How would this battle out in court? reclaim vehicle repair costs **Resolved**

[bourneagain]

Got a case going with the dealer I purchased prestige second hand car from. 3 months after battling to resolve amicable, im considering rejecting under SOGA or pay for repairs then claim cost ans damages through small claims court.

 

The car developed faults from day one. Some were repaired under warranty. Other issues I had to fork out for myself as they were deemed to fall outside warranty. New problems surfaced, all of which were again deemed outside warranty so they refused to repair.

 

Fortunately I took down a timeline of every event, phone call, names of ppl I spoke to, etc... So Following the advice on here, the OFT guide on second hand vehicles and other consumer advice websites, I wrote a detailed letter to the finance company threatening to reject. All that information put together in a 3 page long letter didn't portray the dealer in a pleasant light so I wasn't surprised when the finance company wrote back saying the dealer would not accept rejection but willing to refund any costs for repair falling outside warranty.

 

I wrote back accepting the proposal as long as they cover for all repairs (not just what they deemed to be liable for) and also expenses for fuel/toll charges (there were multiple trips to their own nominated garage that added mileage). They have since gone quiet (it's been 2 weeks).

 

I suspect the dealer bit off more than they wanted with that proposal and now are having second thoughts after seeing the estimated bill i sent through with my response.

 

I have now tried to resolve direct with the dealer and through the finance company. I have offered to accept their proposal, yet still I have nothing. The faults are still there 3 months on which I am sure falls outside of "reasonable time to remediate" (or some similar wording) that OFT's guidelines mention.

 

My preference is to reject and be done with this cursed mobile. However I also do not want a car sitting on my drive for months and years, as some on here have indicated can be the case.

 

The alternative is to pay for the repairs and claim it all back through small claims. I suspect they will defend on the basis of either not covered by warranty or that the issues were due to "wear and tear" therefore not existing at the time of purchase. I would of course argue they were either present or in developing stage at the time of purchase. What is my chances in court?

 

The issues (all 3 manifested around 1 week into ownership, ~ 1500 miles in).

1. Squealing noise from off-side wheels - caused by severely worn rear brake disc and pads attributing to hand brake issues. Discs and pads replaced.

2. Knocking sound from the front axle - caused by damaged front lower arm

3. Grinding noise from the front wheels - caused severe rust on discs. suggested front disc and pads replacement

 

These above was the findings of the garage the dealer designated for diagnosis when I reported the issues. I don't think one could argue driving 1500 miles would "cause" the issues to the discs/pads. That could aggravate and bring it over the edge but not be the "cause". Issue #1 for example, the pads were the thickness of a 2p coin when the garage inspected them (sensors didnt go off as the pads wore out unevenly and to make it worse, the car only has one set of pads connected to the sensors and even that was found to be disconnected). They were shocked that the car would even be on a forecourt for sale. the dealer responded with the usual "car passed an MOT last month therefore legal". I argue that the evidence shows the pads were end of life at the time of purchase and I should have been made aware something like, "mate the pads are almost worn out so you might consider replace", rather than "this car is in pristine condition". Same for issue #3, the rusting is well known to build up over time and requires attention to maintain in good shape. Despite advertising as "regularly maintained", the garage finds they were in an absolute state. This is a £25k car.

 

how would you see this battle out in court if claiming costs for repair/damage?

[Conniff]

Can you tell us what these faults are please bourneagain ?

[bourneagain]

thanks for responding Connif.

 

i described the issues in the original post, here is the relevant extract:

....

The issues (all 3 manifested around 1 week into ownership, ~ 1500 miles in).

1. Squealing noise from off-side wheels - caused by severely worn rear brake disc and pads attributing to hand brake issues. Discs and pads replaced.

2. Knocking sound from the front axle - caused by damaged front lower arm

3. Grinding noise from the front wheels - caused severe rust on discs. suggested front disc and pads replacement

[raydetinu]

All can be fixed, what items were repaired by dealer and those by yourself?

Not a case for rejection IMO, however all should have been fixed by dealer.

Contact finance co again to get dealer to take care of these ( it is their car after all ).

model and mileage would be useful; any advisories on the MOT? you can check on site with VOSA if you don't have the full MOT's.

If no response then yes consider SCC action to recover costs ( original add will be very useful and its description, misrepresentation ).

[Conniff]

So what you are asking for now is a set of pads and discs for the front and a front bush. Is the £25k what you paid or the price when new ?

