If you read and managed to comprehend, you would see the 100% greater mileage and - as you say - other absurdities are terms imposed by the dealer - they are not my statements or logic!

Thanks for taking the time to read (and comprehend) some of it though.

If you understand consumer law, you would know that the dealer cannot make statements which have get-out clauses. If they state in any literature or verbally a specification or attribute of the vehicle, it must be true.

Edited by MrBrown on 19/04/2015 at 15:49

I suppose posting here was a mistake in that people are all too smug in telling you what you should have done. You may very well be right, but that's only a lesson I can learn for next time, it doesn't help me here.

I relied on the integrity of a manufacturer backed franchise. I didn't buy it with cash from a geeza down the pub on the understanding that he'd send me the V5.

Believe me in that a lesson has already been learned. However, a breach of contract is a breach of contract. But at least you clearly took the time to read what I had written :)

Nope. Completely wrong.

I asked, and only asked, what would be a way to calculate a reasonable amount. How is it possibly helpful when people say "you should have done this/ you should have done that".

And remember, you made a comment attributing something to me, when in fact it was the dealer. Don't be bitter because I rubbished your reply.

Are you actually going to tell us the make/model/year?

Thank you for your objective and reasoned response pd. It's a 2008 Nissan Pathfinder, which I paid £14k for (last year).

Unfortunately, it's not exactly "a good one", as I'm currently locking horns with the dealer who has washed their hands of the ongoing problems with it.

I'm all for listening to other people and taking helpful advice, but if the advice is given in hindsight, when the unfavourable outcome is already known, that advice isn't much use to without a time machine to go with it.

I have three young children on a single income, so £14000 is an awful lot of money to me - maybe to some people it isn't.

This may feed the trolls further, but why should I let the dealer get away with it even if it makes little or no difference to the price? In my opinion that's like saying that you shouldn't steal, but if it's something of little value it's morally OK... (the reasoning being that it has little effect on those you steal it from).

Cue backlash...

Edit: just wanted to clarify - I haven't put 10K miles on it, that was the difference between what the dealer advertised it had, and what it actually had. I spoke to the dealer about 8 months ago, and put it all in writing to them. I the time I took their word for it when they intimated that there was nothing I could do. I have recntly taken legal advice because of the ongoing problems with it, and have been advised that I should sue in county court.

Edited by MrBrown on 20/04/2015 at 19:51

Trying to quantify the "loss" is the problem. In terms of a claim for compensation, I recall reading that the idea is to put the claimant in the position he was in beofre the 'episode' shall we say.

Yes, you are correct in that there are unresolved mechanical issues which the dealer is washing their hands of.

I've only done 7K in the car in the year. I bought it on the basis of 50K, it actually had 60K on it.

The legal advice is from a solicitor who is there in an advisory capacity only, and will not profit should I make a successful claim.

As someone above said that they have a hard time swallowing the fact that I would have bought the car with 50K miles but not 60K. Again, I don't want to have to explain every detail, it should just be read that the statement isn't on a whim. In this instance, I traded in a car with 48K miles on it. It was, in my opinion (and afterall it's my money) a step backwards to buy a newer vehicle with more miles on than the one we got rid of. So there's the (my) justification and the reasoning behind that mileage limit.

Edited by MrBrown on 20/04/2015 at 21:52

The dealer screwed up on the day. We only saw the car about twenty minutes before they closed as they hadn't completed all they promised. We were in there three hours waiting for it.

I had already part exchanged my old car into them. My insurance was now valid for the new vehicle and cancelled on the old one, which I also left with vapours in the tank. 100 miles / 3 hours of A roads from home on a Friday evening and seriously overdue collecting our children from the childminder. Easier said than done in reality.

Deal all done on the basis of their verbal and written statements. Website, warranty documents, HPI checks, invoice all stated 50K. Did I also mention that my partner was 6 months pregnant at the time and had been sat in a showroom chair for three hours?

Edited by MrBrown on 20/04/2015 at 22:49

The book value (trade) difference between a 50k and 60k 2008 Pathfinder is £450. So, at retail, something around £600 is probably about right.

I think what really counts against you is time. If you'd rejected the car 1 day after buying it on the basis of the mileage then you'd have had a very good case. However, there comes a point where you are deemed to have accepted it "as is" and nearly 6 months after purcase you are almost certainly well past that point.

Even with regard to faults, it is a 7 year old car and there comes a point that the dealer bears no responsibility for it and you are on your own.

If offering a good will refund, the dealer is entitled to knock off money for the depreciation of the car during the time, mileage you have done and the fact that you have had use of the car all that time.

Personally, I would double check the legal advice as on the face of it, it looks a shakey case to me which could end up costing you a lot of time and money.

Realistically, you have a few options. None of them are brilliant, however ...

1. Try to get them to buy back the car off you. They'll obviously want to buy it back at some discount (you've had it a year, done x miles, etc), and you'll probably want a higher price. Compromise might get you both agreeing on a figure, if both parties are realistic and negotiating in good faith. You can, of course, always use the threat of step 2 as a 'nudge' to get them to negotiate more realistically, if you feel their number is silly.

2. (and this really isn't a pretty one) Legal action. Firstly, you'd need to go to a different garage, and get a quotation for getting the damage and faults fixed. You'd then need to write to the selling garage, enclosing the quotation, and informing them that unless they either do the work themselves, OR pay for it to be done at the other garage, you will issue proceedings in Small Claims. Again, they may make an offer as to what they would be willing to do / part of the costs, and only you will be able to decide if their offer is acceptable. If you can't agree, then issuing the writ in SCC is the next step. Again, once issued, they may try to negotiate. Do be aware that SCC is umlikely to be quick.

3. (and this is unlikely) Is the garage a member of Motorcodes, or some other organisation ? If so, then there may be an arbitration service.

Lastly, you probably should, on here, specify the faults, damage, etc. 'Ongoing mechanical faults' and 'ongoing issues' doesn't really tell people much, and it could be something utterly minor (although you say not trivial) which would be laughed out of court, or it could be something pretty major. We don't know if you don't tell us.

It isn't only the mileage difference. That's actually the least of the issues.

I'll keep you posted.

That's because I don't need any advice on other issues. My only difficulty is determining what the retail difference in price might be for the mileage difference. Now I have a good idea, I can add that to the other parts of the claim to reach a conclusive amount.

There are classic examples of this where people are basing amount on a vehicle of 7 years, it was 6 when this happened. Maybe won't make much difference, but a distortion of the facts which I didn't create.

I think some people have poisoned the theme by suggesting that it's ridiculous to pursue the case just on the mileage difference, and they would be right.

Define immediately.

You obviously haven't read the thread.

thats totally unreasonable