Right to Reject less than 30 days - Car Dealership

[Heych91]

Right to Reject (vehicle dealership) - Campervan
Hi,

I'm looking to see where I sit here.
I purchased a VW campervan on the 12/05/2023 (6 days ago) via part exchange - My van was actually worth £7,000 more to them and they've already sold it (£24,995 Vs £17,995).

I asked them to fix some things before taking delivery, one of which was the windows in the back one was sealed shut and the other couldn't be shut and they are due to fix that tomorrow, no problem.
One other was the front fans dont blow out air and the AC isn't working, they've not fixed that despite saying everything was fixed.

Then it gets deeper, the brakes are awful and you push them all the way to the floor before anything happens.

One side panel, whilst you could see some bubbling has now started to chip away and reveal bubbling holes of rust.
In the foot wells, covered by mats, there was a lot of wet and damp - I have pictures unfortunately I don't know how to post these at the same time as writing this.
A front bulb is out - Not a big thing but present when I bought it and it somehow passed an MOT with this and the brake problem.

For context it's a 17 year old VW T5 camper conversion.

My mind is that I should reject the vehicle as it's only been a few days and already finding loads of problems, where do I sit legally?
Would I be better off asking them to just rectify everything? Is rust covered or is it "sold as seen"?

Thanks

[Pezza54]

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 replaced the Sale of Goods Act.

Autotrader has published an article covering consumers' rights after purchasing a second hand vehicle.

The consumer has 30 days to reject a second hand car.

Contact the dealer and let him know your intention if he doesn't rectify the faults. Confirm the contents of the conversation by email.

[Pezza54]

Sorry should have said vehicle bought from a dealership.

[echat11]

How did you pay for it? Credit Card / debit card?

If you decide to return the car, send the following template Recorded Delivery.
Only communicate in writing. Make the issue easier to deal with.

(they'll have to figure out how to refund the part-exchange element of the transaction)

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rig...r-aeziX3M7tYNw

[Heych91]

Hi,

I've had further problems after having these ones fixed and got a report from Halfords to mention unsafe items on the vehicle and on day 28 have moved to reject the vehicle.

He has replied to say he rejects this and would be prepared to defend their position on court.

On one of the problems he has said he was unaware of it and would to use their right to repair, although I understand they don't have this right for the first 30 days?

He has also said about the items on the report from Halfords "With regards to the other items you mention, I would like to point out that the vehicle passed its MOT and these items are fully inline and expected from a vehicle of this age and condition. You purchased a 17 year old vehicle that will have and has “wear and tear”. I would be interested to see a copy of the report"
FWIW he has had the report from Halfords, he must have just missed it on the email

In the end he has made a without prejudice offer to buy it back for £15k, which is less than the £17,995 trade in price for my old vehicle and significantly less than the £24,995 he sold it for the week after.

[echat11]

How did you pay for it?

[Heych91]

I paid for it by full exchange, the car they took off me.valued to match the full purchase price of the one we were buying

[echat11]

des8 Could you please take a look.

[des8]

The Consumer Rights Act 2012 requires that goods sold must be of satisfactory quality.
The standard is that of a reasonable person

You have purchased a 17 year old vehicle, and Halfords report as in post 5 only highlights 2 points (light bulb which could have failed after MOT and a corroded heat shield) which need replacing.
The other matters they mention really are IMO wear and tear and not unexpected on a 17 year old vehicle, and Halfords are only recommending they are replaced. They do not render the vehicle unsafe.

However if the vehicle was mis advertised you might have grounds for complaint.

The dealer does not have the right to repair as you rejected with in the first thirty days, but you might be better trying to have him repair at least some of the aspects you find unsatisfactory rather than trying to prove in court that the vehicle was unsatisfactory.
The court process is far from speedy and in the meantime you would be well advised to cease using the vehicle.

[Heych91]

des8 the other issues were the brakes which I think proves the MOT was dodgy as that was straight after picking it up.
Its been in the garage as often as it's not been in the garage as well.

I suppose I could go back and argue to try and get them to up their offer, but at the same time I worry they'll withdraw their £15k offer.

[Pezza54]

I agree with Des8. A buyer of a 17 year old vehicle cannot expect it to be perfect unless it was described as so.
The van had a current MOT which means the vehicle was roadworthy and Halfords inspected the van and did not find it unsafe to drive.
Did the OP notice the problem with the brakes during the test drive?
The dealer has said he is prepared to contest rejection of the van in court.
If the court process took nearly a year would the van remain unused in the OP's possession for all this time?
Surely better to ask the dealer to carry out repair work. If he refuses the OP could get the work done elsewhere and think about recovering these costs in court.

[des8]

All I'm saying is that the Halford's report does not suggest anything which IMO demonstrates the vehicle is unsatisfactory.
You mention fans and AC not working, and excessive brake pedal travel.
It may be that those faults render the vehicle unsatisfactory, but if you go to court you will need to prove that the faults existed when you purchased the vehicle.

To do that you would possibly need a report from an independent engineer supporting your contention.

Also due to the values involved any court claim for rejection will most probably be allocated to the fast track, which has costs implications.

I would try and negotiate a price reduction (i.e. partial refund) or repairs

[Pezza54]

£3k is a lot of money to lose overnight. I wouldn't consider it. The dealer will probably put it back on the forecourt at the original price.

Are you able to get a garage to provide a written quotation or estimate to correct the faults, keeping the items individually priced?

Use this quotation to negotiate a price reduction if the dealer refuses to carry out all of the work. If the dealer refuses to negotiate warn him that you intend to get the work done elsewhere and will seek to recover the cost in court.

Confirm the conversation in writing.