[sailor sam]

The warranty is irrelevant. It is merely an extension to the statutory rights you already have under the SOGA. It matters not whether the warranty covers non-wear and tear defects or not, the seller has an obligation to repair any inherent (or faults which were assumed to be present at the point of sale) faults at no expense to you. It would be up to him to claim off the warranty, not you.

[bourneagain]

All can be fixed, what items were repaired by dealer and those by yourself?

Not a case for rejection IMO, however all should have been fixed by dealer.

Contact finance co again to get dealer to take care of these ( it is their car after all ).

model and mileage would be useful; any advisories on the MOT? you can check on site with VOSA if you don't have the full MOT's.

If no response then yes consider SCC action to recover costs ( original add will be very useful and its description, misrepresentation ).

 

 

So what you are asking for now is a set of pads and discs for the front and a front bush. Is the £25k what you paid or the price when new ?

 

 

all three issues were rejected by the dealer

I paid for #1 - only as the car was on a ramp with the garage, waiting for a go/nogo decision from me. i am looking to claim this back.

#2 and #3 are outstanding. i am looking to repair these and claim back i.e front discs/pads + lower arm

no advisories.

range rover, 59k mileage.

25k price paid. price new would have twice as much.

[Conniff]

Can I get this straight. What were the complaints that were dealt with by the dealer, what work have they done under warranty ?

[bourneagain]

Can I get this straight. What were the complaints that were dealt with by the dealer, what work have they done under warranty ?

 

Dealt with by the dealer through warranty company - Suspension issue, dashboard warning, steering wheel column. Didn't mention these earlier in detail, apols.

Dealt with by myself as dealer/warranty refused - rear disc and pads

Outstanding and refused to be dealt with by dealer / warranty - front discs and lower arm

[bourneagain]

was there any further thoughts on this?

looking to have the repairs done (at the most reasonable price) and claim back

dealer has offered to look at the issues but is situated at the other end of the country which would not make economical sense

[raydetinu]

If dealer has offered to fix, I doubt you will get anywhere with claim after getting fixed elsewhere.

may not make economical sense for you but does for dealer. No Vat or overhead costs, which you will have to pay if fixed elsewhere.

[bourneagain]

just re-read the letter and the wording says "any valid warranty claim, not met by the aftermarket warranty will be met by us"

 

given they've already said my issues are not valid under the warranty as they attribute them to wear and tear (rusted brake discs after two weeks of driving in dry season causing screeching noises when turning and suspension bush knocking about) - doesn't that imply they won't fix these?

 

they also havent clarified if they would do this in one day or would inspect first, then order parts in and call me back etc that's too much for me 500 miles away and surely no reasonable judge would think this is fair and it would be economical to have the repairs carried out locally to save on costs

[Westmead Fan]

they also havent clarified if they would do this in one day or would inspect first, then order parts in and call me back etc that's too much for me 500 miles away and surely no reasonable judge would think this is fair and it would be economical to have the repairs carried out locally to save on costs

 

did you buy the car travelling 500 miles???

[bourneagain]

did you buy the car travelling 500 miles???

 

500 miles is the round trip so yes I traveled half that to bring the car home.

 

One can't possibly argue that because I bought it from a dealer at a distance that it is unlucky. The car was sold with an aftermarket warranty that was valid nationwide

[sailor sam]

As I see it you have a dilemma to consider and possibly you would need to either bite the bullet or take the matter to court to let a judge decide.

 

But you need to consider that the judge may think that the seller is being reasonable in offering to rectify the outstanding issue that the warranty is refusing. I assume the warranty co believe the issue to be inherent and therefore will not cover it and quite rightly so. So the problem then swings back to the seller who in all probability is indeed responsible to put it right.

 

However, the seller could argue that he is offering to carry out the work himself and that he did not force you to travel 250 miles to purchase the car in the first place. That was your decision. You on the other hand could argue that the car should of been of satisfactory quality and fit for the purpose when you took delivery of it and therefore the seller is also liable for your 'consequential losses' in taking it back to the seller. The judge may think of a similar scenario in which you had been away on holiday 100's of miles away from home (and the seller) when the car broke down. Only problem with that though is that the car appears to be still drive-able.

 

Not sure anyone can really advise you how to proceed. It would of been easier had the seller of flatly refused to repair the car. Then you could of got it repaired locally and pursued him for the cost.

 

But it appears that the seller is maintaining his obligations under the SOGA all be it only minimal. It would really be for a judge to decided whether or not he is being reasonable and whether you would be entitled to consequential losses in respect of travelling back to the seller.

