I would of taken.

 

Your only option now it seems to to send the seller a formal letter stating that unless they agree to rectify the outstanding faults (as agreed) plus the new one, you will arrange to have the repairs carried out yourself and present them with the bill. You can remind them that under the SOGA, the onus is on them to prove that the defects were not present at the point of sale. Another thing I pointed out previously was the price you paid for the vehicle in the first place. £2.5k isn't exactly cheap considering the age and mileage which is something a judge will consider if you take the matter to court. Had it been say £1k cheaper, I would of said differently. If you do make a claim against the seller, you can also claim 'consequential losses' which would include out of pocket expenses such as car hire etc. First though, you will have to wait to see what response you get to your letter (I suggest giving just 7 days to respond) and then you may have to also send a letter before action (LBA) before finally taking the matter to court.

 

The downside of not rejecting is however, after 2k miles in as many months, you only now have the above option available to you as now you will have been deemed to have accepted the car. And I can see that a court case is looming to recover your repair costs so you can expect to be significantly out of pocket initially. The other piece of bad news is that even if you are awarded judgement, there is no guarantee you will get any money back. Most rouge traders know all the tricks in the book to avoid paying.

[Kiki1]

And Kiki, since when has Wales been abroad? Not that it matters but the holiday was booked and paid for before I got the car. The holiday was mentioned as that contributed to raising my mileage covered significantly. Nice pointless post, thanks.

 

Hardly pointess, whilst the car dealer is almost certainly up to something, you have played right into their hands by continuing to drive the car before work has commenced on the faults, and now another has come to light.

 

If you believe they will now work on current and earlier issues without quibble then you have far too much faith in them. A rental car for the week would have given you peace of mind, paperwork to present before the courts and additional leverage should the repairs still not happen.

[kregrs]

Sailor Sam, having spoken to CAB's consumer line earlier, I was advised to speak personally with the dealer first, and to put it in writing afterwards. The reason being they have the car back with them, and it has been moved to another workshop so the driveshaft/gearbox can be stripped to assess the damage. I was advised along the lines that as the fault has occurred within 6 months of purchase it could be deemed to have been present at time of purchase.

As a comeback to this, the company have done the same (contacted consumer line) and are claiming fair wear and tear. On pushing them they have agreed to have the car inspected by an 'expert' to decide if the fault could have been present. If it is they'll pay for repairs, otherwise they want me to pay. I asked who the expert would be, apparently the local main dealer or a gearbox specialist. I'm curious to know how they'll know if the fault was present at time of sale, and if the expert will be impartial and unbiased.

The other issues, they have agreed to rectify them once this issue is sorted.

[kregrs]

Kiki, sorry for being flippant in my other post, it wasn't a good day when I replied, having car give up and having failed my LGV driving test that morning.

A rental car would have been nice, but unfortunately our budget wouldn't stretch to that.

[kregrs]

So now we have a development. I called the trader today to find out where the car is as I needed some things out of it. During the conversation he offered to split the repair cost 50/50, or I could accept a refund and return of my part ex, or he could supply an exchange vehicle. He also told me that no work had been carried out on the vehicle as yet, but would inform me of what the state of play is.

So, I get to the workshop, get my things from the car and casually asked if they'd diagnosed the fault yet. I was told that the fault is definitely the driveshaft splines, that the parts had been ordered and they were awaiting delivery. He also stated that in his opinion it is wear and tear.

Back to the car trader, who had said that if it was a wear and tear item, they wouldn't be liable for the cost, despite the timeframe of me purchasing the car and the part failing. I understand their 50/50 offer to be a goodwill gesture, but could it seen as an admission of liability as they've since made the other 2 choices available?

The offer of a refund is not an option I want to take, not only because I would (fairly) lose money, but also because I do not want my trade in back, it was traded in with MOT and tax which have both now lapsed. I also am happy with my current car, despite the issues, I just want it sorted.

So what are peoples opinions?