|
The only paperwork I have regarding the warranty is the copy he sent with the claim rejection letter. I've scanned it in here: i.imgur.com/jTgIy.jpg
It is signed by him and not by us as we were never shown it.
He didn't show us any warranty paperwork before we bought, or when we bought the car. He just explained it to us and said that it's covered for the first 3 months. Never told us about ridiculously low mileage restrictions or ridiculously low maximum claim amount.
I understand we don't have any paperwork to confirm what he explained to us verbally, which is why I don't think we'd win at small claims court, unless there is some legality about warranty paperwork that has to be signed by both parties.
Edited by Redrevis on 11/05/2012 at 14:47
|
Hi,
The whole warranty issue is irrelevant ,after just two months of ownership the dealer is entirely responsible for the cost of any repairs .warranties don't come into it .neither does mileage .
Tell the dealer you want the balance of the cost of the repair ,if not issue a claim in the small claims court .
Regards
Tony g
|
|
Hi Tony,
Can you explain to me why what you said is the case. As I'm new to all this SOGA stuff, I've read a bit up on it, but it seems a bit vague when it comes to second hand cars and the age of them, mileage they have done etc and what is expected. It just doesn't seem to be so black and white. Or have I misunderstood it?
Any more detailed explanation you can give, with quotes or links if you can, that would be appreciated. Thanks.
|
Hi red ,
To some extent the SOGA is subjective ,you can't expect the same level of dealer responsibility from a dealer when you buy a 15 year old car with 150,000 miles .As you would if you bought a 3 year old car with thirty thousand miles .
If you have to resort to the court to resolve the issue ,it's a cheap and simple process .The judge will make a decision based on what's reasonable .Most small claims court decisions are decided on reasonableness .
With regard to your own case ,the warranty the dealer gave you is meaningless ,they actually cost the car trade about £15 .That gives you an idea what your chances of claiming on them is .
Your rights as a buyer are not affected by or restricted to the warranty .You have owned the car for just two months ,it's reasonable that the dealer should pay for the cost of any repairs ,for a minimum of 3 months ,and possibly legally for up to 6 months .The mileage you have done in the car is irelevant .
Go back and tell the dealer you want the balance of the cost of the repair ,if he refuses write to him telling him you will issue a claim in the small claims court .
Just for interest how old is the polo ,how many miles has it done ,and did it have a new mot when you bought it .
Regards
Tony g
|
|
I suspect this is one of the older Polo's (pre-2002/2003) ish as the pedal box collapsing is very common on them (it'll probably go again in about 30-40k miles).
If this was a 1-3 year old car with reasonable miles you might have a good case but if, as I suspect, this is an older cheaper car then I really don't think you'll have much comeback.
The dealer was wrong to advise you to get it fxied and then re-imburse the cost when they weren't going to but it is your word against theirs.
Overall, if this is an older, cheaper car £100 contributuion would probably be deemed reasonable.
I totally disagree with tony g that the mileage is irrelevant, it is not btw.
|
|
Incidentally, where did you take it? These usually cost about £180-£200 at reasonable garages so that looks a bit steep to me.
The only long tern fix is to actually weld a strengthening bar into the pedal box - it is a very poor design from the outset and also effect the Lupo.
|
|
We didn't have a choice which garage we took it to as we broke down in a very arkward place, police had to stop the traffic to help get the car out of the way. The RAC towed us to the nearest garage they recommended and as we were not from the area, there wasn't a garage we could suggest.
You say it's our word against his and he shouldn't have told us to get it repaired and we'd get our money back. But if it goes to small claims court, what is he going to do, just lie?
He didn't provide us with appropriate paperwork and didn't inform us about restrictions on the warranty when we bought the car. Also the clutch did have a squeak when we bought it, which I now know can be a sign the pedal box is going, so this issue was definitely there when we bought the car.
The car managed 79k miles before the pedal box went. Why do you assume it will only last 30-40k before it goes again?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Tony,
Thanks for the more detailed info. I posted a link above which has a lot of the info you asked for. Here it is again i.imgur.com/jTgIy.jpg It had 12 months MOT on it when we bought it.
The thing that is confusing me now is, I'm getting completely contradictory advice from 2 people. You're saying one thing and they guy below is completely saying the opposite. How much is it likely to cost going through small claims court? Reading this, it doesn't make it sound cheap and simple like you said: bit.ly/IPP8tu and with the balance of £225.92 being what we're trying to claim back, I'm guessing it could cost up to or above this going through court anyway?
I'm very confused as to what to do now. I have written a letter to the dealer to try and formalise our complaint. But I will have to see what he replies with as to what we do next.
Any more advice from people is still very welcomed. Thanks.
Edited by Redrevis on 12/05/2012 at 13:37
|
|
Hi Red, Tony is on the right lines; irrespective of the age, mileage & price of the goods, as long as the goods are bought from a retailer (as opposed to private or auction) you have rights under the sale of goods act.