 

As I said, it's a bit of a dilemma.

[bourneagain]

hi sam

 

the seller has offered to pay for the cost of travelling to them.

they have not specified if they will cover the total cost (return trip)

they have not specified how many days they will need (do i need train ticket home then commute back to collect)

so it is very difficult to assess whether this is indeed a cost effective solution for them based on the minimal info they have fed back via the finance company. and if it is not a cost effective solution then why suggest it in the first place? i dont know but here my thoughts

 

my local 4x4 specialist they sent me to diagnose the faults suggested replacement of the disc/pads and also replacement of the lower suspension arm to rectify properly. the total estimate was naturally high and so the seller declined to go via that route. i suspect they want to try "do it on the cheap" i.e mend/repair/make noises go away rather than do the right thing and replace the parts as recommended by the 4x4 specialist.

 

the issue i have is, the seller is proposing to carry out the repairs at their workshop. there is a bit of history on the credibility, whereby their lead mechanic gave me an incorrect diagnosis of a problem i showed him when i first viewed the car. that fault later turned out to be ~ £200/£300 worth of inherent damage that had to eventually get repaired under warranty. This workshop is also the one that carried out the pre-sales check and failed to identify the rest of the £1600 worth of inherent faults that i am now suffering (all of which should have been identified by them as confirmed by the 4x4 specialist who looked at this).

 

so i am confident that accepting this offer will mean

- having half baked repairs done on the cheap, which will most likely re-surface

- add 500 miles to the car's odometer and the usual wear/tear to tyres etc

- cause me significant inconvenience depending on how many trips it needs

 

i am willing to bite the bullet and have it done locally and let it battle out in court.

[sailor sam]

To be frank-fully honest and from what you are saying (and bearing in mind your outlay), i'm surprised you went ahead with the purchase in the first place then. I'm also surprised that the warranty would cover inherent faults (assuming the warranty was taken out when you bought the car).

 

But now you are in this position, I think I would be inclined to agree in having the work done locally using your arguments in court. The judge will hopefully take into consideration of the cost of the vehicle. But I strongly advise you to collate as much documented evidence (in the for of inspection reports from the 4x4 specialist) as possible to back up your claim.

 

Please keep us posted.

[bourneagain]

For those that remember this, I ended up taking legal action via the financial ombudsman and the adjudicator issued their verdict last month.

 

Just to sum up my issue, within days, weeks the range rover sport I purchased suffered one issue after the other. In the end, I ended carrying out the following at my own expense:

 

new air compressor

new rear arc bar (knocking)

new front arc bar (knocking)

new front lower arms

repair handbrake parts (issue squealing)

steering flush

replace rear parking sensors

replace SRS squid (airbag related)

Rear disc and pads (brembo)

 

This was over £4000 worth of works. I did not spare any penny and was fully aware of the risk that when I claim for reimbursement, I may lose.

 

I'm pleased to say the adjudicator ruled in favour of me: All costs + some compensation is now due with the exception of:

 

The rear brakes. Ruled as reasonable wear and tear.

The cost of diagnostics when I seeked independent 2nd opinion.

The front arc bar as the knocking for that surfaced just outside the first six months.

so I've swallowed the cost for the above. Fair enough.

 

The ordeal lasted 18 months, in that time, I made a record of every call and what was discussed followed by written email confirmation, names were jotted down, emails printed, receipts, invoices kept, every trip to the mechanic was reported to the supplying dealer, photographs were taken at key points, I kept a dated timeline of all events etc... In the end I took the plunge and filed my claim in what amounted to a 30 page dossier!! it all paid off.

 

also paid out on the cost of coding a new key. The original advert stated 2 keys but on collection, i was fobbed off with one key and a silly excuse. i did not let that one slide either.

 

the payment cleared today and I have to say i could not have had the confidence nor courage without the advice on this forum. there is justice.

[king12345]

Nice one.

This is the third thread with good news I read today on cag!

[Conniff]

As long as you are satisfied with the outcome then it's good news, well done and thanks for updating after such a long time.

 

 

Nice one.

This is the third thread with good news I read today on cag!

 

The gov have just announce that everyone is to have compulsory 200% payrise and annual holidays have been doubled

[raydetinu]

well done.

[ploddertom]

 

The gov have just announce that everyone is to have compulsory 200% payrise and annual holidays have been doubled

 

 

You heard that wrong - everyone is to a years holiday annually.