.

Try reading some of the SOG act and have a look at the CAB website for details on problems with car purchases before spouting off that people are talking rubbish!

The OP has a plausible case, A car that cost what he paid should be fit for purpose for longer than 4 months. End of!

The posts above says you can buy any car, at any price, use it for any amount and by default you get a 6 months equivalent new car warranty on it. That's what the post says.

This is not the case and posting such things is misleading and I'm sorry, but it is rubbish.

The OP may, or may not, have a plausible case and I wasn't commenting on their case in particular. As I posted above a lot depends on how many miles they've done, exactly how long they have owned it etc.

£2400 *is* a cheap car these days (remember only a few years ago the Government said any car under £2k was only fit for scrap) and after 3-4 months it gets very difficult to claim for faults at that level of the market. That doesn't mean the OP doesn't have a case but to tell them they have a watertight one is in my opinion poor advice.

The posts above says you can buy any car, at any price, use it for any amount and by default you get a 6 months equivalent new car warranty on it. That's what the post says.

No it does not, It states that a vehicle should be fit for purpose and should work as intended for 6months.

It does not that say anywhere in SoGA or any other consumer advice. There is a ruling regarding where the burden of proof lies with regards a fault. Obviously, the longer in time and the more miles a vehicle has done the more self evident it is that the fault did not exist at the time of purchase (otherwise the buyer clearly could not have used it to that extent).

The CAB advice actually says:

Dealers are not liable for:

• fair wear and tear, for example if the car breaks down during normal use
• if you mis-use the car
• if you cause accidental damag

Basically, if, for example an injector goes on a car and it has done 80k miles and 80k is typical mileage for an injector to go at then the dealer is not responsible. The dealer is responsible if it turns out an injector has gone at the point of sale and hasn't told the buyer. If the buyer has done 4000 miles in it after sale and the warning light hasn't been flashing and the car hasn't been in limp mode it is very easy for the dealer to argue it was fine and satisfactory when sold.

If what you say is true we could all go and buy £500 cars - run them without a care in the world for 6 months and then buy another. In the real world you can't do this. In the real world a car bought for the price of many train tickets has to last about as long.

Explaination of the sale of goods act 1979..

"The onus is normally on you rather than the trader to prove a claim (that is, to prove that the vehicle is faulty in some way). However, the law states that if you are claiming repair, replacement, full or partial refund within the first six months of ownership, the onus is on the trader to prove that the vehicle was sold without faults when you bought it. This is called the 'reversed burden of proof'. After six months, the burden of proof reverts back to you to provide evidence to support your claim that the vehicle was faulty when it was sold."

Yes, that is exactly what I said above. So, if you buy a car and when you get it home all the water and oil has mixed together it is very difficult for the dealer to prove the headgasket hadn't gone when you'd bought it. If, however, the alternator packs up after 4 months use it is self evident it must have been working at the point of sale.

In the case of the alternator there is another test. Is it "reasonable" that on the age, mileage and price of the car a reasonable person might need to replace such an item as it has worn out? If the car is 2 years old and done 20k miles then it probably isn't and the buyer could probably claim off the seller. If the car is 10 years old and done 100k then that is pretty typical for an alternator to go and the buyer has no claim.

Basically, when you are claiming for a failure which wasn't there at point of sale there is a huge gap depending on the actual car. Once a car gets to 100k miles and 10 years old virtually anything can be considered wear and tear but on a lower mileage, newer car you have a lot more comeback.

The truth is that the SoGA doesn't remove the old adage you get what you pay for. The more you pay, the newer and lower mileage the car, the more protection you get.