DorsetJasper Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I purchased a Disco TD5 in November after 11 days and 262 miles i ended up with a bill for £1600 worth of repairs. Ive been chasing the dealer who wont cough up a single penny and now he has got Law gistics envolved to try and put me of chasing him for the money. Has anyone ever had any dealings with them? Anything i should try and watch out for? Thanks in advance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpkiller Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 sounds like a made up name to me. google the name see what comes up. Go the CAB set the ball rolling, hes sold you a lemon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ste12b Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Real company link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 You don't say what went wrong with your car, but a good starting point here: http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/before_you_buy/thinking_about/cars/dealer#named2 If you've got a good case, don't take any notice of Lawgistics, they specialise in helping motor traders! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) Would you mind saying what the issues with the car, which you had to pay for, are? Edited January 28, 2011 by Billy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DorsetJasper Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 The original post with the problems is in the off road section and i dont know how to adda link, but to sum it up the head gasket failed which then caused the o rings on the oil pump to fail. The Disco had a new starter motor within the first 3 days of ownership as that failed on the journey home The Disco has cost me £1600 to get back on the road and according to consumer direct i am covered under the Distance Sale Regulations. Problem is Law gistics have not got envolved and they are telling me ive got no hope in recovering any of the money as its down to wear and tear after 11 days and 262 miles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I came across a mob like that that acted for a large BMW network. By the end I almost felt sorry for them. They got it so completely wrong it was hilarious. It cost their client an awful lot of money for something the client could have sorted easily and at an early stage (if the client wasn't quite so pig headed and sure that they could get away with anything they pleased). Legal cases are won on the facts as applied to the law and good organisation / preparation. There's very little magic to it. In this day and age the biggest concern we have in litigation is whether the person you are litigating with has any money or will have any money at the end of proceedings. If the people you bought the car off are spending money on lawyers then that's a good sign they have money and something to worry about losing. The real problem with car cases is the whole nature of fixing what can be the unknown. For example, there's a problem with the car and so you take it to a garage and spend £500 thinking you'll get it fixed. That doesn't work and so there's another £500 and more diagnostics; and repeat. End result there's a Bill for a couple of grand and the supplying dealer will say: 1. we would have sorted it for a fraction of that first time around 2. your alternative mechanic was an idiot and didn't need to do that work / spend that money 3. we're not responsible they / you made it worse In an ideal world if you sniff a major problem you would put the car up on bricks and start collecting reports, running diagnostics and spend your day and night sending faxes to the dealer you bought the car from to create a papertrail. In the real world people need their cars and will prefer a local garage, and so you end up with the death of a thousand cuts and the car going back and forth between garages like it's on elastic. Car ownership is quite chemical. When I fall out of love with a car it's gone. When you buy a new car you have a healthy dose of "buyer's remorse" to deal with and unless the bedding in period with your new car goes well then you will fall out of love with it. Even when it gets fixed, everytime you get in it you'll hate it and you will rue the day you bought it. Not a great experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 The original post with the problems is in the off road section and i dont know how to adda link, but to sum it up the head gasket failed which then caused the o rings on the oil pump to fail. The Disco had a new starter motor within the first 3 days of ownership as that failed on the journey home The Disco has cost me £1600 to get back on the road and according to consumer direct i am covered under the Distance Sale Regulations. Problem is Law gistics have not got envolved and they are telling me ive got no hope in recovering any of the money as its down to wear and tear after 11 days and 262 miles Did you complete the contract for the purchase of the vehicle at a Distance (as defined in the Regulations)? Did you ever receive notification of your rights to reject under the Regulations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DorsetJasper Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 The deposit was sent as a distance but i picked the car up in person. I have never recieved any notification, is this distance thing a big stumbling block? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) It's an interesting one. If the deposit was non refundable and the contract was set when you made the call then the DSRs might apply. If the deposit was refundable and you had the opportunity to inspect the goods before completing the contract, then probably not. The DSR framework is a bit of a slog [Google for the Distance Selling Regulations - there's quite a bit of bumpf on them] - it's about working out where and how the contract took place (was it at a distance) then looking at the paperwork to see if the various notices were given to you. It's probably a bit of a red herring and you should focus on the fact that the car was ****** (the usual Sale of Goods Act stuff). There must be a local firm of solicitors to you that have their trainees do this stuff as bread and butter. EDIT: Incidentally the "wear and tear" argument is very unlikely to wash with a Court if you claim that the car was defective / not of satisfactory quality etc. Edited January 28, 2011 by Mungler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DorsetJasper Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Cheers for the help Mungler, i was hoping to deal with it through Money claim online but i shall contact a solicitor on Monday. Thanks again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprackles Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Visit consumeractiongroup.co.uk Search down for the relevant section and post your problems. You will be amazed at the help thats available for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 (edited) Your problem is in the nature of the fault. The head gasket on an engine will fail without warning, its not the sort of thing that you can bodge in order to sell it on quick style! The dealer has sold you a used vehicle, you accepted