I believe (and I'll be happy to be corrected if I'm wrong) that these days car dealerships must inform you of all pertinent facts that would have an influence over your buying decision, whether you ask the questions or not. Here is a relevant document :

www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/cgi-bin/glos/con1item....=*ADV0003-1011.txt

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 prohibits commercial practices that are unfair to consumers. If a trader misleads you or engages in an aggressive commercial practice and you make a decision to purchase a vehicle which you would not otherwise have done, the trader may be in breach of the regulations. For example, a trader may fail to inform you that the vehicle has previously been accident damaged or may claim it is 'sold as seen' to avoid their responsibilities to you.

If they have not told you that it was a hire car, then I'd say you've got a good chance of showing that they have indulged in those 'sharp practices'.

I think you'll struggle to reject it, they are fixing the problems, which to be honest don't sound serious to me.

It might have a broken spring, well its either broken or its not and presumably they change it if it is, the clutch might be failing, again is it or not...whats a rear end strip down, dismantle the rear brakes to check them over (which is proper service requirement for a mechanic) or are we removing the entire rear suspension cos its bent.

The mere fact its been a hire car is no different to it being a pool company car, any idiot will have driven it, a company car might have been issued to an idiot whos ragged it and held it on the clutch at every hill he encountered...its not just renters who periodically stick 50 litres of petrol in Diesel cars and its not just renters who abuse cars.

Backing up GB's remarks above, I worked for a large company 20 years ago, and occasionally drove a pool car, in this case a Pug 309. Nice car, but with only 16K on the clock I found the brake pads worn down to metal. Those cars can be so busy they have little chance of proper regular maintenance, and the stream of different users may not bother to report developing problems.

Bodywork and interior may be easily fettled up to look decent, but unless the selling dealer gives it a thorough check, they probably won't know of any problems. They may find it less trouble for buyers to discover them - they may not even come back to have them sorted!

Sorry. I should have been clearer. I was referring to the part where he said I'd find it difficult to return the car.

I think GB was trying to say that your dealer was playing ball within the rules in trying to fix the faults. If you try to invoke SoGA they may choose to test that in court. There are many threads on this topic on here, from better experts than me.

If they refuse the rejection, you will have to go to court. This is not that easy and takes time and costs money. Before you do so be aware that:

(a) You will have upfront court costs and will have to get a proper, independent, report on the car. You can't just turn up at court without some proper evidence of what is wrong with it.

(b) It will take a minimum of 8 months to get to a proper hearing in most areas.

(c) During that time you can't really use the car. Using a car for 8 months and x000 miles whilst at the same time arguing it isn't "fit for purpose" pretty much destroys your case so you will need to store the car and buy/rent another one for the period.

(d) The court will press you and the dealer to come to an amicable agreement beforehand. If you are determined to reject it and won't compromise that might not suit you.

(e) All this will obviously take time so be prepared for some days off work etc. attending inspections, court etc.

(f) There is a possibility you will lose the case at the end of all of this.

Basically, it is possible, but it won't be quick or easy if the dealer digs their heels in.