Tweet
We purchased a used car from a large, well-known approved dealership. It was advertised as being in very good condition for its age. The website states that any accompanying invoices for repairs etc. would be available to us to give us piece of mind. This influenced our decision to pay a dealer's premium price. The website makes a very big deal about customers being given information about the history of the vehicle. When we met with the sales manager he point black refused to let us even glance at any paperwork and said he was not allowed to let us see them because of GDPR. We have the MOT info. from online and the service stamps but nothing else.
There were two faults that required us driving back to the dealership within the first 2 weeks. The dealer refused to pause the 30 days whilst the work/investigations were carried out. We asked in person and via email and were refused both times.
The dealership supposedly did a ‘rigorous’ check of the car pre-purchase and the paperwork for this states that there are no actions needed. Windscreen, bodywork, underbody protection, warning lamps and corrosion marked as inspected with no issues. Car arrived with big roof dent (repaired by dealer after request). Week afterwards engine lights all on – back to garage but no fault found. Crack in windscreen noted after 6 weeks that was likely there beforehand. We have left this as we've no proof that this is the case.
Most concerning, we noticed a rusty component and took the car back to dealership. We requested to see it up on the jacks. The level of underbody rust for the age of the car is in our view consistent with being kept in very salty coastal conditions and is not usual for the age of this car. Some components e.g. drive shaft heavily corroded. Without viewing the car himself, a member of staff emailed us and said that this was just surface rust consistent with the age of the car (2014) and that all components were superfically rusty. The offer from the dealership is to underseal parts of the car (which parts, and what treatment, we do not know). We disagree a) that it is surface rust for all components (chunks have flaked off in some areas and there is pitting) and b) that simply undersealing over this level of deterioration will provide durability. We are concerned about the safety of some of these areas of weakness.
Whilst the car was at the dealership we noted some large black areas underneath. The technician said that they were unsure whether it was repaired and they did not know whether this should be on the car as a standard thing or not. We have no idea of what these areas are and the dealer let us leave the premises none the wiser. It could be a repair (which may have been in the paperwork we were not allowed to see). It could be something less concerning. We feel that if a tech who works on this make and model all the time is not sure whether two large chunks of black stuff shold be there this person cannot possibly be qualified to state that the underbody has been inspected to be fine (as per the check paperwork).
The dealership stated very explicitly in the ad and in person that this was a car in very good condition for its age, with no issues, and we believed the that check was rigorous. We were told it was unlikely we would see the dealership apart from the annual service, such was its quality. We have already driven there and back 3 times for repairs and investigations and they are wanting it back in again. We feel that the dealership was unfair in not pausing the 30 days and by not letting us see invoices and feel that this indicates that the dealership does not honour our rights and may not in future. We reject the offer from someone who has not viewed the car to slap unspecified underseal on unnamed parts of the vehicle as we contend that the rust is not universally superficial.
We have had the car 3 months. We would like to reject the car and not take the offer of underseal as we feel it's a bigger issue than that. We believe we have been mis-sold the vehicle and that the dealer has hidden information about its past. Are we within our rights here please?
There were two faults that required us driving back to the dealership within the first 2 weeks. The dealer refused to pause the 30 days whilst the work/investigations were carried out. We asked in person and via email and were refused both times.
The dealership supposedly did a ‘rigorous’ check of the car pre-purchase and the paperwork for this states that there are no actions needed. Windscreen, bodywork, underbody protection, warning lamps and corrosion marked as inspected with no issues. Car arrived with big roof dent (repaired by dealer after request). Week afterwards engine lights all on – back to garage but no fault found. Crack in windscreen noted after 6 weeks that was likely there beforehand. We have left this as we've no proof that this is the case.
Most concerning, we noticed a rusty component and took the car back to dealership. We requested to see it up on the jacks. The level of underbody rust for the age of the car is in our view consistent with being kept in very salty coastal conditions and is not usual for the age of this car. Some components e.g. drive shaft heavily corroded. Without viewing the car himself, a member of staff emailed us and said that this was just surface rust consistent with the age of the car (2014) and that all components were superfically rusty. The offer from the dealership is to underseal parts of the car (which parts, and what treatment, we do not know). We disagree a) that it is surface rust for all components (chunks have flaked off in some areas and there is pitting) and b) that simply undersealing over this level of deterioration will provide durability. We are concerned about the safety of some of these areas of weakness.
Whilst the car was at the dealership we noted some large black areas underneath. The technician said that they were unsure whether it was repaired and they did not know whether this should be on the car as a standard thing or not. We have no idea of what these areas are and the dealer let us leave the premises none the wiser. It could be a repair (which may have been in the paperwork we were not allowed to see). It could be something less concerning. We feel that if a tech who works on this make and model all the time is not sure whether two large chunks of black stuff shold be there this person cannot possibly be qualified to state that the underbody has been inspected to be fine (as per the check paperwork).
The dealership stated very explicitly in the ad and in person that this was a car in very good condition for its age, with no issues, and we believed the that check was rigorous. We were told it was unlikely we would see the dealership apart from the annual service, such was its quality. We have already driven there and back 3 times for repairs and investigations and they are wanting it back in again. We feel that the dealership was unfair in not pausing the 30 days and by not letting us see invoices and feel that this indicates that the dealership does not honour our rights and may not in future. We reject the offer from someone who has not viewed the car to slap unspecified underseal on unnamed parts of the vehicle as we contend that the rust is not universally superficial.
We have had the car 3 months. We would like to reject the car and not take the offer of underseal as we feel it's a bigger issue than that. We believe we have been mis-sold the vehicle and that the dealer has hidden information about its past. Are we within our rights here please?
Comment