Car Purchase

[Philario]

Hi, if this isn't in the correct category I apologise.
5 months ago I bought a used Renault Grand Scenic (5years old) from Evans Halshaw. It cost £7000 plus my old car in p/x and I paid for the car using a 0% credit card.
The car had done 39,500 miles when bought & had full service history. It's now done 44,000. On Saturday the cam belt snapped on the motorway, leaving the engine ruined. The cam belt should last a minimum of 6 years or 96,000 miles!
I contacted Evans Halshaw first thing Monday morning to discuss my options. They were helpful, immediately arranging to collect the car via recovery vehicle on Monday afternoon.
Since then, EH have been in touch with Renault about a solution (Renault don't want to help). I have told EH about the Sale of Goods Act pointing out that the car couldn't have been in a satisfactory condition when I bought it and it's a breach of contract etc.
I am awaiting their response.

Where do I stand and will they repair the car or refund me?

Last resort could be section 75 (credit card) but I would rather EH sorted it.

Any help would be MUCH appreciated.
Thank You

[Dazbrad]

Re: Car Purchase

If the contract was formed before the 1st Oct 2015, the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SGA) applies.

If the contract was formed on, or after the 1st Oct 2015, the Comsumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA) applies.

According to the fault you describe, you will be arguing that the goods are "Not of a Satisfactory Quality". This applies to SGA and CRA.

SALE OF GOODS ACT 1979:

If goods are not of a satisfactory quality, the available remedies under SGA could be

a) A Refund - Burden of proof will be on you to prove that the goods where inherently faulty

b) A Repair or a Replacement - Burden of Proof will be on the trader for the first 6 months after purchase to prove that there is not a fault, or that you are responsible for the fault. If the fault developed or was noticed 6 months or longer ago, the buden of proof will be on you to prove that the car was inherently faulty.


CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015:

If goods are not of a satisfactory quality, the available remedies under the CRA could be...

If the goods were bought within 30 days, you are entitled to exercise your 'Short Term Right to Reject' and demand a full refund. The burden of proof will be on you to prove that there is an inherent fault with the car.

You could instead request a Repair or a Replacement. If you prefer this, the 30 days will stop until you are given the repaired car back, or given the replacement car. Only then will the remainder of the 30 days start counting down again. If this remaining time is less than 7 days, you will automatically be given 7 days in which to reject the car and get a full refund.

If the purchase was made more than 30 days ago, you may only request a repair or a replacement, inwhich case the buden of proof will be on the trader for the first 6 months to prove that the car is not faulty, or that you are responsible for the damage. After 6 months, the burden of proof will be on you to prove that the car is inherently faulty.

If the repair or replacement causes significant inconvenience, comes at a cost, or cant be done within a reasonable time. You may be able to pursue the trader for a refund - deducting an agreed and proportionate amount for usage of the car.

A traders best defence against claims is simply to say no as long as they possibly can. 9/10 people are either too scared to take legal action, fear lossing more money as a result or dont know what to do if a trader says this. Most will give up thinking they dont stand a chance.

Send 3 recorded delivery letters to the trader, keeping a copy for yourself. Each letter should pe sent parted by a deadline to respond of between 2 - 28 days. The 3rd letter should be titled "Letter Before Action".

Write in the letter asking whether the trader is a member of an ADR scheme (a form of mediation) if they are get in contact with that scheme and take your case with them.

If the trader is not a member of an ADR scheme, you can go to your local court house and get an N1 form and apply your vase that way. Or you can apply for court online at www.moneyclaim.gov.uk

Hope this helps.let us know how you got on.

[des8]

Re: Car Purchase

As you purchased the vehicle 5 months ago, and they are not of satisfactory quality you are entitled to reject the vehicle.
The burden of proving the vehicle was of satisfactory quality during the first six months after sale is on the seller
(Sale of Goods Act 1979 Part 5A sec F248A (3):For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above goods which do not conform to the contract of sale at any time within the period of six months starting with the date on which the goods were delivered to the buyer must be taken not to have so conformed at that date.)

[Dazbrad]

Re: Car Purchase

Dont want to provoke any debates, but only a judge can decide what is or isnt reasonable. A refund is only an available remedy, not an entitlement.

If I bought a car and I noticed that the ariel was bent within 6 months of purchase. A judge MAY see it unreasonable for the trader to have to give a refund when a repair might be relatively easy & possibly cheaper. A trader in those circumstances, an similar will certainly challenge the case.

This is considering that the Sale of Goods Act applies... Anf thanks for pointing that out des8, completely missef that.

[des8]

Re: Car Purchase

I thought the Sale of Goods Act was pretty clear about the buyers rights.
Sec F2 48A:

This section applies if—

(a)

the buyer deals as consumer or, in Scotland, there is a consumer contract in which the buyer is a consumer, and

(b)

the goods do not conform to the contract of sale at the time of delivery.

(2)

If this section applies, the buyer has the right—

(a)

under and in accordance with section 48B below, to require the seller to repair or replace the goods, or

(b)

under and in accordance with section 48C below—

(i)

to require the seller to reduce the purchase price of the goods to the buyer by an appropriate amount, or

(ii)

to rescind the contract with regard to the goods in question.

(3)

For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above goods which do not conform to the contract of sale at any time within the period of six months starting with the date on which the goods were delivered to the buyer must be taken not to have so conformed at that date.

(4)

Subsection (3) above does not apply if—

(a)

it is established that the goods did so conform at that date;

(b)

its application is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity.


Can you show where it says it is not a consumers right?

As the OP has had use of vehicle for 5 months, in the event of rescission there could be a deduction for use

[Dazbrad]

Re: Car Purchase

I do not dispute what the law states, and I cannot point to a particular piece of legislation that supports the makes exemptions when rescinding a contract. However, I strongly believe a judge will make exceptions based on a test of reasonableness. That is not saying your wrong, a judge may decide that a full or partial refund is reasonable. They could look at the severity of the breach and decide that it is unreasonable for the trader to have to give a full refund, especially when the defendant is stating that it can be fixed in an hour for £20-£200.

Seriously this could go on for a while, I only want to manage the enquirers expectation in a worse case scenario.

[des8]

Re: Car Purchase

I believe you are giving an incorrect interpretation of the law.
You did state "a refund is not an entitlement"
The Act clearly states it is a right.

[Dazbrad]

Re: Car Purchase

Agreed, and I stand corrected. I have clearly written without thinking.

However, I feel that my words were influenced by my belief that a judge will also have to consider the reasonableness of a decision that may be based on a minor breach, something that could so easily be remedied swiftly and cheaply, putting both parties where they would have otherwise been.

We may have to agree to disagree on this point. But yes, I have chosen some bad words to use there. My apologies.

[Dazbrad]

Re: Car Purchase

I have just realised your the same person as on the other topic, ha. I work for Citizens Advice Consumer Helpline, this is not a backing for anything I say, as I do not disagree with you or what the law states. You are arguing fact and clearly are also knowledgable on the general subject. What ever your job may be, I was clearly trained to give people advice that considered any unsaid facts. For example, that it was not supposed to be driven off road... or something like that. Restricting liability I guess?!? You are obviously stating it straight from the book. I guess its better that people can read the differences in advice, and why. Best of luck Philario.

[des8]

Re: Car Purchase

For what it's worth, I'm just a grumpy old git!

On a forum like this it is important to have posters put forward contrary views.
However I do believe it is also important that one can show the basis for one's view.
You'll find differences are aired, but by discussing them openly and in a spirit of friendliness we can all learn.

With your background I am sure we all look forward to your further postings
Des

Back to topic now!