Rejecting vehicle due to corrosion

[PapaMike]

Hi, I am new to the forum.

I recently purchased a vehicle and tried rejecting this under the 30 day short term rejection under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

The reason for rejection is corrosion on the vehicle. The vehicle is just under five years old and has a six year anti-corrosion warranty

I noticed the corrosion on the vehicle on the second day of ownership of the vehicle. On noticing it I contacted the dealership I purchased it from and also the manufacturer.

The manufacturer sent me to an approved bodyshop who submitted a quotation under warranty for just under £4000 worth of work and parts that need to be replaced. The car was purchased for £4500. On receiving the quote from the bodyshop I put a rejection letter through to the dealership via email as it was close to the 30 day deadline stating the vehicle was not of satisfactory quality due to the amount of work required quoted by the bodyshop.

The dealership has refused my rejection of the warranty and have said the car had no issues when sold and they believed that I had change my mind about the car and was looking for a reason to return it.

I am waiting on the manufacturer to make a decision on if they can proceed with the warranty claim as the cost of the work required is a lot compared to the actual value of the car.

Any advice or help will be much appreciated.

[des8]

As you have exercised your right to early rejection, you could proceed with the matter to court.
On the other hand you might want to wait to see if the warranty claim succeeds, if that is what you want.

The car had no issues when sold, but within 30 days it was suffering from severe corrosion.......... did you store it in a barrel of salt?

[PapaMike]

Hi DES8, thank you for your reply.

Do I need to do a letter before action or proceed directly to court? I spoke with Citizens Advice and they said that I needed to exhaust or possible avenues before proceeding with court action. The warranty claim is progressing and the vehicle is going to have another inspection by the manufacturer and not a third party so they can make a final decision on it. Would it be better to hold on for this second inspection and then submit the paperwork to the court?

Many thanks

[des8]

CAB are odd with their advice sometimes.
With your 30 day right to reject what do CAB advise you do other than reject. What other avenues do you have to explore??
You don't have to agree to a repair or accept a replacement.
If the contract is breached that is your statutory right


You should issue a Letter before Action giving them 14 days to pay before initiating court action

[PapaMike]

Thank you again for your help. I sent a Letter Before Action after the refusal which I received no response at all. I guess my next move now is to complete the paperwork for the court. I am hopefully finding out the outcome of the warranty claim. The vehicle had an additional inspection and I am hoping to get some kind of written confirmation of this inspection that I can include with the court paperwork. Can this be added after the submitting the claim?

[des8]

The claim form includes a space for setting out the basis of your claim.
Your evidence is submitted after the defendant has responded to your claim

If this is your first foray into the court system you might like to read these links first:
https://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media/...online_use.pdf
https://www.judiciary.uk/publication...-civil-221013/

When you have had a read, draft your particulars of claim and, if you want, post them up for a check over

[PapaMike]

Thank you for the documents and for all your help. I will give the documents a good read and then draft my particulars of claim.

I received an outcome from the warranty claim, the manufacturer has come to the decision after another inspection that the vehicle is uneconomical to repair and they have offered to purchase the vehicle from me but this is around £1000 below the purchase price that I paid in June.

[des8]

Well that is helpful for your claim.

whilst continuing with that have you considered trying to persuade the manufacturer to increase their offer.
It might mean you come out with less than the purchase price, but it will result in a faster resolution with a lot less stress

[PapaMike]

A new twist to the story of my rusty car. The owner of the garage has emailed me and asked for a photograph of the mileage of the vehicle. He does not state the reason for why he needs this and normally all information goes through his solicitors (although he is copied them into the email). Before I respond to his email would there be any legal reason why he would need this information?

[des8]

Can't think of any reason for that request unless you had mentioned the mileage in your letters to him.

You said you had not received a response to your Letter before Action, but now mention his solicitors.
have you had correspondence with them?

[PapaMike]

Hi DES8,

Thank you for the quick response.I had not mentioned mileage in any of my letters so I am unsure why he is asking for a photograph of the mileage.

All my communications have to go through his solicitors, this is because in the email I received when the owner of the garage refused my rejection of the vehicle he stated that he would not reply to any of my communications such as emails, text, phone calls and all communications will be done via his legal counsel.

I had a problem before I sent the letter before action where I had still not received the v5 so I contacted his solicitors and they contacted the garage and the v5 arrived about a week later. This is the only communication received from the solicitors.

I sent the letter before action which received no response, I also sent a couple of emails to keep them updated about the second inspection of the vehicle and informed them that any report or outcome I received I would send to them as well. I have also phone the solicitors to make sure they have received the emails.

I will post my particulars of claim as it might be easier to understand the events and what communications I have had the garage owner, garage staff and the solicitor.

[ostell]

They could be asking for mileage as there is a limit on the corrosion warranty

[PapaMike]

Hi Ostell,

Thank you for the reply. The car jumped through all the warranty requirement hoops by the manufacturer which was that it was under six years old and had an anti-corrosion check as part of its service by a main dealer (this was in August 2018). The garage that sold the vehicle has not been involved with the warranty claim. I have emailed the picture as requested to the solicitors.

[PapaMike]

I have tried to write a Particulars of Claim which I copied from another thread and modified.

Particulars of claim:

On 23.06.2019, the Claimant purchased from the Defendant (a car dealership) a Dacia Sandero (registration number) for £4756

The defendant was in breach of contract as the goods were not of satisfactory quality contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015

The defendant has refused the notice of rejection

Accordingly the claimant claims

(a)the sum of £4756

(b) additional costs of £XXXX

(c)court costs

(d) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just

Would this be ok to submit? I will try and draft a witness statement as well so it will make sense the events of what happened.

[des8]

Okish, but you need to number the paragraphs and I would prefer a little more detail as below:


1. At all material times the Defendant carried on business as a car dealership and the Claimant acted as a consumer.

2. on 23.06.2019, Claimant purchased from Defendant a Dacia Sandero (vehicle registration xxxx xxx) for the sum of £4756.00

3. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ("CRA"), there are implied terms that the vehicle would be of satisfactory quality and fit for its intended purpose

4. 0n 25.06.2019 claimant noted corrosion on the vehicle, which on investigation was found to be excessive

5 Thus there was a breach of contract as vehicle was neither of satisfactory quality nor fit for purpose

6. The Claimant exercised his short term right to reject the vehicle under Section 20 (1) of the CRA for breach of contract by emailed letter on dd mm yyyy

7. The Defendant has refused to refund the sum of £4756.00

8. The Claimant therefore claims:
a)The repayment of £4756.00
b)additional costs of £XXXX
c)court costs
d) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just