it and drove it home, then 11 days later you contact the dealer and say its broke: Bit hard to say it was broke when you bought it at this point. Did you get a warranty? Then, even if you did, it many not cover this sort of thing, its more 'wear and tear' than a fault that would make the vehicle unfit for purpose. If you bought a vehicle with a brand new MOT, then 11 days later a suspension or structural body part failed, that would suggest that the fault pre-dated the sale date, in which case the dealer may be found guilty of selling a dodgy vehicle. Also I don't see how Distance Selling comes into things, you went for it, saw it, paid for it and took ownership, they didn't supply it to you on description only. Sorry to be so negative, as stated on other posts I have a property repair/plumbing business, but I also own a used car sales and repair shop, so have had a lot of experience in disputes like this: Forewarned is forearmed or suchlike..... :( Edited January 29, 2011 by jacksdad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 TD5 common faults: Cylinder head on earlier ones are located with plastic dowels :blink: these fail and the head gasket fails, 'usual' after 80k miles. Uprated to stainless steel on later engines. Starter motors fail in above average numbers. Oil leaks into cylinder head wiring loom. As these are common faults it may not be good for your claim: Sorry again :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Nah, even if second hand, with only 262 miles on the clock after purchase the Court will go with the punter and will just take a close look at the receipts to make sure that the work carried out was necessary and at the right price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 (edited) I hope you are right and I am very wrong! Its just that I've seen lots of cases similar to this, and really feel that the outcome may prove to be in the dealers favour. Please keep us informed Any chance of posting the price, age and mileage of said TD5 ? Edited January 30, 2011 by jacksdad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Goods are of ‘Satisfactory quality’ if they reach the standard a reasonable person would expect taking into account the price and any description. If it was a £500 old banger with a billion miles on the clock, then yes, you can't go to Court and suggest that you should have received a Rolls Royce Disco for Rover Metro money. However, if it's been advertised by the dealer as in good condition and the forecourt price was a few grand plus (i.e. it didn't have an old banger price tag on it), then it would be reasonable to think it would last more than a few hundred miles without going bang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Quite agree Mungler! How much and mileage etc. may help us 'experts' a bit ! I've been buying and selling cars & bikes part/full time for nearly 30 years and I'm still not sure on the outcome of this :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MM Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Name the garage, so that it can be avoided. They should just put it right, knowing that its the right thing to do. They have sold you a blag car. (yes, thats a technical term ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Having been in the motor trade I can see both sides of this. As a dealer you take a car in PX or from an auction on its visible merits. If the previous owner has suffered faults and bodged it up to get it through an auction or not disclosed them to the dealer when agreeing a PX price then the dealer may sell on the vehicle with faults quite innocently. Many faults do not manifest themselves until the car is in daily use,i.e. after being sold on. Also, with head gasket faults and the like there is always the suspicion that the new owner has over-revved the engine, over-filled the oil or generally messed with it. The Sale of Goods Act deals with 'fitness for purpose'. If the OP can get an authority such as AA or RAC to examine the car and compile a report, then assuming it is damning about the car's condition as a motor vehicle used for daily transport the OP should have a reasonable case. The other angle is to show that the car is not as per the advertised description and go down the Consumer Protection Act route with your council Trading Standards Dept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DorsetJasper Posted January 30, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Cheers for all the replys I wish it was a cheap motor and then i would have thrown it away but it cost me £4.5K so with all the works done it owes me over 6k. Ive just noticed on the warranty paper work which is worth nothing the trader has put the incorrect price and has dropped 1k. I reckon hes having a inland revenue fiddle as i paid 1/2 cash and 1/2 card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul99 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Nah, even if second hand, with only 262 miles on the clock after purchase the Court will go with the punter and will just take a close look at the receipts to make sure that the work carried out was necessary and at the right price. That backs up an experince my brother and his GF had last year after buying a fairly new second hand car. On the 14th day they had it out of the blue the engine electrics had a melt down. They phoned the garage who weren't at all interested and were really arrogant with it too - despite telling them when they bought it to bring it straight back if they have any problems. Anyway they sought advice from CAB and trading standards who advised they get the repairs done by a reputable local garage and then seek to recover their money - which thanks to the advice and hands on help CAB and trading standards gave them was alot easier than they had expected and the bill was settled up very quickly. I suspect the garage very well knew that if it was to go to court that they would loose especially when they were told Trading standards were now involved. It seemed very clear to all but the garage that a car costing nearly £5000 that developed a major fault in just 14 days was not fit for purpose - I'm pretty sure the garage would have known this too but certainly tried it on - as I expect alot of garages would initially... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Cheers for all the replys I wish it was a cheap motor and then i would have thrown it away but it cost me £4.5K so with all the works done it owes me over 6k. Ive just noticed on the warranty paper work which is worth nothing the trader has put the incorrect price and has dropped 1k. I reckon hes having a inland revenue fiddle as i paid 1/2 cash and 1/2 card. Yes. That is a common fiddle and gives you some ammo' if you can document or evidence the original advertised price. Dealers pay VAT on the difference between the price the pay for a car and the price they sell it at. By writing down the sales figure they are avoiding paying VAT and that can be a serious offence. They certainly will not want HMR crawling all over their records and contacting previous buyers. If you have the evidence let them know that you intend to forward it to HMR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.