Whilst PDF is wrong to infer (apologies if I've mis-read this pdf) that your rights are reduced due to the age of the car, what is reduced is the quality of goods that you can expect.
For example it would be reasonable to expect that a turbo on a 2 year old 10,000 mile car will last longer than 6 months, but expecting a turbo on a 12 year old 100,000 mile car to remain in good working order for 5 years is unreasonable.
Unfortunately as Tony says, you will need to go to court to get a definitive ruling on your particular circumstances.
Dealers realise that customers are reluctant to go legal & so try it on by offering a compromise.
It's easy for me to say this as it's not my money, my car or my arguement with a 16 stone, shaven headed, "love & hate" tatoo'd thug of a dealer but if it were me, I'd go legal.
Good luck
|
|
There are two issues here: any sort of warranty and any rights you have under SoGA.
As far as I can see the "warranty" isn't worth the paper it is, or in this case, isn't written on. Without a written contract I can't see there is much to dispute on however annoying it may be.
That leaves whatever rights you have under SoGA. You haven't given full details of age, mileage and price paid so it is difficult for anyone to give much of an opinion but the only real opinion which matters is that of a court not anyone here.
My personal opinion, and that's all it is, is that you'll struggle with this kind of fault on a cheapish car a good few years old with a good few miles on it a while after you purchased it with a legal case. It is part of the SoGA that a retailer can offer a reasonable contribution and they have offered something so haven't completely denied any responsibility even if they did mislead you.
Personally, rather than having all the expense, stress and general hassle of a legal case you probably won't win anyway I'd go back to the dealer and suggest you go 50/50 with them on the cost and tell them that'll be the last they'll ever hear from you.
If you want proper advice you need to consuilt a solicitor who specialises in these cases and will be able to give advice backed by their experience.
|
|
pd - The age and mileage is on the warranty document which I've posted a link to twice above. No-one has asked me the price of the car before. We paid £1750 for it.
You say a reasonable contribution can be offered, but on the CAB Advice guide it doesn't mention a reasonable contribution, it says:
"You discover the fault within six months of you buying the car, it is presumed that the fault was present when you bought it.
If the dealer disputes this, it is up to them to prove the fault was not present. A pre-sale ‘tick box’ check of the car’s mechanical condition when it was sold is not sufficient. Neither is a paper you have signed which says something like "examined and found satisfactory in all respects." They need to provide reasonable evidence, such as an independent report into the car’s condition."
Quoted from here: bit.ly/JrpEok
I'm going to go to the local CAB office on Monday and see what they say. Like I said above I've written a letter to the dealer, I just have to post it and see what response I get.
I was going to cash the cheque on Monday, but I'm now wondering that if I do that, legally would that be classed as accepting the offer they've given and stop me from trying to claim the rest back? I'll check that with the CAB on Monday too I think.
Thanks for your help. And I'll come back and let you all know what advice I get on Monday.
|
|
Sorry, I hadn't seen the warranty before. If I read it right it gives the terms which you have exceeded so it is invalid for this claim.
That leaves you with your statuory rights.
Others may diasgree but I do not think you will get far with a £1750 car which is below the level the Government viewed as scrap two years ago unless it fails in the first couple of weeks or so. There have been past SoGA cases where the judge has decleared cars under £2000 as all being essential "sold as seen".
Unless you are very lucky, I doubt anyone at the CAB will have the necessary specialist knowledge to make a judgement on an individual case such as this.
Personally, I would try and come to some sort of deal with the dealer to up their contribution a bit and move on. On this sort of age and priced car I think a contribution is fair enough - sadly you will need to keep spending money on it as a 70-80k Polo will need bits attending to which simply fail due to wear. Remember the law is there to protect the seller from unreasonable demands from the buyer so if you get too unreasonable you might find you're the one in the wrong.
The reason for my comment on the pedal box was that I have come across several Polo's which have had two boxes by 80k miles. I do find them pretty fragile cars which are prone to all sorts of build related niggles, especially now that generation is getting on a bit in age.
|
|
I went to the local CAB office today. They were very helpful actually.
After looking through all the info I provided, they went away, 15mins later came back with a lot of information for me to read through regarding the steps I can take from here and said on the face of it, it looks like the dealer is breaking their contractual agreement under the SoGA and that the full cost of the repair should have been paid for, regardless of the warranty the car had.
They also believed that cashing the £100 would appear as accepting the offer made from the dealer and advised against it.
So I'll send my letter to the dealer and depending on his reply, go back to the CAB and take the next step.
Thanks for all your help guys.
p.s. "outlier" I don't know why you uoted me and didn't write anything else :-/
|
|
I was going to cash the cheque on Monday, but I'm now wondering that if I do that, legally would that be classed as accepting the offer they've given and stop me from trying to claim the rest back?
Edited by outlier on 12/05/2012 at 20:55
|
|
|
|
|
